Switch Advanced Classes

[ekwalizer]

No, actually the game calls them exactly that... Consular is the class, Shadow is the Advanced Class, it is quite clear in the game.

 

Some day, someone is going to have to explain how a Vanguard has a blaster rifle yet can only shoot 10 meters. That is one of the most contrived things I've seen in a long time.

 

A Juggernaut's class is "Sith Warrior". A Guardian's class is "Jedi Knight".

 

The game couldn't be more clear that is the case.

 

This game could call ACs "Goon Professions" ... they would still be classes. But what do I know, I've only been playing RPG games longer than Bioware has been a company. Bioware calling Bounty Hunter a "class" on a 5 year old description page doesn't make it so.

 

They are identical other than story and animations. Identical. The only difference is the perspective of the larger story that you participate in.

 

You'll get no argument out of me on the ridiculousness of Operatives and Powertechs + mirrors being melee with ranged weapon skins. That is 100% boneheaded.

 

D&D calls them classes. WoW calls them classes. ESO calls them classes. SWG called them professions - that didn;t make them magically not classes.

 

People are conflating what this game calls a class into what other games call a class. But nothing could be further from the truth. If (eg) Bounty Hunter was a full blown class then you would receive BH abilities on the regular. But you don't. You get new AC abilities regularly and new overall BH abilities sparsely. You have far more AC abilities than story abilities. If there ever comes a time when 51% of a players abilities come from their story type then I will call that the class. But so long as most of your abilities come from your AC .... then your AC is your actual class.

 

But, since you want to go by this studio's definition. I am willing, right here and now, to concede that Bounty Hunter is a class if you concede that according to this studio AC respecs will not happen.

 

As to a solution ... AC selection at creation. Problem solved. Other than that there is no problem at all.

Edited January 27, 2016 by ekwalizer

[TX_Angel]

This game could call ACs "Goon Professions" ... they would still be classes. But what do I know, I've only been playing RPG games longer than Bioware has been a company. Bioware calling Bounty Hunter a "class" on a 5 year old description page doesn't make it so.

 

They are identical other than story and animations. Identical. The only difference is the perspective of the larger story that you participate in.

 

I see what you mean, you're looking at the larger picture, and yes, a Jugg and a Guardian are mirror roles. I was referring to what the game calls classes and advanced classes, not what an outside impartial observer would call them.

 

You'll get no argument out of me on the ridiculousness of Operatives and Powertechs + mirrors being melee with ranged weapon skins. That is 100% boneheaded.

 

We agree on something, woot!

 

But, since you want to go by this studio's definition. I am willing, right here and now, to concede that Bounty Hunter is a class if you concede that according to this studio AC respecs will not happen.

 

As to a solution ... AC selection at creation. Problem solved. Other than that there is no problem at all.

 

Nothing is set in stone. 4.0 brought about major changes to the core game. Anything can happen.

 

I give it 50/50 odds that 5.0 will bring about exactly what I'm suggesting, that every class will be able to pick from all three roles. We shall see.

[ekwalizer]

I give it 50/50 odds that 5.0 will bring about exactly what I'm suggesting, that every class will be able to pick from all three roles. We shall see.

 

And I give it dollars:doughnuts that there will not be a 6.0 or SWTOR a year later if that comes to pass.

 

We agree on more than you think we do. But, I'm a hard-liner on this issue.

 

Did 4.0 knock down a lot of the arguments against it? Yes. Absolutely. But not all.

 

Did 4.0 also invalidate the "need" for it? Yes. Almost entirely.

 

I would not oppose it if it was a once per character event. I could get behind that. But only once per character.

 

But we both know that that will not be the case. It was supposed to be a never per character event; yet here we are talking about it. If it comes to pass it will not be limited or cost prohibitive. 60-tokens have been "reduced" by 44% since they were introduced (which is just a gimmick to make fools believe they are getting a good deal on something arbitrarily priced in the first place). With "signature clicks" alone, I could buy a level 60 every other week if I wanted to. AC respec would be no different. The argument would be made: "I can buy a whole new level 60 for 2k CC!" And that would be the price.

 

Is that what MMOs have devolved into? Spending less than $20 (or just subscribing for 4 months) to get a ("free") high level character? Other than paying Bioware directly, how is that not the exact same thing as a character leveling service?

 

Believe me, I understand capping off an AC that you can't stand to play. I have multiples of each on both sides of the game. I don't like Mara/Sent. I don't like Sniper/Slinger. I have each of them because I wanted one of every AC.

