ETA on Advanced Class change?

[LordArtemis]

Current list, pros and cons as reported by participants.

 

 

Option 1

Level 10 to 15 - Allow AC Change - max 2 changes allowed - reduction to level 10 with change - 24 hour cooldown - once you reach level 16 AC is permanent - everything except XP and quests are unaffected - armor/earpieces/weapons for character and companions are removed and must be reequipped.

 

Option 2

Level 10 to 55 - Allow AC Change - max 1 change allowed - reduction to level 10 with change - no cooldown - no level gate for permanent AC choice - everything except XP and quests are unaffected - armor/earpieces/weapons for character and companions are removed and must be reequipped.

 

Option 3

 

Level 10 to 55 - Allow AC Change - max 2 changes allowed - no reduction in level - one month cooldown - no level gate for permanent AC choice - everything is unaffected - armor/earpieces/weapons for character and companions are removed and must be reequipped.

 

Option 4

 

Level 10 to 30 - Allow AC Change - max 1 change allowed - no reduction in level - no cooldown - no level gate for permanent AC choice - everything is unaffected - armor/earpieces/weapons for character and companions are removed and must be reequipped.

 

Option 5

Level 10 to 46 - Allow AC Change - no maximum changes, can change at will up to 46 - no reduction in level - no cooldown - once you reach level 47 AC is permanent - everything is unaffected - armor/earpieces/weapons for character and companions are removed and must be reequipped.

 

Option 6

Level 10 to 55 - Allow AC Change - no maximum changes, can change at will - no reduction in level - no cooldown - no level gate for permanent AC choice - everything is unaffected - armor/earpieces/weapons for character and companions are removed and must be reequipped.

 

Option 7

Level 10 to 55 - Allow AC Change - no maximum changes, can change at will - no reduction in level - no cooldown - no level gate for permanent AC choice - Must level one character to max level in an AC to unlock legacy ability to switch AC for that class - everything is unaffected - armor/earpieces/weapons for character and companions are removed and must be reequipped.

 

Option 8

Level 10 to 55 - Allow AC Change - maximum 8 changes per account, can change at will - no reduction in level - no cooldown - no level gate for permanent AC choice - everything is unaffected - armor/earpieces/weapons for character and companions are removed and must be reequipped.

 

Option 9

 

Level 10 to 55 - Allow AC Change - no maximum number of changes - must change at AC trainers on fleet - 1 Week cooldown - Option for AC change unlocked as Character Perk for 600 cartel Coins (or 1.5 million credits) - Each subsequent AC change costs 40 cartel coins (or 100,000 credits).

 

Option 10

 

Level 40 to 55 - Allow AC Change - max 1 change allowed - no reduction in level - no cooldown - no level gate for permanent AC choice - everything is unaffected - armor/earpieces/weapons for character and companions are removed and must be reequipped.

 

 

Option 11

 

No AC change allowed.

 

 

 

And this is the pro and con list as it stands right now. It is certainly open for more additions or corrections.

 

 

PROS

 

1. breathing life into characters that may have been abandoned and thus extending someone's stay in game, their enjoyment in game.

2. allowing people who only have fun playing through a story once - experiment with their character without having to suffer through the story they already know and aren't having fun replaying.

3. allowing people to keep using unique, no longer acquirable items, that include pets, speeders, crystals, armor shells, as well as legacy perk unlocks on a character they have grown attached to, while enjoying the game play style that works better for them, within the same archetype, rather than having to reroll from scratch and lose all the investment they made into a character.

4. making extra money for bioware by making ac switch purchasable with cartel coins.

 

CONS

 

1) I would expect that many folks are not going to react well to this change if implemented.

2) They flirted with the idea before launch, even talked about it publicly, but in the end decided not to allow it. At the time folks were pretty dead set against it. I don't think it's likely the current environment has changed much since then.

3) Some classes could end up underrepresented due to bad design. Right now some folks stick with an AC they choose because they would have to reroll and do not wish to do so I would guess.

4) If restrictions are not in place this could end up being abused or exploited.

5) This will likely further demean AC choice.

6) Could cause FOTM issues.

7) If late game AC change is allowed it could end up causing folks that have an AC but do not know how to properly play it running Raids and Operations, making an existing problem worse.

 

 

I am willing to begrudgingly support option 1, option 7 but would prefer option 11. The idea of option 7 has some appeal...you have to level an AC to max level to get a legacy unlock you can use to switch to that AC inside the class for another character account wide. That still give AC meaning IMO.

