I'm confused, can you romance him? I don't even remember having an option to recruit him.

Because your choices are supposed to matter. If you choose to not keep a potential weapon, then it shouldn't be there when you need it. That said, Heal often and heal early, don't go looking for a heal when you are almost dead. Top off every chance you get. If a heal spawns and you are already topped off, lead her through it. The heals do damage to her. You seem to be using your interrupts too sparingly, and from the 2 attempts I watched it looked like you were standing in her AOE. Clean some of this up and I'm sure you will get it.

I just mean that we know ~45% of characters are DS, I just don't see Bioware spending time on a redemption arc/story/character scenes that 45% of the characters will skip over. So I think that either he will have a story that we all see, and are shoehorned into, or Arcann will show up and we will be given the choice but he will have little impact on the rest of the story from that point on, so that the people who killed him will not have a completely divergent story to follow.

I doubt we will have a choice. I just don't see Bioware writing a redemption story, voicing it, and putting it in the game when many of us would choose to shoot Arcann in the face on sight, and not see any of that content. As for the get out of jail free card, I tend to play my characters as realistically as possible. Because of that heinous criminals that also tried to kill me simply never would get a pass from that character. But further than this, the idea that a person can order the deaths of an uncountable number of people, kill an untold amount himself and commit tons of war crimes but not get punished at all because he turned "good" and did some community service is pure fantasy. While I understand this is a fantasy game, in an IP made for children and as a society we really like the simple endings and a good redemption. The reality is that Arcann would be killed, or turned over to the empire or republic. Where he would be given at best a show trial, then definitely executed in the empire. In the republic he perhaps could be sent to a Belsavis like prison to spend the rest of his life, likely in solitude. No matter how often he told people he was now a good person that would not keep him from that fate. His death/incarceration would then be used as propaganda to help empower and uplift the people of the planets he nearly destroyed. Personally I would love to see an Arcann return who tries his best to be a good person for his mother, even thinking that he's helping my Alliance by attacking his sister, and that he would be benevolent on the throne. But everything he does is skewed and misconstrued, and he proves to simply be hindering our attempts with horrific actions that we often have to clean up behind. He could be simply far too damaged to have basic empathy or understanding of why he is evil, no matter how hard he tries. Until we are forced to deal with him, making him a very tragic villain. But I understand that a more realistic narrative like that is not a simple good over evil ending that the Star Wars movies are known for. However that doesn't change that some of us like the more realistic stories told in the EU, where good does not always triumph over evil, bad guys are not always one dimensional, and sometimes the end is bitter sweet at best, it helps make the characters feel more realistic to me. But I understand why people love the arcs where the bad guy suddenly sees the error of his ways, repents and is welcome as a good guy. It's heartwarming.

I should have said my instead of our. If a person goes through 100% light sided and trying to convert everyone, perhaps then Senya's action are heroic or whatever. But for a gray (military) character or a DS character she is a traitor plain and simple. She has shown that while she lives her children who are my sworn enemies, will be protected by her. So there is a simple solution to that, She dies with them. This is a war, and in war I guarantee you, that if someone intentionally saves the life of the enemy general, and spared the life of the enemy commander previously, both of which are their children. That person are not going to be considered for any sort of high ranking position other than head of cell block C. Can you imagine if one of seal team 6 saved Osama Bin Laden because he was their cousin or something? No military official would care what sort of good intentions or emotions that soldier had.

You said it... Our entire purpose from the very start was to kill Arcann it was never hidden or even hinted at otherwise. The final plan was to kill Arcann! Senya wanted/wants to save her son, as you put it. That is literally going against me and my alliance if her goal is the exact opposite of ours.

Why not? He has no reason not to, and every reason to. #1 He still hates me. Nothing has been shown otherwise. #2 He still hates his father, who is still inside me. #3 I was the architect (sorta) of his downfall. #4 I have the only vehicle capable of fighting the eternal army and getting his throne back. #5 He's an evil a-hole and has been since the first time I met him. DS doesn't need a reason. So, again why wouldn't he come after me? Because mama is there? As far as I know she was planning this from the beginning, giving him a safety net in case I actually did win.

It's annoying for characters that are more evil, but to me it's not because choices matter. It's because DS choices only/always effect negatively. We all know that the real world does not work this way, at all. People give money to criminal organizations all the time with the intention of charity. Weapons are sold/given to people in good faith, and those people eventually do terrible things with them. Just because a person does something with a good heart doesn't mean good things will happen. Just once I would like a "LS" choice to have a truly negative consequence. Save a prisoner from death, that person now goes on to kill an entire family. Refuse a reward from a person you save, Run out of resources to get to the next location and miss a chance at saving someone else. Spare the life of your most hated rival, they escape when being transferred to a cell and kill/wound (remove from story) your love interest during the scuffle. Sparing everyone, being friendly, and nice, and never taking money for your deeds does not mean that everything will always go your way perfectly, and being a no nonsense jerk with an itchy trigger finger does not mean everything will go wrong.