Edited January 27, 2016 by ekwalizer

[ekwalizer]

And I give it dollars:doughnuts that there will not be a 6.0 or SWTOR a year later if that comes to pass.

 

That said. Because our disciplines are selected from a drop down menu now, I see little reason why that couldn't be expanded from 3 to 6 and eliminate the ACs altogether. This would allow the four archtypes to have access to each of their disciplines.

 

A few things would have to be worked out such as a healing discipline for Warrior/Knights and a tank discipline for agent/Smugglers.

 

Additionally, weapon types would have to either be consolidated per archtype or the restrictions removed/greatly reduced. I'm a fan of removal. If a change like this were to take place, there is no room for half measures.

 

I'm talking tech-staves as the default for PT/VG disciplines. Assault cannon as an option for mercenary disciplines. Two pistols for Commandos. Single bladed assassins, double bladed sorcs. Vibroknives as main hands for Operatives. That kind of stuff.

 

The Melee mechanics for PT/VG Op/Sco are very confusing. My third toon (way back in Dec11/Jan12) was an Operative and I honestly thought he was just a crappy ranged DPS until I started doing HM FPs with him and someone corrected me.

[TX_Angel]

And I give it dollars:doughnuts that there will not be a 6.0 or SWTOR a year later if that comes to pass.

 

I suspect I could find a post saying that same thing about "if those darn instant level cap tokens come out, this game is finished!".

 

We agree on more than you think we do. But, I'm a hard-liner on this issue.

 

Fair enough... I respect your right to feel that way, all I ask in return is that you respect that I have a right to feel otherwise...

 

The world should be wide enough for both views. Just maybe not in one game

 

Is that what MMOs have devolved into? Spending less than $20 (or just subscribing for 4 months) to get a ("free") high level character? Other than paying Bioware directly, how is that not the exact same thing as a character leveling service?

 

Yes, it really is. It has been headed this way for some time.

 

I played UO a long time ago, for a short while, but it was much too harsh for my taste. I tried Everquest... lord, anyone who thinks SWTOR is "grindy" doesn't know what GRIND is!

 

But yes, this is where they are going, and will continue to go.

 

I also give at least 20% odds that by 5.0, we'll have a "story mode" where there is no combat, or you get a one-shot kill on everything, in return you get no gear or comms. This will be for people who just want to play the 8 class stories without actually having to fight.

 

Before you say that is silly... my wife would take that option in a heartbeat. She really doesn't care for the endless combat, she would rather enjoy the story.

 

Believe me, I understand capping off an AC that you can't stand to play. I have multiples of each on both sides of the game. I don't like Mara/Sent. I don't like Sniper/Slinger. I have each of them because I wanted one of every AC.

 

I agree on the Mara/Sent, but I love my sniper/slinger. I don't care for the Sin/Shadow however, I don't play those.

[TX_Angel]

That said. Because our disciplines are selected from a drop down menu now, I see little reason why that couldn't be expanded from 3 to 6 and eliminate the ACs altogether. This would allow the four archtypes to have access to each of their disciplines.

 

That is a good idea... Considering the direction of the game, how they are trying to remove complexity, that seems like a reasonable compromise...

 

Then you don't have AC changes, because you no longer have ACs. Everyone wins!

 

A few things would have to be worked out such as a healing discipline for Warrior/Knights and a tank discipline for agent/Smugglers.

 

True, but if they can come up with level sync, companions that auto-gear and do all roles, and all the other 4.0 changes, I imagine they can figure that one out.

 

Additionally, weapon types would have to either be consolidated per archtype or the restrictions removed/greatly reduced. I'm a fan of removal. If a change like this were to take place, there is no room for half measures.

 

I'm talking tech-staves as the default for PT/VG disciplines. Assault cannon as an option for mercenary disciplines. Two pistols for Commandos. Single bladed assassins, double bladed sorcs. Vibroknives as main hands for Operatives. That kind of stuff.

 

^ A billion times this... I HATE the assault cannon on my Commandos (multiple, I love the role, hate the weapon). It looks so absurd, I'd love the option of a blaster rifle or a pair of blasters.

 

How about 2 weapon slots, but some weapons take up both slots (many games do this, graying out the second slot if you put a blaster right or cannon there). Have the focus/generator/shield be another slot by itself, rather than being the off hand.

 

Totally agree on tech-stavs as well, that makes a million times more sense for a melee tank than a blaster RIFLE!

