ETA on Advanced Class change?

[Vhaegrant]

From where do you derive this irrefutable fact?

Largely from common sense and the fact that if it isn't a direct quote with a source from a Bioware employee anything on the forum is opinion. I didn't present it as 'irrefutable fact', just my opinion as are all my posts. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

Are you seriously advocating for pay to win?

My definition of 'Pay to Win' is being able to purchase with cash (real money) items that are better than those obtainable through effort in game. In current context if you could buy purple [82] mods from the cartel market while only being able to gain purple [75] from running Nightmare mode Scum and Villany that would be Pay to Win.

The first part alludes to being able to bypass the levelling content through a cash purchase rather than spending your time. I don't feel the need to enforce a levelling requirement on people if they chose to bypass said content. However I didn't make any mention of price, maybe for what I suggested £250, £300?

The second part of filling the gear with purple [72] mods comes from the step up to purple [75]s now being the top level available from Operations, now the crafters have gained access to the purple [72]s. So effectively if you purchase some Cartel coins, get some packs from the cartel market sell them on the GTN to raise credits you can then use those credits to purchase said purple [72]s.

[Ratajack]

I've seen the old Daniel Erickson quote made not long after the launch where he says they have no plans for switching advanced class which are seen as fundamentally different classes. No mention of specific segregation of roles though, are you referring to a different source?

I've also seen the more recent comment by the current lead designer that says AC switch has been considered and may happen in the future. This points out that games change as they mature and no ruleset is out of reach for the discussion of change.

Underminging the intent? I still don't think it does. An AC change still maintains a seperation of abilities that prevents a character mixing tank/healing abilities.

 

If the design intent was to prevent any character from having access to both tanking AND healing abilities AT ANY TIME and not not just at the same time, how does allowing class changes NOT undermine that design intent? Allowing a single character to have access to tanking AND healing abilities, even if they do not have access to them at the SAME time, undermines the intent of NOT allowing a single character to access both tanking and healing abilities.

 

 

 

 

Seriously I am still struggling to understand why anyone would place such an absolute against the arguement as 'If it changes I quit'. I'm sorry but this just reminds me of young kids on the football pitch who walk off with their ball just because they start to loose.

 

Yet, there WILL be people who will leave if they allow class changes. It has nothing to do with "losing" this debate. It has everything to do with breaking a fundamental "unwritten" rule of MMO's, that being your class is your class and class changes are a no-no.

 

Allowing an AC change has zero effect on you within the game mechanics. It is no more invasive than the role changing already available within the skill trees. No one sees any real problems with that level of role swapping. No one is threatening to quit because a Mercenary can change from Healer role to DPS role or a Powertech changes from DPS role to Tank role. Why should they be so insulted that they feel the need to quit over allowing another player to chose between Healer OR Tank role?

 

Because it is a 'meaningful' choice? It's only meaningful as far as it pertains to you. If you wan't your AC choice to be meaningful and absolute then by all means feel free not to use an AC change feature should it ever be implemented.I just don't feel that should be enforced on other players.

 

Because changing from a tank to healer requires you to change your CLASS, not just your spec. Here again, we come up against that "unwritten" rule.

 

The players who are against allowing class changes are NOT enforcing anything on anyone. BW set the rules, not the players. So far, BW has not changed the rules and I do not see them doing so in the foreseeable future.

Edited July 26, 2013 by Ratajack

[Ratajack]

It doesn't ultimately lead anywhere, I think you may be relying on the Slippery Slope Fallacy

 

I would not advocate allowing a Story Class change (and believe it would fall into the virtually impossible due to the way they track story advancement such as companion interaction, the same issues they have mentioned make gender change and faction change so difficult) as the game is built around the story being the main focus. If the game was less linear with not so much focus on the story then it may be a consideration as long as access to certain combinations of abilities was restricted.

 

So you want to enforce your play style on others? You want to allow class changes from juggernaut to marauder, for example, but disallow going from mercenary to marauder?

