Probably beating a dead horse, but here we go.
1) Bespoke datacrons that provide stats at 500+% of the normal values are bad for the game. Players already have to contest the new character and a strong 3/6/9. Just give the datacrons regular stat values (especially because you've been putting stat boosts in the 3/6/9 that are multiplicative on top of the stats found on the datacrons - leading to absurd values). Selling literal "I win" buttons is disparaging to players.
2) Following through on rash decisions related to balance when a large portion of the community thinks it's awful the moment the notice goes out is bad. Maybe don't push the change immediately and instead talk to the players or come up with a reasoning for why you still intend to push, despite feedback. Maybe you have a decent reason, but leaving players on read when it upends the game in more ways than your original statement implied it would is not healthy. Yes, this is in reference to the P1 release, the TIE Dagger buffs, and the Scythe bugs that you introduced that have royally messed up the fleet meta.
3) Not fully considering decisions from other points in the game is bad. This ties in with a lot of other points on this list. When you make changes, you really need to fully consider how it might impact players at all points in the game. For example: removing an older assault battle, like forest moon, has a disproportionately larger effect on newer/smaller accounts. It's a cheaper investment than newer assault battles and it's a potentially larger amount of their regular resource income. It's still bad for everyone, but it's disproportionately worse for early game players.
4) Invalidating player investment is bad. Pretty simple. Removing rewards that required investment without reallocating those rewards somewhere else that doesn't require investment invalidates the time and effort that players made. For instance, again, the forest moon assault battle. If it's gone for good, the better decision would be to increase fleet challenge zetas from 2 to 3, move shards into Endor Escalation, give new players OG ewoks at 3 or 4 stars so they can start Endor Escalation sooner, and increase the amount of each piece of gear rewarded for completing all daily challenges by 1.
5) Increasing the entry cost of various events by significant amounts is bad. Duel of the Fates required 2x R9s. Peridea Patrol requires 3x R9s for the top tier. That's a significantly increased entry cost for something that will take a few years to pay back. And with the removal of other content, it's hard for players to make the justification for that kind of entry cost if we're uncertain of the expected lifespan of the event.
6) Seemingly ignoring feedback about various game modes is bad. Players have been complaining about PvP modes for a very long time. TW, specifically, hasn't received changes in 3(?) years or something. High GP guilds are collapsing, players are dropping, people are sandbagging. It's not good. And now other PvP modes are starting to feel similar, leading to significant player burnout.
7) Lack of communication (or communication that isn't meaningful) with the players about game related stuff is bad. Answering the same question multiple times in the same Q/A is wasting your time and ours. The road ahead posts that we wait on for so long have recently just been about a parking lot. No big changes, no real direction, just more of the same. Only new characters that everyone already expects. Not really going anywhere.
8) Not adjusting activities to balance the time investment from players is bad. This seems pretty self-explanatory. If you add requirements that take time, be prepared to make other things take less time.
These are a handful of things that I think are driving players away. But, as is kind of implied with the title, I don't expect anything to change. CG is gonna CG and they'll continue to alienate players and drive people away, rather than listen to feedback.
