New 1.3 Details from MXM Expo 2012!

[Enderet]

True, but I also was getting social points before and after that time up until recently.

 

It still doesn't change the fact that something like that shouldn't be labeled as a new feature but rather a bug fix, and something like that should of been fixed long before 1.3.

 

You currently get social points from the conversations that you have while being in the FP.

 

I dont think any of us know what they meant in that slide. It could be that we are now going to be rewarded social points for completing something in a group, rather than simply from the conversations. It could be that you will now get some social points for defeating bosses, etc. Until they clarify it, I dont think there is anything to get riled up about.

[TheRandyFlagg]

Adaptive gear – make social gear scale with your armor type (i.e. light, medium, heavy)

 

This may have been asked/answered already, but any word on whether or not the social gear will adapt to your companion's armor type as well? I'd love to have the option to give my other companions full gear sets.

[Luceus]

In regards to the gear disparity... it takes 2 days or less, to get a full BM gear. The difference between full BM and WH is 127 expertise, or a 1.7% pvp bonus difference. Meaning, no... someone that is new to PvP can catch up very quick, and gear disparity is a non-issue.

 

There are other stats than expertize, like endurance, str, etc. Your point is valid though, that the difference between BM and WH is not that bad. In addition, you can gear WH gear w/o ranked matches, just takes forever.

[Enderet]

Adaptive gear – make social gear scale with your armor type (i.e. light, medium, heavy)

 

This may have been asked/answered already, but any word on whether or not the social gear will adapt to your companion's armor type as well? I'd love to have the option to give my other companions full gear sets.

 

That is a good question, that has yet to be answered.

[rymah]

The only way I'd be comfortable allowing solo queues for ranked warzones is if they also require any players who leave a warzone in progress because they are losing to automatically take a loss for the match and not get any credit for playing. So tired of seeing warzones that can be saved after a bad start fall apart completely because half the team bails on the rest who want to actually try and win.

[Enderet]

The only way I'd be comfortable allowing solo queues for ranked warzones is if they also require any players who leave a warzone in progress because they are losing to automatically take a loss for the match and not get any credit for playing. So tired of seeing warzones that can be saved after a bad start fall apart completely because half the team bails on the rest who want to actually try and win.

 

I know theyve talked about having a deserter debuff on people that leave ranked WZs. But I dont know if thatll be enough of a detriment for the kind of people that you mentioned.

[MaximusRex]

You do realize they haven't made that decision yet, right? Hell it's in the QA section of the OP.

 

So what happens to the people that stay behind?

 

BW should just do server mergers and be done with it.

 

The problem with forced mergers is a lot of people are going to lose character and/or legacy names, and then when it's forced BioWare looks like the bad guy. When they give you a choice of maybe a dozen servers, you can do you own research and come to terms with the changes on your own terms and it feel less crappy about losing your name, or maybe you can find a server where you can keep your name.

 

If people choose to stay behind, that is their prerogative as well. Some people, and I don't understand why myself, but some people prefer dead servers. Or if they actually want to close servers, they might give a deadline for the players to make a choice. Blizzard did something similar when after TBC came out some servers were massively overpopulated, they opened free transfers to new servers, and told us that if enough people didn't move off our server they would do a forced server split. Enough people left and they didn't have to do a single forced split, and those of us who didn't want to leave were spared having to relocate.

 

If BioWare plans to actually close servers, which they haven't said yet, they also need to have a plan to do something with characters of unsubbed players, should they ever decide to come back they are not going to tell them "We turned your old server off, you character is now on the hard drive we can't get too, sorry, start over."

[TheNotorius]

I was wondering - how do you think they'll obtain a performance optimization?

 

They can either

a) do something with the engine (improving it somehow)

b) do how they optimized Civil war in 1.2 - decreasing the number of effects showed (for example, they decreased the rate of fire of lasers) in the world

c) add new lower graphic options. Or maybe a mix of these.

[JeramieCrowe]

The problem with forced mergers is a lot of people are going to lose character and/or legacy names, and then when it's forced BioWare looks like the bad guy. When they give you a choice of maybe a dozen servers, you can do you own research and come to terms with the changes on your own terms and it feel less crappy about losing your name, or maybe you can find a server where you can keep your name.

 

If people choose to stay behind, that is their prerogative as well. Some people, and I don't understand why myself, but some people prefer dead servers. Or if they actually want to close servers, they might give a deadline for the players to make a choice. Blizzard did something similar when after TBC came out some servers were massively overpopulated, they opened free transfers to new servers, and told us that if enough people didn't move off our server they would do a forced server split. Enough people left and they didn't have to do a single forced split, and those of us who didn't want to leave were spared having to relocate.

