It is a nerf based upon group size. They have clearly decided not to allow fast leveling, when it was an enticement to play the game, rather than a deterrent. Idiotic calls like this are the reason the game deflated after launch. Now they see a resurgence in subs and apparently they want the game to die, so they nerfed hunt xp.

Every time I build a custom outfit I have to destroy the entire set, even if I only use one piece for my set. It would be great if I could pick, say, just the helm from the silent ghost armor, instead of the whole thing. It's a huge waste of time. Why not make it so we are able to loot things from the "Show items" window when previewing an outfit in collections

In the expansion you SERIOUSLY need to add something that allows us to save our abilities on our hotkeys so that we do not need to set up our entire layout every time we switch specs. When my group needs a healer, I would normally switch to heals. Except that means I have to completely set up all of my hotkeys to do so, and then fix them again when I switch back. It's this kind of quality of life feature that was lacking at launch with the lack of a group finder and the inability to easily re-spec, and we all know how that turned out. Inconveniences like this lead to frustration, which leads to turning off the game and going to play another. Please, please, please add this. I would honestly rather have this single improvement than anything else in the upcoming expansion. Heck, I would rather have it than the expansion at all. Bonus points for a way to have account-wide friends instead of having to add every single one of my friends alts on every single one of my alts.

Server transfers will only work if the game continues to fail in a linear descent. If any expansion has any measure of success, chaos will ensue. Worse chaos, I mean.

A single server tool won't "work" and a cross server one will because of math. The problem isn't effort, the problem is the number of valid group combinations, the total pool, and the ratio of remainders to total pool. Not effort. Math. Not subject to opinion or debate. Geez.

Luckily we don't have to deal with hypotheticals. We have real world data. Games implement X server LFG and people make vigorous use of it, invariably. And never complain about lost community. People don't like to do things that make their world worse. Drug addicts do, but the LFG tool is no heroin. If it had such an adverse effect, people would refrain from using it. It doesn't, so they don't. I swear the people against X-Server lfg are blizzard employees planted to make the game fail. EDIT And, really, a smuggler who won't use cover and someone who refuses to use their 60 minute buff? Made up examples do not become us.

I don't know what WoW you are playing but on all the servers I play there is a thriving community. People know each other, people know who is bad, and lame. And people that actually like to group more than they like being safe from the very rare (yes, they are rare) lame lfg person, will use the lfg tool. And actually GROUP in the two hours thye have to play. The "it ruins community" gripe is a straw man. LFG tools have not affected community one iota. I don't know what to tell you except that the same "community" can't be behaving differently for two people. I know I am not lying, or delusional. Therefore I must assume you are. Stop saying the lfg ruined the WoW "community". NO.

Macro =/= a bot. They do not automate the game. No.

Your entire argument is invalid. What you argue against is being able to re-spec at all. Dual spec is simply a UI tool for doing what we can already do, at a cost. Go start your own thread.

It was my understanding that they said they will be adding dual spec. The main reason we want dual spec is so that it saves our alt spec, our buttons, and maybe but not necessarily our gear, so we don't have to deal with re-setting up all of our quickslots and so forth. If what we are getting is simply the ability to refund our talents in the field, then I have to admit bioware simply does not get it at all. It was never about getting to fleet. Almost all of the fps and ops start at fleet. Three times I was asked to do something yesterday, never in the spec I was currently in. The promise of the dual spec and hope of a group finder are what are keeping me going! Bioware, tell me I am wrong about field respec!

I added the emphasis. You make a good point if... you ignore absolutely all of the evidence we have on the subject to date and the entire basis for the existence of the genre. Yes, a very good point. I like your caveat though, well played.

It would be more accurate to say "I don't like this game so I will play one that is fundamentally different, and so must everyone else." Allowing AC changes will fundamentally change this game. Because really, playing a game that allows you to change your class at higher levels is the same as playing an entirely different game, and genre. When you ask for AC change, you are basically saying "Even though I don't really like role playing games, I chose to play one, so now I want you to change it to suit me." As far as doing the math, it's not really necessary. It's clearly evident. The time it takes to walk one path < the time it takes to walk two. Which of course does not even touch upon future revenue from gearing both characters. It's quite simple really , barring any bizarre exceptions or changes in reality, leveling and gearing two toons will take longer and keep one engaged longer than one toon. None of this is new or groundbreaking. The business model of an mmo parses to "Keep as many people subscribed and NOT logged in to the game as long as possible." Saying leveling one toon and swithching is as likely or even plausible to keep you hooked to the game as long as two is, is as much of the stretch as the guy pointing out you can level to 50 without choosing an AC. It's simply not a valid point. Sure, someone might spend as much time leveling one toon as two, but it is so improbable as to have no place in an intelligent discussion. We have to agree on reality before we can discuss how it works.