 

I still prefer no AC change, but I'm somewhat willing to support 1 and 7. I personally do not feel option 10 is a good idea as I think it would possibly have a negative impact on the game, more likely than an early change.

 

I would also add what I would like to see happen with respect to AC.

 

1) Bioware would come out and publicly state, in no uncertain terms, that AC IS YOUR CLASS.

 

2) Make AC choice mandatory at level 10, move all abilities under the AC heading in the abilities pane and remove the base class header, move all trainable abilities from that point forward under the AC header on the trainer.

 

3) Remove all references in the game to your base class that can be removed once you choose your AC.

 

4) Add a small quest line at max level that is AC specific, where they refer to your AC directly.

 

IMO this would make the choice more meaningful.

 

Please let me know if the new option 10 is accurate as folks have requested it. If not I will adjust it accordingly.

Edited August 1, 2013 by LordArtemis

[branmakmuffin]

If you think the reason to allow it is simply that players want it, I'll counter with this; It should not be allowed, because there are lots of players that DON'T want it.

The difference is you want to limit options for no reason other than you don't like something, something which has no effect on you. No one's going to make you buy an AC change. Those in favor of allowing it want to give people the option. See TUXs' most recent post.

[TUXs]

Option 3

 

Level 10 to 55 - Allow AC Change - max 2 changes allowed - no reduction in level - one month cooldown - no level gate for permanent AC choice - everything is unaffected - armor/earpieces/weapons for character and companions are removed and must be reequipped.

 

I am willing to begrudgingly support option 1, option 7 but would prefer option 11. The idea of option 7 has some appeal...you have to level an AC to max level to get a legacy unlock you can use to switch to that AC inside the class for another character account wide. That still give AC meaning IMO.

 

I still prefer no AC change, but I'm somewhat willing to support 1 and 7. I personally do not feel option 10 is a good idea as I think it would possibly have a negative impact on the game, more likely than an early change.

 

I would also add what I would like to see happen with respect to AC.

 

2) Make AC choice mandatory at level 10

 

IMO this would make the choice more meaningful.

 

I appreciate this list Lord - I also appreciate you keeping an open mind in this debate, even though you disagree with the idea. Thank you.

 

The only adjustment I would make to #3 is that it's unlimited changes, but there is a 30-day cooldown on the ability to switch. Restrictions are warranted to prevent abuse. I also think this is something perfectly suited for the Cartel Market, adding a fiscal 'cost' to the change as well. On top of that, all AC specific skills that you've learned are "untrained" (not class skills that don't change or things like speeder piloting), adding an in-game credit sink as well.

 

The mandatory AC selection at 10 is a good idea as well. I know we have a few Jedi Knights and Troopers in our guild who are 55 and I can appreciate that they wanted the challenge of leveling without an AC, but that impacts (hurts) ALL group play imo and I can understand why that should be addressed.

 

 

The difference is you want to limit options for no reason other than you don't like something, something which has no effect on you. No one's going to make you buy an AC change. Those in favor of allowing it want to give people the option. See TUXs' most recent post.

 

Thank you Bran. We don't often see eye to eye, but I'm very pleased we agree on this one...I really see this as little more than a bigger respec, something I do twice a night for PvP or PvE. I wouldn't use it myself, but I understand the appeal of it to players who are stuck with an AC they dislike (or are just bored with). There are also those casual players who've had the game since launch who are still only on their 1st 55 level toon. Not everyone researches the ACs before selecting...I don't think that an early mistake should haunt a player forever, not in an online game where your advanced class defines your role - and the needs of the community are always in flux.

[ekwalizer]

I asked for a valid reason, you gave me a list of garbage excuses without anything to support your fictitious claims.

 

Yes, you'd like to keep it the way it is, I believe there are numerous valid reasons to allow it. My main reason is CHOICE!

 

I still haven't heard that ONE good reason not to allow it. Not one. I challenge you one more time...please, give me ONE valid reason this would be bad for the game.

 

We have also heard no valid arguments on your side. That is how opinions work. It is your OPINION that we haven't made valid arguments. You have no measurable fact to base your opinion on.

 

My reason for wanting it is...if it makes someone happy, go for it. Why would I seriously care what AC someone else wanted to be? There's NO negative to allowing it...not for me, not for the community. The only reason I've heard for NOT allowing it is punitive.

 

The mandatory AC selection at 10 is a good idea as well. I know we have a few Jedi Knights and Troopers in our guild who are 55 and I can appreciate that they wanted the challenge of leveling without an AC, but that impacts (hurts) ALL group play imo and I can understand why that should be addressed.