 

If BioWare plans to actually close servers, which they haven't said yet, they also need to have a plan to do something with characters of unsubbed players, should they ever decide to come back they are not going to tell them "We turned your old server off, you character is now on the hard drive we can't get too, sorry, start over."

 

If BioWare would just separate surnames from Legacy names, and make surnames non-unique and on a per character basis like EQ2, it wouldn't be nearly such a big issue.

 

But the recent comment that characters are carrying around so much information that making customizable text is iffy didn't make my day.

Edited May 29, 2012 by JeramieCrowe

[DarthTHC]

Not everyone has your computer is a start

 

His computer isn't even that great. Sorta "meh", actually.

[Alkiii]

Why am I getting this information from Dulfy?

 

Why are we not getting this information from the SWTOR.com website from those that are developing this game?

 

 

I'm sorry, but this kind of unprofessionalism doesn't sit well with me.

[Erasimus]

The problem with forced mergers is a lot of people are going to lose character and/or legacy names, ......

 

This isn't necessarily true.

 

Naming - For example: If the combination of Name-Legacy were to be considered as a "Name" there should be far fewer collisions that need to be resolved.

 

Server-Mergers - They haven't really said anything about server mergers. But when they talk about "Mega-Servers" what exactly does that mean? Just a server with a larger population cap? Possibly, but lets say it means something different, for example:

1. First free server transfers to see how many people move and what the population figures are for each server.

2. Based on the new server populations combine X number of servers into a sever group, call it a mega server and give it a name. Each original sever then becomes a "sector" of the new mega-server, but it is one server for the purposes of FP, OPs, WZs, etc.

 

There are lots of scenarios that are possible. Thing is, none of us really knows which is being contemplated. Personally I'll hang around for a bit, finish leveling my alts, and see how it goes. If it doesn't work out, well there is always MoP, Kung Fu Panda for the win

Edited May 29, 2012 by Erasimus

[JeramieCrowe]

I'm sorry, but this kind of unprofessionalism doesn't sit well with me.

 

Well, at least we were warned. I mean, it's not like they haven't been telling us for the last three years that they would be giving more attention to fansites out of recognition that a vastly larger population go there than the game's official website for information. Fansite owners, in turn, provide links to their sites all over the internet, including here. That, along with other avenues such as Twitter and FaceBook, is the present and future of communication.

 

I remember hearing stories of how upset people were that they had to get their detailed news from the TV instead of the radio when TVs were invented and being used by more households. Radio news time allotments were getting shorter while TVs were getting longer and sharing more info than radio.

 

This is no different. This website always has the short, concise version of any major news, but largely unimportant, albeit interesting, details are shared with fansites. Gotta keep up with the times and go to where the people are. And that's not here.

 

So, actual professionalism dictates the use of fansites, Twitter, and FaceBook. You, the average lay-person, may see it as unprofessional, but it really isn't.

Edited May 29, 2012 by JeramieCrowe

[rymah]

I know theyve talked about having a deserter debuff on people that leave ranked WZs. But I dont know if thatll be enough of a detriment for the kind of people that you mentioned.

 

If your ranking is affected by wins and losses, people who chain quit will have a really hard time getting into groups, especially if they make it so you can see how many times they've left losing warzones. It won't help the other 7 people at first but once you start talking about wanting players of a certain rank to join, it will filter out the garbage well enough.

[Zataos]

If that's the case with ranked WZs, they should just scrap the idea and switch to some type of ranked "guild war", where your guild has scheduled matches each night to face other guilds (or faction) for some type of guild/faction advantage, using a completely new map/maps.

[Jenzali]

Thanks for the Dulfy information. I'm really excited about the patch now.

[Vlacke]

The patch is looking excellent indeed, looking forward to it.

[CaptFalc]

A bit late to the thread but I was actually the guy who asked about Ranked Warzones (Danger Mouse bag at the end), I was a little shocked by his reply. Wasn't reassuring in my opinion.

 

A funny thing happened though,

Me and my brother where on the front row and we could see that the dev's laptop was popping up with the Windows Update notice (the one which shuts its self down after a few minutes). Naturally we thought he was going to postpone the update before the presentation. He didn't and me and my brother were laughing as he opted to start the talk. When he next looked at the update, you could see he had only a minute left or something, was pretty funny at the time as we imagined it going off during the talk. He left it right until the last moment, definitely a Dev aye!?

[amnie]

Why am I getting this information from Dulfy?