 

However, as the game stands it is not unreasonable to see the AC as a subset of the starting class. It doesn't need to be any more complex than that

 

The devs have already stated the the AC's are fundamentally DIFFERENT CLASS DESIGNS. It ISN'T any more complex than that. You can look at it any way you want in an attempt to justify your desire to allow class changes, but that does not change what the devs have stated.

[Vhaegrant]

Slippery Slope is NOT a fallacy. Once precident is established it becomes easier to go down hill. Just because YOU will not advocate Smuggler to Knight doesn't mean 1000 other people would once the door has been opened.

 

Um, yes it is.

[Ratajack]

Slippery Slope is NOT a fallacy. Once precident is established it becomes easier to go down hill. Just because YOU will not advocate Smuggler to Knight doesn't mean 1000 other people would once the door has been opened.

 

 

 

yes it is.

 

Fixed that for you.

Edited July 27, 2013 by Ratajack

[ekwalizer]

Um, yes it is.

 

Lol just because you quote some random webpage doesn't negate the fact that the US Legal system recognizes slippery slope.

 

Even Yoda eludes to it.

 

“The fear of loss is a path to the Dark Side.”

 

“Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.”

 

“Yes, a Jedi’s strength flows from the Force. But beware of the dark side. Anger, fear, aggression; the dark side of the Force are they. Easily they flow, quick to join you in a fight. If once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny, consume you it will, as it did Obi-Wan’s apprentice.”

Edited July 27, 2013 by ekwalizer

[Vhaegrant]

If the design intent was to prevent any character from having access to both tanking AND healing abilities AT ANY TIME and not not just at the same time, how does allowing class changes NOT undermine that design intent? Allowing a single character to have access to tanking AND healing abilities, even if they do not have access to them at the SAME time, undermines the intent of NOT allowing a single character to access both tanking and healing abilities.

I'm not trying to get a form of AC change brought in that is as convenient as it is to repsec between skill trees (if a subscriber and having purchased Field Respecialisation it is free and can be done anywhere and at anytime, the developers are currently looking at ways to prevent this from happening in Warzones).

I think it should have:

- an associated cost that is large enough to deter casual AC change but reasonable to be considered. Based on costs of species change and name change I see it being around the 1,000 cc mark (around £5.50, free from 2 months subscription cc allotment, or purchase from GTN at whatever people want to list it at)

- activated at a specific point such as the advanced class trainers on fleet or a terminal you can purchase for your starship.

- a cool down period of at least one week, maybe longer.

I think the above three safeguards prevent the potential for abuse and casual switching.

On the question of design intent, you can quote over and over again what original design intents are and I will point you at the suggestions forum where BW ask for people to make contributions that they can consider for future purposes. Games with the potential to run as long as an MMO can are in a constant state of upgrades and changes. New features are implemented and balanced. Decisions made during development are changed. Such is the life of an MMO.

 

Yet, there WILL be people who will leave if they allow class changes. It has nothing to do with "losing" this debate. It has everything to do with breaking a fundamental "unwritten" rule of MMO's, that being your class is your class and class changes are a no-no.

All you can state with confidence is that YOU will leave, you have no idea as to the action of others. Just as I have no idea if it would bring back more players.

It makes me smile that many players are calling for SWTOR to be more innovative. But the main argument you keep bringing back is that it shouldn't change and it should be just like every other MMO and do things to 'Unwritten' rules because that's how it was at launch.

 

Because changing from a tank to healer requires you to change your CLASS, not just your spec. Here again, we come up against that "unwritten" rule.

This definition of class isn't one the game makes but one a developer made a long time ago. The game is quite clear on what a class is, it is the story. Go make up a new character, on creation you are asked to chose a Class such as Bounty Hunter or Sith Warrior not the advanced class (although I never realised they put information regarding AC on this page as well, but then my mind was already made up to make one of each AC)

 

The players who are against allowing class changes are NOT enforcing anything on anyone. BW set the rules, not the players. So far, BW has not changed the rules and I do not see them doing so in the foreseeable future.