 

How do you get right with your claims that you just want people to have choice on their AC, you just want people to be happy and that AC respec will not hurt the game in previous statements; then completely contradict yourself by saying that choosing an AC at 10 should be mandatory, and that not selecting an AC hurts the game?

Edited August 1, 2013 by ekwalizer

[TUXs]

How do you get right with your claims that you just want people to have choice on their AC, you just want people to be happy and that AC respec will not hurt the game in previous statements; then completely contradict yourself by saying that choosing an AC at 10 should be mandatory, and that not selecting an AC hurts the game?

 

I didn't contradict anything. I believe mandating an AC selection at 10 should be implemented to avoid impacting GROUP play (PvP, Heroics, FPs) - a level 40 Trooper will lack many abilities that a Commando/Vanguard would be expected to have at that level. The ability to switch that AC every 30-days doesn't hurt the game.

 

And my valid argument is simple - the AC I select has no impact on you whatsoever. I want players to play whatever the hell they like...you insist that they be stuck playing whatever they picked.

Edited August 1, 2013 by TUXs

[Quraswren]

SNIP...

How do you get right with your claims that you just want people to have choice on their AC, you just want people to be happy and that AC respec will not hurt the game in previous statements; then completely contradict yourself by saying that choosing an AC at 10 should be mandatory, and that not selecting an AC hurts the game?

 

You mean to say that you don't see a difference in "NO AC" at all VS choosing or even changing between AC and which would hurt the overall game?

 

 

Really?

[ekwalizer]

When someone makes the argument in favor of AC change that it is about "choice", "player happiness" and "no negative impact on the game", then says that players should have NO CHOICE but to select an AC at level 10 because not choosing an AC is harmful to the game, then yes I have to call BS on that.

 

What happened to their happiness? What happened to their choice? Not making a decision is in fact a choice.

 

How is not selecting an AC different than wanting to select a different AC? Either way you are trying to avoid a decision that is repeatedly explained as PERMANENT.

 

I'm sorry, the percentage of characters out there that do not select AC before they leave the fleet is statistically insignificant. It doesn't "hurt the game".

 

What it *might* do is hurt your gaming experience, when you run into them.

 

But how is that a valid argument to make, but "I don't want to be GF'd with an Assassin Tank that used to be a Lightning Sorc.", is magically not valid?

Edited August 1, 2013 by ekwalizer

[TUXs]

When someone makes the argument in favor of AC change that it is about "choice", "player happiness" and "no negative impact on the game", then says that players should have NO CHOICE but to select an AC at level 10 because not choosing an AC is harmful to the game, then yes I have to call BS on that.

 

What happened to their happiness? What happened to their choice? Not making a decision is in fact a choice.

 

How is not selecting an AC different than wanting to select a different AC? Either way you are trying to avoid a decision that is repeatedly explained as PERMANENT.

 

I'm sorry, the percentage of characters out there that do not select AC before they leave the fleet is statistically insignificant. It doesn't "hurt the game".

 

What it *might* do is hurt your gaming experience, when you run into them.

 

But how is that a valid argument to make, but "I don't want to be GF'd with an Assassin Tank that used to be a Lightning Sorc.", is magically not valid?

 

Oh geezus dude, if you don't see the clear freaking difference, I'm not going to be the one to enlighten you. Contrary to your belief, they are not contradictory.

[ekwalizer]

Oh geezus dude, if you don't see the clear freaking difference, I'm not going to be the one to enlighten you. Contrary to your belief, they are not contradictory.

 

How does someone not selecting an AC impact YOU?

 

Do you pay their subscription?

 

Who are you to tell them how to have fun?

 

Why are you trying to control them?

 

You should mind your own business.

 

(Does any of that sound familiar?)

[TUXs]

How does someone not selecting an AC impact YOU?

 

Do you pay their subscription?

 

Who are you to tell them how to have fun?

 

Why are you trying to control them?

 

You should mind your own business.

 

(Does any of that sound familiar?)

Fine. Let people not pick one. I doubt it's much of an issue as it is, so fine. I was trying to avoid group issues is all.

[LordArtemis]

This entire problem exists, IMO, because of EXTREMELY POOR class design. Simply put, setting up the class and AC system as it is was a huge blunder with respect to the problems it would cause later on.

 

I think I understand why they did it...to offer more choice, the appearance or feeling of diversity in the classes since there simply was not a lot of class diversity to begin with.

 

But, in the end all it did IMO was make a bad situation worse....instead of doing the smart thing, setting the current class as your "path", then allowing you to choose your class after you choose your path AT CHARACTER CREATION they set you to choose your "class" at level 10.