[Ratajack]

I don't care, a whole lot of other people don't care, and that argument falls flat on its face in the volume of changes that have happened since launch.

 

If your whole defense is that, then you have nothing to stand on.

 

The fact that many things have been changed since launch does not mean that everything needs to be changed.

 

The fact that you don't care what the devs intended matters not one iota.

 

The last time I checked, the devs still controlled this game and their intentions were what mattered, not your concern regarding those intentions.

[ekwalizer]

I suspect I could find a post saying that same thing about "if those darn instant level cap tokens come out, this game is finished!".

 

The jury is still out on that, but truth be told it will have little to do with the tokens. There was a mass exodus in May of last year, right at the start of 12XP. We still don't have the numbers we had then, according to TorStatus anyway. Anecdotally, I tend to agree.

[ekwalizer]

That is a good idea... Considering the direction of the game, how they are trying to remove complexity, that seems like a reasonable compromise...

 

Then you don't have AC changes, because you no longer have ACs. Everyone wins!

 

True, but if they can come up with level sync, companions that auto-gear and do all roles, and all the other 4.0 changes, I imagine they can figure that one out.

 

^ A billion times this... I HATE the assault cannon on my Commandos (multiple, I love the role, hate the weapon). It looks so absurd, I'd love the option of a blaster rifle or a pair of blasters.

 

How about 2 weapon slots, but some weapons take up both slots (many games do this, graying out the second slot if you put a blaster right or cannon there). Have the focus/generator/shield be another slot by itself, rather than being the off hand.

 

Totally agree on tech-stavs as well, that makes a million times more sense for a melee tank than a blaster RIFLE!

 

Well, I'm not one for making the game .... less than what it is. But I do recognize that this game is in trouble. I don't think AC respec is any form of magic bullet; but I could get behind a smartly performed removal of ACs.

 

I always though the focus/shield/generator should have been a non-hand item. How does an assassin use a double-bladed LS with something else occupying one of his hands? Of course an assault cannon (I hates it too on my mando) should take both hands .... just as a great-sword. Hell, you are always animated with both hands while in use.

 

Q3 report comes out tomorrow afternoon. I'll be very interested to see if TOR gets a positive mention. I really hope it does, I just don't expect it to. As games fail to produce "enough" ROI their budgets get slashed which creates a self-licking icecream cone of doom.

Edited January 27, 2016 by ekwalizer

[ekwalizer]

The fact that many things have been changed since launch does not mean that everything needs to be changed.

 

All the wishful thinking in posts above aside, this remains true.

 

Our cheese doesn't need to be moved.

 

We only change when the pain of remaining the same is greater than the pain of the change - I can't remember who I stole that from.

[Ratajack]

I don't care how much you all-caps it, I don't care how much you DeepSkyBlue it, I don't care how much you try to emphasize it, you keep treating AC swapping like class changing. No. We're not asking to switch from Shadow to Scoundrel, we're not asking to switch from Gunslinger to Guardian, we're not asking to switch from Mercenary to Marauder. Even if you supply proof that the devs said what you say they said, you are the only one in these forums that believe them. Advanced Classes are actually just Sub Classes; cousins. They're already 95% of the way to being eachother, stop trying to blow it out of proportion by treating it like something else. (I think that's called making a mountain out of a molehill.)

 

 

 

You know what, I actually agree with all that. Subclass swapping is enough of a change that they should stick with it long enough to actually try it out. I never tried to imply that it's a change to be taken lightly. A cooldown for the Subclass swap token would ensure that they can't just switch it up on a whim. It's a choice to be taken after careful consideration, but at least players would have the freedom to choose, one way or the other.

 

How YOU define classes does not matter one iota. Your claim that AC's are subclasses and not FULL CLASSES does not matter one iota.

 

The only thing that matters with regards to AC's being your class is that last word from the devs is that the AC's were treated as FULL CLASSES, that they are FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT CLASS DESIGNS.

 

Notice, nowhere do they say subclasses, but they do say FULL CLASSES.

[Wallner]

So, what you are saying is that it's "OK" for others to feel diminished as long as you get what you want?

 

How would you feel diminished?

 

I think it's OK to make something more convenient, like being able to switch advanced class.

 

How YOU define classes does not matter one iota. Your claim that AC's are subclasses and not FULL CLASSES does not matter one iota.

 

The only thing that matters with regards to AC's being your class is that last word from the devs is that the AC's were treated as FULL CLASSES, that they are FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT CLASS DESIGNS.