I'm advocating for a potential increase in a players choice without going all the way of asking for class changes, Bioware have made continuous modifications to classes as the game has matured including the addition of new content that allows for other aspects considered permanent at character creation to be changed. All I am asking for is for such a change to be considered. At no point would I force you to use the feature.

Edited July 27, 2013 by Vhaegrant

[ekwalizer]

Um, yes it is.

 

This type of argument is by no means invariably fallacious, but the strength of the argument is inversely proportional to the number of steps between A and Z,

 

LOL Epic Fail.

 

The steps between A and Z is that B-Y would come all at once.

 

"But you already let me change from Merc to PowerTech, why can't I change from PowerTech to Juggernaut? They both are tanks/melee DPS and they both wear heavy armor, I don't have time to level a new toon and who are you to tell me how to play the game I pay for?"

[Basreia]

I see nothing but arguments back and forth with nothing but boasting about one's ability and immature ranting. If you want to feel my thoughts on it. Look at my post in this thread

 

Other than that. Please stop the childish bickering, immature yelling and starting crying matches. This is a discussion thread not a angry forums thread

[Vhaegrant]

This type of argument is by no means invariably fallacious, but the strength of the argument is inversely proportional to the number of steps between A and Z,

 

LOL Epic Fail.

 

The steps between A and Z is that B-Y would come all at once.

 

"But you already let me change from Merc to PowerTech, why can't I change from PowerTech to Juggernaut? They both are tanks/melee DPS and they both wear heavy armor, I don't have time to level a new toon and who are you to tell me how to play the game I pay for?"

 

Okay, I was more commenting on the fact that you dismissed the Slippery Slope Fallacy out of hand rather than the degree to which it applies.

 

Wanting to change your AC for many is just an aspect of their character's class.

Class > Advanced Class > Skill tree Specialisation

This progression suggests that it should be less convenient to change than a skill tree but not impossible.

 

This level of change would be the end of it, the point at which I'd say that's enough choice for a player to be getting on with. Besides which it has already been mentioned that the programming behind a Class change would be significantly harder due to the way data is tracked through story progression.

[Vhaegrant]

I see nothing but arguments back and forth with nothing but boasting about one's ability and immature ranting. If you want to feel my thoughts on it. Look at my post in this thread

 

Other than that. Please stop the childish bickering, immature yelling and starting crying matches. This is a discussion thread not a angry forums thread

 

Hear, hear

 

I'm off to bed and away for the weekend. Try not to get the thread locked while I'm gone

Edited July 27, 2013 by Vhaegrant

[branmakmuffin]

"But you already let me change from Merc to PowerTech, why can't I change from PowerTech to Juggernaut? They both are tanks/melee DPS and they both wear heavy armor, I don't have time to level a new toon and who are you to tell me how to play the game I pay for?"

Slippery slope is a logically fallacious argument. The situation you spin is wholly inapt to the discussion because Juggernaut and Powertech are not part of the same basic class and so do not share the same story and companions. To change from one to the other would be as big a deal as gender change or faction change. Changing from Powertech to Mercenary of the same gender does not impact the storyline whatsoever. Not that that settles matter, but it does illustrate the ridiculousness of the slippery slope argument.

[ekwalizer]

Okay, I was more commenting on the fact that you dismissed the Slippery Slope Fallacy out of hand rather than the degree to which it applies.

 

Wanting to change your AC for many is just an aspect of their character's class.

Class > Advanced Class > Skill tree Specialisation

This progression suggests that it should be less convenient to change than a skill tree but not impossible.

 

This level of change would be the end of it, the point at which I'd say that's enough choice for a player to be getting on with. Besides which it has already been mentioned that the programming behind a Class change would be significantly harder due to the way data is tracked through story progression.

 

The problem is it would not be the end of it, but just the beginning.

 

Your Story is not your Class. Your story begins with a prelude.

 

Your class is what you selectas your class from your story options once you arrive at the fleet. Remove the word "Advanced" and it becomes less confusing.