 

Really, that is just silly design. How many games on the market make you wait to choose your class until level 10? And of those games, how many continue to refer to your original class despite you have essentially chosen a new one?

 

It is likely there is at least a few. After all, foolish design decisions are not the exclusive property of the original SWTOR development team.

 

They can fix this IMO....what I see as the base problem....by making some early game adjustments. That would put all of this to bed permanently.

[Spatology]

Far too much ambiguity and redundancy has plagued this thread.

 

The majority of the Pro's and Con's collected for us by L.A., in reality, are the same issues. They are simply rephrased in order to maintain an aura of neutrality.

 

It's very sad to see people sacrifice legitimacy in order to support ideals that intrinsically hold little water.

 

Blatently denying that you just want AC change for QoL purposes (ie im lazy and dont wanna level another character) is lame. Own up.

 

Atleast im honest, i dont want AC change because ive already leveled characters of the same class because i wanted to play the other AC. I did what was nessesary to enjoy the game in the way I pleased. It is a slight to all players who have done this to institute this change.

 

Just to add frosting to the cake, from the way EA/Bioware has treated its loyal customers so far, its likely they will institute this change. Even if it means minimal profit gain, and pisses off half the player base. If they think they can get away with it, you better beleive EA is gonna get that $$$$$$$$$$$

Edited August 1, 2013 by Spatology

[branmakmuffin]

Blatently denying that you just want AC change for QoL purposes (ie im lazy and dont wanna level another character) is lame. Own up.

It's a game people play for leisurely enjoyment. The purpose is to have fun. The concept of "lazy" does not even enter the equation. You play the way you want and others will play the way they want. If you don't like the way they play, you don't have to play that way. By the same token, they shouldn't have to play your way, either.

Edited August 1, 2013 by branmakmuffin

[Spatology]

It's a game people play for leisurely enjoyment. The purpose is to have fun. The concept of "lazy" does not even enter the equation. You play the way you want and others will play the way they want. If you don't like the way they play, you don't have to play that way. By the same token, they shouldn't have to play your way, either.

 

Lazy is a poor selection of a word, since you clearly take offense. Regardless, by merit of others actions who have leveled characters of both AC, your pathway is clear sir. You may enjoy the game to your leisure.

 

Its not my way sir. It is the way of the MMO, and more importantly, games in general. You complete tasks to attain a goal.

 

You are asking for a way to attain the goal, without completeing the task.

Edited August 1, 2013 by Spatology

[branmakmuffin]

Lazy is a poor selection of a word, since you clearly take offense.

Clearly you get your exercise jumping to conclusions. "Offense" is not even remotely applicable, here.

 

You are asking for a way to attain the goal, without completeing the task.

If you want to roll up a new character and "work hard" to level it and someone else wants to pay CCs to switch to the other AC (should that ever become available), why do you care? How does it affect you? No can has answered and no one can answer that question reasonably. If if helps you sleep at night to smugly refer to "pro-AC changers" as lazy, enjoy your pettiness.

[Soluss]

Why not just have CC level 55's. Why not have BIS gear for CC. People want to have fun their way.

[ekwalizer]

It's a game people play for leisurely enjoyment. The purpose is to have fun. The concept of "lazy" does not even enter the equation. You play the way you want and others will play the way they want. If you don't like the way they play, you don't have to play that way. By the same token, they shouldn't have to play your way, either.

 

They aren't playing "my way". They are playing "Bioware's way".

[LordArtemis]

Far too much ambiguity and redundancy has plagued this thread.

 

The majority of the Pro's and Con's collected for us by L.A., in reality, are the same issues. They are simply rephrased in order to maintain an aura of neutrality.

 

It's very sad to see people sacrifice legitimacy in order to support ideals that intrinsically hold little water.

 

Blatently denying that you just want AC change for QoL purposes (ie im lazy and dont wanna level another character) is lame. Own up.

 

Atleast im honest, i dont want AC change because ive already leveled characters of the same class because i wanted to play the other AC. I did what was nessesary to enjoy the game in the way I pleased. It is a slight to all players who have done this to institute this change.

 

Just to add frosting to the cake, from the way EA/Bioware has treated its loyal customers so far, its likely they will institute this change. Even if it means minimal profit gain, and pisses off half the player base. If they think they can get away with it, you better beleive EA is gonna get that $$$$$$$$$$$

 

I'm not going to accuse you of anything here, I just wanted to be clear...do you feel I am being disingenuous or pretending to be neutral with respect to the collection post?