In the final analysis anything could be called a semantics argument. The simple and obvious fact of the matter is that the thing which, in this game, is called an "advanced class" represents the exact same type of choices as what is called simply your "class" in any other game with distinct classes. You can never change your class. It tells you in absolutely no uncertain terms that your AC choice is permanent and that essentially, you are now choosing your CLASS. What you are looking for is a game like the secret world, where there are no distinct classes. Yes BW has stated that they want you to experience all of the different stories and classes. When you get right down to it, though , what they really want is for you to keep paying them. Now who do you suppose will pay them longer? Someone who must actually do the work and LEVEL each CLASS they want to try at 50, or the person who can just swap around and change AC at 50? I'll give you a hint: it's the first one. By years. It will never cease to amaze me how immediately and completely people on these boards lose sight of the fact that BW is a business, and they will do whatever is in their financial best interests to do. In fact, they are legally obligated to increase shareholder value. So, will AC swapping make them more money in the long run? Almost certainly not, and therefore you will never see it. Another one is cross server lfg, which will allow people who are too busy to log in the means to find a group fast and enjoy the game, rather than cancelling a game subscription they can make no use of. It WILL happen, period. When you pull your head out of the fantasyland wherein bioware actually cares about their customer and return to the reality in which they only care about profit, things become markedly clearer. So... every time you join a discussion on these boards, first think: Which side of this argument is most likely to increase EA and Biowares shareholder value? Whichever one it is is going to be the right one. Nostrafrickindamus. See if I am wrong.

You could also just map target next and target closest to a keyboard button and then set that button on your mouse to (single key- whatever you set it to).

First of all, no it isn't. If you ignore people in WoW you never get randoms with that person again, not that you would otherwise. Second, instead of risking peopl eleaving before the end and wasting your time, you would rather go back to no lfg, and spend that time spamming general for a group and never kill even one boss? Super.

He is right, run it as admin. Razer mouse here.

Please point me to the part where there are "made up maths". The numbers are made up, yes. The math is not. What comprises a group is not. How many groups you can form from a certain number of people is not. And the video is EVIDENCE of exactly nothing. Do you understand that the leaders of the largest 100 guilds in the game have no need for a cross server tool? Do you not understand how it would be advantageous to the leader of the largest group in a specific server to not allow cross server? On their server, their guild is something of a hegemony, whereas if you have cross server, their influence on the people on their server decreases drastically. If you have the only well in town and everyone has to get your okay to drink, will you vote for or against aqueducts? Well nothing is 100% but I'm thinking against... When they cheered they might as well have cheered "Yay! We remain significant!" That. Video. Substantiates. Nothing. Get it through your head.

They were picked based upon the fact that they are the leaders of the 100some largest guilds in the game. 100some people with THE LEAST TROUBLE finding groups in the game. Are you seriously not getting that point? They WERE hand picked based upon criteria that makes them specifically biased against cross server vs same server lfg.

If the scenario I provided does not make it valid, then nothing will. From now on you should just reply "No cross server lfg nananananananananan I'm not listening lalalalalalala" 1 tank + 2 healers + 7 dps + single server lfg tool = one group and 6 people not grouped. 1 tank + 2 healers + 7dps + cross server lfg tool = Between 3 and 10 groups and zero people left ungrouped. End of story. Single server will not get it done. Valid reason provided.

Every time you point to the guild summit video as "evidence" of anything other than the motivations of the leaders of the 100 largest guilds in the game, you remove another of the very few reasons to listen to anything you say. When you say it you say: "The people who need help finding groups the very least out of anyone don't need any help finding groups." There, now that I parsed it for you, you see how foolish it sounds, right?

I posted a very clear one. You ignored it.

Yeah. Racist against Chinese....food.

I know it's probably tough for you remember YOUR PREVIOUS POST but we were talking about the math. Remember the example I gave with the eleven people looking for a group? Yeah. THAT is more valid. As far as validity: numbers > a roomful of guildleaders with no need for lfg.

If you a group that is heavily predisposed towards one type of thinking as opposed to another, then assumes the opposite position? No, it doesn't make it TRUE. All else being equal, if the group assumes the opposite opinion, it makes it no more or less TRUE, per se. It simply removes the likelihood that their opinion is based upon personal preference rather than reality. This just keeps getting worse and worse. Seriously, you're messing with us now, aren't you, Conrad? No person can have this little common sense. It's mind boggling.

Ok, the maths beat your "I remember 30 min queues and dps queued as wipes blah blah blah". Your link is the same thing. Anecdotal evidence. I'm guessing in five or six years when you get to rhetoric 101 you might look back on this thread and think "Wow. I did not make a single, valid, logical point, or one backed up by actual facts, in that entire thread." Yes, that was ad hominem.