I agree with the OP. The entire point of my alliance was to stop Arcann and his eternal fleet. Arcann on on numerous occasions tried to kill me, and along with his brother and military brought ruin to the empire/republic that I called home. Under his rule the galaxy was placed under totalitarian rule and made to bow to his every whim. When I was rescued it was under the intention that I would work towards ending him and his rule. So there are two great betrayals, Scorpio and Senya. Scorpio's is obvious, but along with Senya's betrayal I am back at square one. Arcann, The Emperor of Zukuul is still alive and likely wants to kill me more than ever after I defeated him again. The galaxy is still under totalitarian control by one of Senya's children and I have no reason to believe that Vaylin will not simply vacate the throne if big brother comes back, or maybe he is her right hand. Who knows? The point is that for my character, nothing has changed since chapter 1. This is compounded with the fact that I now know Senya will not let her children be killed or kill them herself, and that is the entire reason for the alliance. In fact when we first learned Arcann was her child, her loyalty was a major point of contention. Turns out Koth was 100% correct. I'm not sure how the leader of the alliance could possibly work with Senya again, because her goals are the opposite of my own. If Senya is present during a fight with Vaylin I have to assume she will take Vaylin side against me. Her actions so far have shown that she values her family above everything else including the rest of the galaxy.

Seriously? How is that even possible? A PC engine that cannot handle chat bubbles is baffling to me. I stand by that asking for chat bubbles is a reasonable request. But if they would truly do all that then it is reasonable to not implement them, though that speaks volumes about this engine, I suppose you get what you pay for though free game = cheap engine.

You are absolutely right! I remember though the devs came out on FF14 and said they cannot do them because of PS3 limitations, so it's a legit reason they cannot be done. I haven't played STO is so long I cannot remember if that is true myself. I do remember that ESO released with no chat bubbles and it was heavily requested then became one the the first released mods. My only point was that acting like chat bubbles are not normal in 3D MMOs is silly. It's a pretty reasonable request.

Clearly. That is why I said speaking in a public channel is annoying. It's not some end of the world issue, Like I said. But I would argue that chat bubble have more use than dance emotes, and you can bet your butt that if the devs didn't include that, people would be asking for them as well. Chat bubbles have been a normal part of MMOs for the better part of 15 years, it's not a strange request is all.

Doesn't every 3D MMO have them? I cannot think of one that doesn't. They really help to show when someone around you is speaking. That is their only use,but it's useful, and a staple of the genre. Seemed strange to not have them when the game released, still strange to not have them now. Speaking to another person in a public channel on fleet is annoying because of the lack of speech bubbles, which is a problem other MMOs simply do not have. To me it seems as strange as not having mail boxes or emotes, an MMO is completely playable without them but their loss would be felt and somewhat baffling.

Good point, but on that level force users can also deflect lighsabers with their bare hands too. So how does having or not having a lightsaber matter? Once we add the force into the equation everything changes because it is the primary power of force users. If we are asking why don't they use a different weapon, well they did. In the EU there were force users using everything from lightwhips, blasters, and even those who did not have a weapon at all, because they were so powerful in the force. That is why I say, objectively on the battlefield the gun is a more, useful weapon than a sword. When we add in the phenomenal powers of the force users it doesn't change the dynamic between the sword and the gun. Unless one of those people do not have those powers. On a basic level, deflecting blaster bolts is already a feat of wonder. Either the force user has some sort of battlefield precognition, or they are so inhumanly fast they can see the blaster bolts then react to them before they go from barrel to target. Either way, the lightsaber itself has very little to do with defending against blasters, all it allows is the Force user to turn those blaster bolts against the enemy. Which is something that having a blaster themselves, they could also do fine by stepping out of the way of the blaster bolts and returning fire, by stopping the blasters bolts with their hand and returning fire, by absorbing the power in those blaster bolts and returning fire, or any number of the very numerous ways we know force users can stop virtually any weapon used against them. Lightning, force push, bullets, lightsabers, blasters bolts, blaster cannons, missiles, fire, poison gas, even vehicle cannons. We have seen all this and more deflected by a simple hand wave or palm. To me this means that the lightsaber is simply for slashing stabbing and cutting people in half as a weapon, and not truly necessary for defense. With that in mind, I feel a blaster or gun is a far better offensive weapon than the lightsaber.