[QuiDonJorn]

It's a game people play for leisurely enjoyment. The purpose is to have fun. The concept of "lazy" does not even enter the equation. You play the way you want and others will play the way they want. If you don't like the way they play, you don't have to play that way. By the same token, they shouldn't have to play your way, either.

 

This is correct from my point of view.

Do what you want, I don't care. Other people don't affect me and my game at all.

Get your AC change feature. Doesn't matter. It doesn't affect me.

I have 2 Sage's, a Shadow, a Guardian, a Sentinel, a Sorceror, an Assassin, a Gunslinger, a Sniper, a Juggernaut, a Mercenary, and a Vanguard.

I leveled the characters I wanted to level, because frankly, the AC's and specs don't really matter to me.

I have the characters I want. AC is almost secondary to me.

 

So yeah, you guys can do whatever you want, I don't care.

[Ratajack]

I appreciate this list Lord - I also appreciate you keeping an open mind in this debate, even though you disagree with the idea. Thank you.

 

The only adjustment I would make to #3 is that it's unlimited changes, but there is a 30-day cooldown on the ability to switch. Restrictions are warranted to prevent abuse. I also think this is something perfectly suited for the Cartel Market, adding a fiscal 'cost' to the change as well. On top of that, all AC specific skills that you've learned are "untrained" (not class skills that don't change or things like speeder piloting), adding an in-game credit sink as well.

 

The mandatory AC selection at 10 is a good idea as well. I know we have a few Jedi Knights and Troopers in our guild who are 55 and I can appreciate that they wanted the challenge of leveling without an AC, but that impacts (hurts) ALL group play imo and I can understand why that should be addressed.

 

 

 

 

Thank you Bran. We don't often see eye to eye, but I'm very pleased we agree on this one...I really see this as little more than a bigger respec, something I do twice a night for PvP or PvE. I wouldn't use it myself, but I understand the appeal of it to players who are stuck with an AC they dislike (or are just bored with). There are also those casual players who've had the game since launch who are still only on their 1st 55 level toon. Not everyone researches the ACs before selecting...I don't think that an early mistake should haunt a player forever, not in an online game where your advanced class defines your role - and the needs of the community are always in flux.

 

What makes you think that restrictions would prevent these forums from being inundated with clamoring for those restrictions to be lowered or removed altogether? We already have restrictions on class changes, and yet you are among those who are clamoring for the restrictions that ALREADY EXIST to be lowered, if not removed.

 

You can call it slippery slope, but the evidence is right before your eyes that restrictions will not prevent cries for those restrictions to be lifted or lowered.

 

As for an online game where your class defines your role, that is the case in almost every MMO. Why should the WOW player who chose to roll a priest and later realizes they prefer druid healing not be able to change to his class to druid? After all, he made that mistake of choosing priest early, even before level 1. Why should that mistake haunt him forever if the needs of the community are always in flux? Is it possibly because allowing class changes holds the potential for more negative impacts than positive? Is it possibly because allowing class changes is an unwritten "no-no" in MMO's?

[Ratajack]

Fine. Let people not pick one. I doubt it's much of an issue as it is, so fine. I was trying to avoid group issues is all.

 

What about the people who wish to avoid group issues by asking that BW not increase the numbers of people who have no idea how to play their class which is what would happen if class changes were allowed? Are their desires any less valid than your desire to avoid group issues by forcing a mandatory AC pick at level 10?

[astrobearx]

If you think the reason to allow it is simply that players want it, I'll counter with this; It should not be allowed, because there are lots of players that DON'T want it.

what a weak *** reasoning to not allow AC change.

[Spatology]

Clearly you get your exercise jumping to conclusions. "Offense" is not even remotely applicable, here.

 

 

If you want to roll up a new character and "work hard" to level it and someone else wants to pay CCs to switch to the other AC (should that ever become available), why do you care? How does it affect you? No can has answered and no one can answer that question reasonably. If if helps you sleep at night to smugly refer to "pro-AC changers" as lazy, enjoy your pettiness.

 

You aren't the first to ask this question, read the thread for your answer. Also, I'm not smug, I'm sure you take it that way. Regardless, wanting things without putting in effort that others have for said thing is the epitome of lazy. No more approprite adjective comes to mind for this situation.

[Ratajack]

what a weak *** reasoning to not allow AC change.

 

News flash.

 

"People want it" isn't exactly a strong reason.

[astrobearx]

News flash.

 

"People want it" isn't exactly a strong reason.

 

neither is "we dont want it just because we dont like it", both is a incredibly a weak reason to (not) allow AC change and only stems from personal biases.