Sadly this is true. I wish I had the knowledge to update it, but I don't have many of the missing pieces.

Considering the game content after the first time through is all about story, it makes sense to roll at least 8, if not 16 since you can see the story from light or dark sides. How one chooses to experience that story (all at once or in bits an pieces) is not up to you or me, or even Bioware. But the fact that to get the fullest experience from the game one should at least play all 8 classes is bioware's "fault" as that is the design.

Except that those "vanities and conveniences" are meant to keep players playing. The game's content is mostly shared with class quests making up the "unique" content. In order to keep people paying you want them to want to experience the other classes. Now the legacy system should do this, but it was launched after people had already started playing. The fact that they punish players for playing in a way that the system was not designed for is problematic since the design for said system was unknown when play started.

This would only be a valid argument if some servers were not destination servers at all. As it stands take Canderous Ordo, a heavily populated server, it can be transferred into from a number of servers, but not others. Now if you limited transfer into this server to those who had characters on it already this would not effect population metrics. Now if they had simply said, CO is too full already so we are not taking any transfers into it, you'd have an argument.

Legacy unlocks, a system that was not clearly laid out when many people created their characters are considered a convenience? I'm sorry, but what is the point of having a reward system that fails to let you take full advantage of the rewards because its creators were too narrow minded to consider the fact that the system was implemented after many characters were created? Everything that BW does should in fact take legacy into account. In fact, it is clear that Legacy was the way they hoped to hold on to customers, but by lacking foresight they have simply driven more customers away by punishing the customer for a poorly planned and poorly implemented system. The next step in transfers should be in helping the customer take advantage of this system, not further hinder it.

Your first comment to me, was a response to one of my posts that suggested, now is the time to discuss paid transfers and those plans. Now you are backtracking and saying that this transfer went exactly as planned. I might disagree with that on different levels, but that wasn't the point of the original post. Now that the free transfers are mostly resolved (excluding a few issues that their poor planning did result in) it is time for them to let us in on the future plans for transfers. This is especially true when it comes to legacy consolidations since those are issues that should not impact populations. If you have even 1 character on a server that has unlocked a legacy, that means you have potentially 7 slots reserved on that server. Transferring other character into said server will not effect the population. My sub was paid through August, walking away now only gives BW free money. So making rational critiques of their lack of foresight is the best use of that remaining time.

And you would again be alienating customers for no reason, it is obvious from the very need for these transfers that Bioware has a number of dissatisfied customers that have already left the game, that should be a huge reason to make as many of the remaining customers happy.

It becomes work when you have to do it again for no good reason. Look I get it, you love Bioware but come on their poor communication about everything from legacy system to this character transfer process has continually punished the player base for BW's own inability to plan accordingly. There is of course a simpler solution - all legacy work should be account wide, but BW has said this isn't going to happen. So in that case the other option is to allow people to freely transfer their existing characters on to servers where they already have existing characters. This hurts no one, since the slots for those characters need to be open to transfer.

Reasons to have not put all of your characters on one server or been on the right server to begin with. Some servers were full after the head start program. You didn't know your real life friend was on server X until later. Because of the "Allies and Enemies" portion of the guild registry your guild was led to believe faction would play a bigger role in the game so you choose to separate characters by faction to different servers. Because of poor communications about legacies and what would in fact be unlocked, you wanted to have different legacy names and not have your characters of different species/factions share one name.

Yes because good customer service is asking your customer to redo work because you didn't provide enough information the first time.

My guild has a similar issue. We set up our Reps on Canderous Ordo and our Imps on Krayt Dragon. We now actually want to try and consolidate onto Canderous Ordo, but can't because KD's destination is Shadowlands. Given all of the Legacy info coming out, it seems in our best interests to put aside our Rep/Imp server divides and bring them all onto one servers. So both the poor communication about the Legacy system and poor communication about transfers has left us in the cold with one set of leveled character getting left behind.

Seriously, especially considering the lack of foresight given to this process and its relation to things like legacies. Especially after hearing things like this:

I don't think you understand the idiom. The customer is of course not always right, the expressions meaning however is that the customer in being wrong still an important part of the equation for a business. Any business that does not believe in satisfying as many of its customers as possible and in such a way as to offend as few as possible will end up out of business. Foresight and communication are keys to keeping customers happy, even ones who are "wrong", Bioware clearly lacks a good communication skills or even good foresight. Their inability to communicate their plans have resulted in a plethora of dissatisfied customers, they should have had the foresight to see this.

There seems to be a mentality on the TOR team that the customer is not always right and that forging ahead is better than going slow and finding the right answer. If you look at the Legacy system this is a great example. I wish someone at BW would just say, "wait, let's think about this and maybe even poll the players". (Note by poll the players I mean in game, not via the forums) Instead they seem to take the approach that they are right regardless of the legitimate problems their solutions might create.

Fair enough and thank you for taking the time to find those sources, some of them I had seen, but others I had not.