I'll state now that I've not bothered sifting through any of the other threads here to see if anything I have a problem with has been addressed.  I begin:

I'll try to be concise.

To whom it may concern. . .

Firstly, equipment qualms...

With regard to blaster weapons in general...

----  Semi-automatic fire rate is irritatingly mitigated.  Basically, if I can click the trigger of my pistol, carbine, or assault rifle fast enough to almost appear to be in full-auto, I ought to be able to.

----  All of the weapons seem to fail to deal an appropriate amount of damage (exceptions being the Disruptor, DLT-20a, E-11, and A280)...  Headshots should always be instant death, regardless of weapon  — BIG "maybe" for the argument of two from a pistol.  Even against the paper-thin Stormtrooper armor.  I know — it's hard to believe a futuristic laser weapon could penetrate paper, but stay with me, here.

----  Body shots, strangely enough, appear to be in good order, however, many of the weapons seem nigh worthless due to the fact that their accuracy, recoil, and what I'm going to call "reticle fall" (the time it takes for the reticle to settle) are not appropriate.

With regard to specific weapons...

----  For grenades and the like...  Your medics' "Sonic" and "Biotic" grenades are really crappy.  Well, not so much the biotic, but still — any soldier crazy enough to want a grenade that kills over time rather than instantly (via a fragmentation grenade, of course) is a terrible soldier.

So, my suggestion:  remove the crappy sonic/biotic grenades, replacing them with the tried and tested frag, or tweak them to not be crappy.

Additionally, Support's Detonation packs and PRG-7 10-second-fused 'nades are misplaced;  they and the proximity mines belong with the Heavy Weapons Specialist...  A Support seems to obviously require a more anti-personnel-friendly grenade.

Also, your EMP grenades should certainly not effect a Rebel soldier.  And hell, I'd go so far as to say that they could harmlessly be removed completely and never be missed.

----  As for the E11 and A280...  It's difficult for me to determine if the two are too powerful, or if the other weapons are simply utter failures in comparison.  I'm led to believe the latter.

You know what?  I think I can make this a hell of a lot shorter.  Let's see, here...

OK!  Look at the T21 and it's Rebel equivalent  — huge-assed heavy-duty repeating blasters.  Both are eerily accurate, they pack an immense punch, and they have fire rates to be reckoned with.  And, their reticles, if memory serves, take a while to settle down, so you're not exactly encouraged to "run and gun" with it.

Perfect.  Absolutely perfect.  Fits its niche like a snake in the grass (I think I came up with that little nugget just now).  Now, look at everything else but the E11, A280, DLT20a, and Disruptor...

_______________
What do I see?...
_______________

Firstly, accuracy profiles of all but the aforementioned are disgustingly pitiful and unfit, in addition to having ...

All pistol variants fire too slowly...

CR-1 blaster cannon/Flechette launcher have ever so slightly less stopping power than they ought to...

All anti-armor launcher variants lack significant punch...

The T-10 and DLT-19 lack significant punch and fire rate...

The MG-15 and Bowcaster, actually, are quite what I think they ought to be, though I must say, I find the Bowcaster feels out-of-place in the hands of any non-Wookiee, but that's of somewhat little concern to me...

...One thing with the Disruptor and DLT-20a, however, is that their reticle fall time could stand to be slightly faster.
_______________
_______________

----  Now, as for vehicles...

Judging from the fact that there are hardly any, I can't comment, as you seem to be still in the early stages of development, there.

----  As for space battles...  I can only offer this much:  Space combat has always appeared too shallow to me, and so I hate it.  Organization can only be as good as "tremendously sloppy," and individual combats are decided by 1) who's craft is better for ship-to-ship combat, 2) who's forces in the immediate area outnumber the other's, and 3) randomness.  Seems to be all too often a question of who gets fed up vainly flying in circles in an attempt to get the opponent in the crosshairs.  That person flies off, with a varying degree of "evasiveness", and the other gets to shoot them.  Rinse...and repeat.