 

Whwn you look at your character sheet, it says

<Mercenary>

 

Not

 

<Bounty Hunter Mercenary>

 

Frankly I don't buy into the time-sink argument that people throw around either. "I don't have time to XYZ". That is nonsense. If it is a priority for you you will make time for it. Last summer I was working 12hours/day 7days/week as an overseas defense contractor and still was able to level 3 toons in three months. In real life I have a wife, 2 kids and a full time job. Playing only 2 hours a night I can still level a toon in a month.

 

4 times people are told that it is PERMANENT. If you don't like your AC reroll. I have several toons that I don't care for their ACs playstyle. I rerolled and was max level much shorter than the duration of this thread.

Edited July 27, 2013 by ekwalizer

[ekwalizer]

Slippery slope is a logically fallacious argument. The situation you spin is wholly inapt to the discussion because Juggernaut and Powertech are not part of the same basic class and so do not share the same story and companions. To change from one to the other would be as big a deal as gender change or faction change. Changing from Powertech to Mercenary of the same gender does not impact the storyline whatsoever. Not that that settles matter, but it does illustrate the ridiculousness of the slippery slope argument.

 

Once again, Bounty Hunter is NOT a class. It is a STORY.

[Ratajack]

I'm advocating for a potential increase in a players choice without going all the way of asking for class changes, Bioware have made continuous modifications to classes as the game has matured including the addition of new content that allows for other aspects considered permanent at character creation to be changed. All I am asking for is for such a change to be considered. At no point would I force you to use the feature.

 

Allowing cosmetic appearance changes is a far cry from allowing class changes.

[astrobearx]

I see nothing but arguments back and forth with nothing but boasting about one's ability and immature ranting. If you want to feel my thoughts on it. Look at my post in this thread

 

Other than that. Please stop the childish bickering, immature yelling and starting crying matches. This is a discussion thread not a angry forums thread

 

indeed

[Ratajack]

Okay, I was more commenting on the fact that you dismissed the Slippery Slope Fallacy out of hand rather than the degree to which it applies.

 

Wanting to change your AC for many is just an aspect of their character's class.

Class > Advanced Class > Skill tree Specialisation

This progression suggests that it should be less convenient to change than a skill tree but not impossible.

 

This level of change would be the end of it, the point at which I'd say that's enough choice for a player to be getting on with. Besides which it has already been mentioned that the programming behind a Class change would be significantly harder due to the way data is tracked through story progression.

 

The fact that many see AC as just an aspect of their character's class does not negate the devs statement that AC's are FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT CLASS DESIGNS. Do those who choose not to accept that your AC IS your class know better than the devs?

 

A class change is a class change, whether that be from a juggernaut to a marauder or from a mercenary to a marauder. If you are going to argue for something as controversial as a class change, shouldn't that be "across the board"?

[branmakmuffin]

Once again, Bounty Hunter is NOT a class. It is a STORY.

So when you roll a Bounty Hunter character, what is your character's class? The " " class?

 

The problem is it would not be the end of it, but just the beginning.

More slippery slopery.

 

4 times people are told that it is PERMANENT.

Yes, it is permanent as the game is now. Are you saying it cannot ever be changed?

Edited July 27, 2013 by branmakmuffin

[Ratajack]

So when you roll a Bounty Hunter character, what is your character's class? The " " class?

 

 

More slippery slopery.

 

 

Yes, it is permanent as the game is now. Are you saying it cannot ever be changed?

 

No, I'm not saying that it can "never" be changed, but I'm wondering why so may people cannot understand the concept of "PERMANENT" and feel that the rules shouldn't apply to them or should be changed to suit them.

 

As I said earlier, if I bought a new car and decided after 10,000 miles I didn't like it, do I get to take it back to the dealer, hand them the car I no longer liked and just get a new one? No, I would have to BUY a new one, much like those who want a new class need to actually level that new class according to the rules set by the devs and which are still in place.