 

Why are we not getting this information from the SWTOR.com website from those that are developing this game?

 

 

I'm sorry, but this kind of unprofessionalism doesn't sit well with me.

 

something's telling me you've never heard of a game called Final Fantasy XI or a company called Squaresoft/Square Enix

[Drewes]

They explained it for you.

 

Do you want to lose a good ranking you create due to a few new players/jerks playing poorly and without any teamwork necessary to do well?

 

Join a guild and see what you can do bro.

 

If i loose my "good" ranking by playing in a Solo-queue, that is supposed to be balanced in overall ranking between the 2 teams (ie. lets say Team 1 has avg. solo rating: 1100 and team 2 has a solo rating of 1111) then that is fine.

If the avg. rating between the 2 teams are to big ( lets say 500 in my example), then it defeats the purpose of ranked games and ofc. i would be mad about that. Its all in the implementation. And X-server for more people.

 

What they are doing is forcing the casuals (ie. me) to either spend a LOT of time getting into a PvP based guild with like mineded people or spend a god awfull amount of time trying to get a PuG 8 man group together when i log on, in order to play some "fair" PvP.

 

There is still nothing that prevents those top-ranked players in joining the open "solo" queues ( with a 4 man premade of same top skill players) and roflstomp us solo'ers/casuals just for the fun of it. THAT is the real issue about no SOLO-RANKED. Im not sitting around my room thinking im going to "own" solo-ranked, i just want to "only" play players with my similat PvP skill level and not get roflstomped by the über-skilled players or the players that spend 10 hours a day in SWTOR PvP. I want a LEVEL playing field in that sense.

[Pingonaut]

Good to hear they're working on optimizing the game. I'm having a hard time playing and my computer really good for most games (SWTOR is the only game that runs terribly, despite it not looking graphics-intensive).

[StrykerOne]

There needs to be a 8 man restriction for Ranked WZs. Why you say well because if say I que up for a RWZ and there is 1 or 2 people who just dont care or just arent very good at it. Should that persone effect the whole teams standings? I say NO. It should be for people who all have voice chat and are familier with eachother and work well with eachother. Otherwise WZs are pointless to me. Trying to communicate with your team through chat stops me from moving and attacking or defending.

 

I have to agree with this. Ranked PvP is a feature designed for the elitists, not average players. Someone without a guild group, voice chat, and every 3rd party addon available has about as much business playing in a ranked warzone as a guy who plays in his company softball league does playing in a professional baseball game. This is a feature aimed solely at hardcore PvP guilds and which will have absolutely zero impact for 99% of the population since no one who isn't in a top PvP guild will have a chance in hell of winning a match.

 

Don't get me wrong, it's nice to have something for the "pro" PvP crowd to do, but the high end 8-man guild groups are going to absolutely crush PUGs or casual guild groups so the only thing adding solo queues would do is give more casual players a way to guarantee themselves a loss unless there are so many playing that you end up with enough low- and mid-ranked players to have entire teams formed at those skill levels (something I can't imagine happening).

 

There is one way to support solo queuing... have full teams only compete against other full teams and don't allow queuing with a partial team. That way you'd have premades fighting premades and PUGs fighting PUGs, so things would be somewhat balanced. But if premades can fight PUGs then solo queuing is pretty much a guaranteed loss.

[Daethorz]

If all of this is true information, I'm five times more excited for 1.3 now.

mostly about augment kits made by crafters, i was angry thinking they where just going to let people augment for credits on the spot...

 

@ Rated Warzone

guys... rated wzs are nothing different than they are on WoW, personally i always wanted a gear & stat oriented single-que "Rated Warzone", but that dosent look like its ever going to happen on any mmo.

Edited May 31, 2012 by Daethorz

[Asroha]

•Free Trial – Maybe you have friends that have not tried the game yet – maybe they are reluctant to spend money on a game they don’t know if they are going to like. We had free trials in the past and they were a bit complicated – only on certain weekends, you had to give a token to your friends etc. Now we have simplified it and starting in 1.3 you will be able to play the game for free to a certain level permanently.

 

LOL, F2P coming in 6 months or less...

[jarjarloves]

•Free Trial – Maybe you have friends that have not tried the game yet – maybe they are reluctant to spend money on a game they don’t know if they are going to like. We had free trials in the past and they were a bit complicated – only on certain weekends, you had to give a token to your friends etc. Now we have simplified it and starting in 1.3 you will be able to play the game for free to a certain level permanently.

 

LOL, F2P coming in 6 months or less...

 

funny you said that 6 months ago and the game is still not F2P.