So, to put it bluntly (and I may be a little...  I want to say, "biased," but I'm sure that's not the word...  can you be "prejudiced" against space battles?), if you asked me what I thought of your renditions of space battles, I'd say that however many moments were spent creating those battles, from the first moment of mental conception and up through packing them into the executable, all of those moments were literally wasted time, energy, and life, and you can never have them back.  I would say that with a sorrowful tone, not because I was eventually subjected to the final result of what I would call "fruitless labors," but because I was sorry that you developers had wasted all that time.

----  With regard to the linear nature of CP capture...  I'm going to quote from one of your news posts under "Withering Fire:  Part 3 - Combat."  'Pardon me' in advance if I seem flamey:

"Ok, so the standard game of battlefield 2 or 2142. You jump in the game. Your next few moments are most likely spent sprinting to a flag, killing one or two people on the way, then capturing the flag. You then get up to another person, die, spawn, and repeat. Each combat involves no more than a few people at a time..."

--  It's important to first note that that's how a dumbass plays Battlefield 2 or 2142.  Very important.  Elaboration in a little bit.

"...and the end objective is usually best met by sneaking in to the places that have the least defence.  This is all very well and good to win conquest games, but all it results in is a bunch of tiny skirmishes across the map.  We are aiming to change that in FirstStrike.  Part of the whole concept of our mod is for the players to take part in an actual battlefield. That is, we want to encourage actual battles.  You know, large scale affairs with intense firefights, squads pushing against one another, walkers stomping through the middle, ground being fought over and defended, and blaster fire coming through the mist or clouds. Lots of blaster fire."

-- Such is the nature of warfare.  If you are stronger than the enemy, engage him.  If he's stronger than you, avoid him.  Don't commit to an act if you can't win.  Strike where he's weak.  Would you, if you had the choice, cut at your assailant's knuckles, or his throat?

Sneaking to the weakest places is often best because it is often best, and that's a result of the players of both teams;  it's only controllable if your team is organized.  The teams create the circumstances around the map as a whole, and that contributes to the fun of the fight.  Restricting the teams to taking the CPs in a pre-set order sucks a gigantic amount of fun out of it, and from the looks of it, for terrible reasons.

You want to encourage large-scale affairs, where squads push against one another, fighting over ground?  That's dependant, once again, on the players (also on the number of players on the server, obviously).  Now, certainly, you can increase the probability that players will engage one another in combat by forcing them to go to a certain CP, but there's nothing fun about it unless your players are organized.  It just becomes a cluster-fuck of lone wolves.

You appear to seek an ideal that can't be achieved in this linear-capture method, but you make the experience worse as a result.

Now, I don't reckon you'd go so far as to say, "Oh, Stevo, you're so right!  Let's get rid of that POS play-style and insert the splendidly-diverse standard 'Conquest' mode!"  So, I ask that you at least consider, perhaps, addition of a standard Conquest as an alternate game mode to this linear silliness, if you get my meaning.

----  One last suggestion regarding the Officers:  The "sensor ping" should not have any prerequisites;  he is, and would be, be weak enough already.  And, the beacon requirements should be halved at the least.

----  Lastly, I have a couple matters of which I perceive to be "bugginess" to report.

-- The ammo packs, for both Support and Officers on both factions, seem to have a problem with refilling themselves after use.  I'm not exactly sure if that's a bug or a strange bit of intention, but if it was intentional, it shouldn't be.

-- There appears to be some issues with hit-regions on players — I've found myself watching from two feet away on unsuspecting, stationary opponents as my blaster bolts fly straight through both head and body without causing damage.

_______________
_______________

I think that about does it, for now.  Let me just say that I reserve the right to withdraw these final words in the event that my feedback is not considered:

"Thank you."

That is all.

The classes are setup much like a spectrum. You have your far left Anti Infantry - normal trooper (with a sniper rifle he is completely anti infantry)  and on the far right you have your Heavy Weapons dude who is the best vs vehicles ( he becomes totally anti vehicle when he chooses he rocket launcher)

Inbetween that you have your medic , situated moderate left ..with his anti infantry area affect nades and frontline trooper support equipment such as bacta and a defibrillator .   Moderate right you have your Support dude who can harm vehicles ,to some extent, with his detpack , plus his more defensive support capabilities such as repair, rearm and anti infantry trip mines.

Dunno if that made much sense .. i am past tired .