 

Here's more slippery slope for you. Even if you put restrictions on class changes, these forums will be full of people asking, begging, clamoring, demanding (whatever term you want to use) for those restrictions to be changed and loosened or even lifted. If you want proof, just look at this thread. The game already has restrictions on class changes. Those restrictions are "You cannot do it", yet we've had countless threads asking for this restriction to changed or lifted, including this 220+ page thread.

Edited July 27, 2013 by Ratajack

[Ratajack]

So when you roll a Bounty Hunter character, what is your character's class? The " " class?

 

When you choose the bounty hunter story, your class is listed as bounty hunter until you chose your ACTUAL CLASS (AC) at which point if you check your character page, your class is either powertech or mercenary. Doing a /who, checking your guild roster or targeting yourself will also show your class as powertech or mercenary, not "bounty hunter-powertech" or "bounty hunter-mercenary".

[ekwalizer]

 

 

More slippery slopery.

 

 

 

Oh, when you say it like that it makes perfect sense. We should absolutely ignore hundreds of years of jurisprudence because it is inconvenient to you and a couple others.

[Kneemo]

The arguments against this are ridiculous. half of them are people who are just always going to be against making things convenient, the other half are people complaining "i don't want to deal with people not knowing their class."

 

what if we met in the middle-ish? what if you can only switch your AC if you already have the faction mirror version of what you want to switch to within x amount of levels of the character you're switching? using myself as an example, i have a 50 sage and a 50 assassin and i would love for my sage to instead be a shadow and my assassin be a sorc.

 

legacy already tracks which "story class" you complete, maybe it can log which AC too to allow this.

[TridusSWTOR]

Actually, I'm NOT cherry picking. I'm showing the whole basket of cherries. You were the one cherry picking when you asked only about a level 11 character CHOOSING his class, not CHANGING his class.

 

Actually you are, you made a broad accusation across every player. So when I bring up a level 11 scenario, all the sudden you backpedal because you decided to paint the brush of "lazy players" on everyone. Maybe now, you will finally learn not to blame everyone and label them. Another point in my favor, greed, arrogance and labeling from the Anti-AC change side. Pathetic.

 

When you state something is NOT going to affect others, that has to be across the board, as well.

 

Hate to break it to you, but AC change doesn't affect others. It actually gives them more options. You are bringing in the "well it affects me because now my healer went tank.". That's because you are trying to control other players and that's wrong. Do you pay their sub? No you do not. Therefore it does not affect you.

 

The fact that player A pays his subscription and does not find activity x to be "fun" does not give him the right to change the rules to suit himself so he can get the rewards he would gain from activity X without actually doing activity X, nor does it give player the right to tell player B that player B still has to do activity Y to get the rewards from activity Y. This is what you have been doing. You are arguing for changing the rules to allow class changes since many don't find going leveling "fun" and at the same time you are arguing against allowing players to have BIS gear without doing ops even if that player does not find OPS "fun".

 

So when a player levels a AC up to level 44 and realizes this isn't the type of class he is interested in. Since you can only truly know your class starting at level 45. You want them to change and redo all that work? So you are now blaming game design on the player, wow, can we get any more shallow now? What's next, the player shouldn't log in to play because there are too many of his AC online? Where is the line drawn with you?

 

I love how you bring up "well then you shouldn't have to run ops because that's isn't fun.". This will be fun picking apart, here we go.

 

So how many people does it require for an AC change? If it were put in the game. How many people are required or will be affected if a person does an AC change? Please answer me.

 

Next question, how many people does it take to run an operation? Please tell me. Tell me the exact number of people and how many people are affected if one person can take loot from an op without doing the work.

 

I can't wait to hear this answer, you pretty much fell on your own sword.

 

That's a very good reason to reset a character to level 10 if they change their class. It will give that player those 3-35 levels to become accustomed the new skills they would be getting at the rate intended by the devs.

 

Like I said before, but it seems you are having trouble with reading comphresion. At level 45 you get all the skills required to determine if you want to move forward with a class. Since it will remain the same at level 45 and beyond. So now you want players to redo the MAJORITY of the leveling process just because well...you want them to relearn their new AC, but they won't have any of the skills to actually see what the AC is like. Makes so much sense.

