Maybe it's just me... But the DEVs need to "fix" this because we shouldn't be forced to switch languages just to get a game to work....

It would have been a smarter idea to create a "credit sink" with buffs you could buy from vendors. Let's say you need to do an Ops mission and you don't have a healer? Then, you could go to a special vendor and purchase a 1 hour buff that automatically heals for for that hour. They already do it with stims. That would be a great "Money sink". I remember similar things in SWG. Anyone remember "Wookie Ookies" or "Hoth Chocolate"? Except in this game they could be more expensive. But they'd also have to be worth the credits. If they did something like that, they wouldn't have needed to add cost to QT. And their "credit sink" also wouldn't hurt new players. This one does....

I fully agree with exception that our Legacy Cargo hold needs more than 8. Maybe 16. Why? Because of the Outfitter. I store armor that's "Bound To Legacy" and that is NOT in "collections" in my Legacy Cargo Hold for use on multiple characters. Personal Cargo hold needs to be increased to a greater number also because of all the items we receive that's "Bound To Character", Unless, they change EVERYTHING to "Bound To Legacy." Of even better than that, just add it to "Collections" so it won't take up valuable inventory space. That would be smarter in the long run.

Conquests as well as conquest rankings for guilds are severely flawed. 1. Guilds fight over all categories. Looks good on paper for a conquest aspect, but it allows larger, more active guilds to dominate the top of the list in Large, Medium and Small yield. Why does a guild that can achieve over 200 million conquest points need to compete for a "Small Yield" planet? They don't. A guild that can generate over 100 million conquest points needs to be fighting for "Large Yield" planets. A guild that can achieve over 50 million conquest points needs to be fighting for "Medium Yield" planets. And any guild that can't get to 50 million Conquest Points needs to be competing to "Small Yield" In the current system, the only guilds that stay in the top of the list are the same 10 or so guilds, and no other, smaller guilds have a chance to be in the top #1 spot. 2. Conquest guilds. Conquest guilds seem to be geared towards accumulating as many conquest points as possible. Which isn't a problem. Except for the methodology they use to achieve this goal. Most of the guilds within the top 3 on any list are usually those guilds with the most severe inactivity policy. If you look on the Star Forge conquest rankings you will see that about 10 guilds are listed in the top 3 on the list every week. And only about 3 of those are "in control" of most of the contested planets. Those 3 guilds or so have an inactivity policy of 10 - 20 days of inactivity before they kick members from their guilds. I saw one guild "Bark" an ad that said they kick inactive in 14 days. So, that means that no player in their guild is allowed to have a life. Because to them, only the conquest points matter. the game doesn't even count you as inactive until you haven't logged into the game on a character for 24 - 30 days. And some guilds remove members every 10 days. Think about it You join a guild, you're "pending" until Tuesday, then get kicked the following week because you had to deal with a death in the family. This policy makes players think it's a waste of time to even join a guild. Every guild that dominates the conquest rankings every week has this policy. My guild policy is to only kick members if they're inactive for over 100 days. In this current system, we will NEVER be in the top 3 on any conquest ranking list... Not eve "Small Yield". And that is the flaw... We have 2 guilds that are active and constantly working on conquest each and every week. And the most conquest points we've ever achieved in the entire life of this game was around 40 million conquest points. I don't want to adopt the same policy as the other "conquest guilds" because it isn't fair to players. FTP or Subscribers, players need to be in guilds to have fun. This game pushes the idea of joining guilds and being members of group content. Yet the current conquest system is so flawed, it's alienating players and making most not wish to join guilds in the first place. I think the conquest system needs a full overhaul and that the "rankings" and "yield" should work automatically. When conquest starts for the week, every guild should be in "Small Yield" then, once a guild it's 50 million conquest points, it should be pushed up to the "Medium Yield" ranking list. Then, if it hits 100 million conquest points, it should be pushed up again to "High Yield". Maybe adding 2 or more "Yield" ranks would work better. Maybe there's a better idea than this one... But in the current system, no guild can get in the top three ranks of the rankings unless they adopt an inactivity policy that damages gamer moral and enthusiasm. Sure, we could be in the top 3 on the conquest list every week, just like those other guilds... But we'd have to sacrifice members on a regular basis weekly to do it. We should never have to "remove" inactive members that frequently just to always be within the top of conquest. Conquest should work better than that. It should be based on "activity" of members, yes. That's true. But We shouldn't have to kick a person out if they don't log into the game within 1 week to do it. Which brings me to another issue... The inactivity system... The game is supposed to count your "character" as inactive if you don't log into the game within 30 days. But I've noticed that this system sometimes counts "characters" inactive if they don't log into the game within 22, 23, 24, 25, and 26 days. And it's not even consistent. Why is it per "character"? I log into the game daily. Every single day. If I log into my Trooper for 30 days, then the system counts every other character I have on Star Forge as "Inactive" after 30 days. Even though I'm not inactive... Even if it was tied to "Legacy" it would be better. Because if I log into one character on my legacy (100 of them total), then none would ever be "inactive", ever. However, if given a choice, I think it should be tied to my "Account" because I have characters on multiple servers. All of my characters are in guilds. There's 100 on Star Forge alone. And with the current system, I have to log into every character I have every 30 days to keep them "active". Even though I am a subscriber to two accounts, and I play on both accounts daily. These are things that need to be fixed.