 

AC change 2 times per character

High CC/Credit cost

No other restrictions.

 

The more bad ideas you suggest, the better my options become. Once again, I provide choice, while you enforce your own rules on other players. So what happens when a player changes AC in front of your character? Do you get a higher repair cost? Does your character take a death? Do you lose credits? Oh wait....nothing happens...gee who would of thought.

[TridusSWTOR]

Of the two of us (you and I), which one is arguing for the currently existing rules set in place by BW to be changed? I'll give you a hint-it's not me.

 

Regarding class changing affecting others, it has already been explained multiple times how allowing class changes WILL affect others and not just the player changing class, but I'm guessing that you either missed them or ignored them because they do not mesh with your desires.

 

So you want sprint at level 1 removed. Gotcha.

 

You do know that MMO's are always adapting right? That's why they have these things called patches and updates. It's so they can change the gaming world to make it better. Yea I know it's mind-blowing but it does actually happen. It actually happens in multiple MMO's.

 

Once again, you are enforcing your personal beliefs on others out of greedy,selfishness, and arrogance. Do you pay my sub? No you do not.

 

Once again, it's already been explained and debunked several times by myself, how AC change doesn't affect anyone but the player doing it. It's out of your greed to control that player on how they play, that's the only one affecting another player. Stop trying to control other players on how they want to enjoy the game.

 

I provide choice, you do not. The end.

[Spatology]

Actually you are, you made a broad accusation across every player. So when I bring up a level 11 scenario, all the sudden you backpedal because you decided to paint the brush of "lazy players" on everyone. Maybe now, you will finally learn not to blame everyone and label them. Another point in my favor, greed, arrogance and labeling from the Anti-AC change side. Pathetic.

 

 

 

Hate to break it to you, but AC change doesn't affect others. It actually gives them more options. You are bringing in the "well it affects me because now my healer went tank.". That's because you are trying to control other players and that's wrong. Do you pay their sub? No you do not. Therefore it does not affect you.

 

 

 

So when a player levels a AC up to level 44 and realizes this isn't the type of class he is interested in. Since you can only truly know your class starting at level 45. You want them to change and redo all that work? So you are now blaming game design on the player, wow, can we get any more shallow now? What's next, the player shouldn't log in to play because there are too many of his AC online? Where is the line drawn with you?

 

I love how you bring up "well then you shouldn't have to run ops because that's isn't fun.". This will be fun picking apart, here we go.

 

So how many people does it require for an AC change? If it were put in the game. How many people are required or will be affected if a person does an AC change? Please answer me.

 

Next question, how many people does it take to run an operation? Please tell me. Tell me the exact number of people and how many people are affected if one person can take loot from an op without doing the work.

 

I can't wait to hear this answer, you pretty much fell on your own sword.

 

 

 

Like I said before, but it seems you are having trouble with reading comphresion. At level 45 you get all the skills required to determine if you want to move forward with a class. Since it will remain the same at level 45 and beyond. So now you want players to redo the MAJORITY of the leveling process just because well...you want them to relearn their new AC, but they won't have any of the skills to actually see what the AC is like. Makes so much sense.

 

AC change 2 times per character

High CC/Credit cost

No other restrictions.

 

The more bad ideas you suggest, the better my options become. Once again, I provide choice, while you enforce your own rules on other players. So what happens when a player changes AC in front of your character? Do you get a higher repair cost? Does your character take a death? Do you lose credits? Oh wait....nothing happens...gee who would of thought.

 

What is the purpose of the penalties? They serve none really. At what point do we get to use the ingame function that requires no human oversite for free.....

 

Im tired of people legitimizing biowares nickel and diming.

 

There is really 0 legitimate reason to AC swap.

 

If you have acheived titles and things on a character, that character has obviously acheived some measure of sucess. Why fix something that isnt broken.

 

If you are level 11, you spent an hour on the character.

 

Bioware made leveling half as long as it was at release. Go enjoy the game they made for you.