What amuses me is those who unsub. I have 2 accounts. I have had a paid subscription on one of them since Beta and the other account has been a paid account since I got it. Those people who unsub are the ones I find hilarious. I think I took a break from playing SW:TOR for about a year. I still logged in and played a little, but mostly for that year I was focusing on another game. But I never unsubscribed. I collected my free coins and just played other games until I was ready to come back. The subscription isn't all that expensive... I pay $84.37/per account once every 6 months... A total of $168.74 @ $14.06/month per account. My Jack Daniels supply is more expensive. I buy the $50.00 bottle. I drink it over time, usually a month or two, or three. If I take 3 months to drink that $50 bottle, I pay about $16/month for it. If I take 4 months to drink it, then my SW:TOR account is more expensive. But not by much if you count tax. I spend more per month on pretty much everything in my life. Just over $14 per month on anything isn't that much. The only thing I wish for is that they start giving us access to subscribing yearly. That would make my life easier... The reason those people who unsub amuse me is that they usually don't play when they go FTP. Then, they sit in the game and complain about the game in General Chat... And I'm like, "Didn't you just say you're back after about a year?" and "You need to be here with us every day to have a right to gripe about the game...." All games have bugs. I think this game does a pretty good job on getting to them... And... I'm here every day, so I know.

Yay! It worked!!! LOL

Computers, I'm ok with. Smart phones, not so much... Mine's and android... So how do I do what you just said. In very descriptive terms, lol. I'm smart phone illiterate...

The password is 100% correct. I did it, checked it, and rechecked it several times just now. It took me to the security key page and reentered the security key several times (Different codes each time) and it didn't let me into the game.

This is my second account. I can't login on my main account because it keeps rejecting my security key code. It keeps giving me the message, "The display name, password, or security key you have entered is incorrect. Please confirm your login information." The account login mane, the password are correct. As is the number on the security key. I let it change several times and keyed in the new number code each time and still got this message. I was able to login on this account because this account doesn't have a security key attached to it. If I could, I'd just remove the security key from the account then re-add it. But I can't do it unless I can login to the website, using... my security key, that it isn't accepting. I did try that too. It doesn't work here either. But the message is different. This message says, "Sorry, we couldn't find your code. Try again?" in reference to the security key number.

Wow. You are correct. I moved that and my targeting is working again! Unbelievable.

I already sent in an in-game bug report on this. But here's my assessment of the problem so far... I'm having trouble interacting with terminals, doors, GTN terminals, elevator switches, looting humanoid corpses, Legacy, Guild, and Personal Cargo Holds as well as repair droids and NPCs. The problem would be a game killer for most players. I normally play the game at 100% zoom and I shouldn't have to adjust my zoom over and over to play the game. But that's exactly what I'm being forced to do. I began to have problems with this bug last night after about 8pm EST. I already did virus checks, reset my router and modem, checked my internet speed, and did a full maintenance workup on my PC, so that's not it. Also, the problem exists on more than one PC in my home as wells as several SWTOR accounts. Every other site/game, etc works fine. It only exists on SWTOR. If I'm looting a humanoid corpse, I have to zoom in until it's lootable, then aim my pointer slightly off the corpse to loot it. Larger corpses seem to loot ok without adjustments. If I'm trying to enter a door, hit an elevator switch or something like that, I have to zoom in 100%, as close as I can get to the object as well as stand as close as I can, then target off to the side of it to activate it. If I kill multiple enemies, I have to target one to the left or the right of me to loot it. All of these have very painful, time consuming work arounds to them. But it would be really great if they were set to a priority and fixed ASAP. Most players don't have my level of patience. And mine is wearing down and this is only the second day of this bug.

More opinions, no clarifications.

Players can only give opinions. An opinion isn't a definitive answer. An opinion is speculative. Only a DEV aka Developer can give an accurate assessment of the question. We can speculate or assume what a DEV answer would be until the end of time. It's a simple question with likely a simple answer. Yet no DEV has chimed in on it. Is "Bug Hunt" an exploit? Yes? No? Other? Explain? (If it requires a further explanation.) I'm getting tons of "opinions" from players. All are speculative. No DEV explanation to date has been a clear and decisive answer to this question. All "answers" have danced around the subject and have offered nothing clear and direct as an answer. They have not said "It is" an exploit, yet they're "fixing" or "nerfing it" (which is what they do to exploits). They haven't said "it isn't" an exploit, yet they're "fixing" or "Nerfing" this ability. (Which is what they do to exploits.) I'm pretty much scrolling past all opinions. I'll read anything that has a legit Bioware tag on it that's from a DEV. And that's all I'm going to read. I do know that at a certain point, this will all be irrelevant because they have stated they are "fixing" this and more "fixes" are coming to it. For something that's argued that it's "not an exploit" so much in-game and here. The DEVS are working on a repair for it. Which to me speaks volumes, even if the DEVs won't.

Allow "me" to make a "clarification". 1. I did do my research "before" posting this thread. 2. What the DEV did say wasn't a clarification that this is or isn't an exploit. The statement made was that they know of and are aware of "this area" and have made "changes" to it. they also said "these are not the final version" of those changes. What I'm asking for is a more clear and precise clarification "from a DEV" as to if this is an exploit or not BECAUSE other players are making the ASSUMPTION that it's not an exploit because the ability to do it hasn't been removed from the game. However, other players, like myself think it must be an exploit BECAUSE it's being "nerfed" over and over, in an attempt to stop players from "exploiting" it. We can argue this subject all day long, but I refuse to fall into that game with the trolls. I'm waiting for an actual member of the development team aka a DEV to respond and "clarify" this so we can end this debate clearly. Whichever direction this goes it only has two possible outcomes. Either this is an exploit that the DEVs are trying to patch a fix to, or it is not. But only a DEV can answer this and make this clear.

I'm still waiting for a response from a DEV. (Notice I'm not addressing the trolls). there are solid reasons for thinking it could be an exploit. And there are also solid reasons for thinking it's not an exploit. Both sides of the discussion could be considered a valid argument. However, without a solid input from a DEV, the debate will continue unresolved and unclear. All I'm asking for is clarification from a DEV.