 

Notice, nowhere do they say subclasses, but they do say FULL CLASSES.

 

*facepalm*

 

We're suggesting a change. It doesn't matter what their design intent was, we want them to change the existing system.

 

But now you'll probably reply somthing like " Oh so the designers intent doesn't matter!? Well your suggestion doesn't matter!!"

 

It sounds like you're not criticizing the suggestion, your criticizing the fact that we are suggesting it.

Edited January 27, 2016 by Wallner

[Ratajack]

How would you feel diminished?

 

I think it's OK to make something more convenient, like being able to switch advanced class.

 

 

 

*facepalm*

 

We're suggesting a change. It doesn't matter what their design intent was, we want them to change the existing system.

 

But now you'll probably reply somthing like " Oh so the designers intent doesn't matter!? Well your suggestion doesn't matter!!"

 

It sounds like you're not criticizing the suggestion, your criticizing the fact that we are suggesting it.

 

It's probably a bit of both, actually.

 

First, regarding the suggestion itself:

 

I do not think changing class (AC) should be allowed. I think the devs were right when they designed the classes so that no single character has access to tanking skills, healing skills and DPS skills AT ANY TIME, not just at the same time.

 

Given the ease and speed of leveling, as well as the option to create an instant 60, there is little to no need to allow players to change their class, IMO.

 

If you want to claim that you should be able to change your class within story lines, what about KOTFE, where the story, alliance and companions are the same for all characters? Do they allow a Juggernaut to change to sorcerer since their story and companions are the same? If you honestly believe we would not see threads "suggesting" that BW allow this once a character reaches KOTFE if they allow class changes within the same story, I have a Death Star (slightly used, but in good condition) to sell you.

 

Let's not forget that the devs could not even change class on a dev shard without breaking the game to do so. If I understand correctly, a dev shard is a server with specific "rules" that allow things to be done that cannot be done on live servers, to put it simply.

 

Second, regarding the fact that this suggestion is being made:

 

The decision was made over 4 years ago not to allow class (as defined buy the devs-AC) changes.

 

There have been multiple threads from the same few people over those 4 years begging to be able to change their class, even thought they were advised that their choice was PERMANENT.

 

The has been NOT ONE PEEP from the devs in over two years, since they made one VERY ambiguous statement, that may very well have been nothing more than a "soft no" regarding class changes.

 

Yet, those same few people cannot seem to accept the answer that BW has given and continues to give regarding class changes.

 

The same few people continue to necro old threads or create new threads "suggesting" that they be able to change their class.

 

At what point do people realize that they cannot always have everything they want?

[Fevee]

How YOU define classes does not matter one iota. Your claim that AC's are subclasses and not FULL CLASSES does not matter one iota.

 

The only thing that matters with regards to AC's being your class is that last word from the devs is that the AC's were treated as FULL CLASSES, that they are FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT CLASS DESIGNS.

 

Notice, nowhere do they say subclasses, but they do say FULL CLASSES.

 

And how you define ACs doesn't matter one iota, either. They are subclasses, the proof of it is inherently obvious.

 

Knight versus Smuggler? Those are different classes, those are the ones with "FUUUUUUUUNDAMMMMENTALLLLLLY DIFFFFFFERENT CLASSSSSSSSSS DESIGNNNNNNNS!"

 

Whereas Vanguard versus Commando? They branched off from the same class making them subclasses of the Trooper class. I don't know why you can't see that.

 

Knight versus Smuggler is apples and oranges, we're not asking for those. Scoundrels versus Gunslingers, that's Galas and Granny Smiths; that's what we're asking for. And yet, you're stuck on this tired rhetoric that the subclasses are infinitely different from eachother.

 

In fact, from today on, I resolve to call them subclasses; 'cause that's what they really are.

 

What about simply having each class able to pick from every skill tree from both ACs? That would give a Commando, what... 1 tank, 1 heal, and 4 dps trees? Likewise, a Vanguard would get the same 6 trees.

 

What do you think of that compromise?

 

While the different between subclasses is minor, there still is a difference, and I would prefer it stay that way. It's not like the OP of this thread is asking to change between full classes, only subclasses.

 

It's more like 25% similarity between ACs; certainly not 95.

 

No, the similarity between full classes is about 25%. The subclasses branched from the same full class; thus being subclasses. Now, I wouldn't be able to make that argument if I didn't start off as a Bounty Hunter, and was later offered the choice to become a Powertech or a Mercenary. If there never was a Bounty Hunter class, and you had to pick between Powertech or Mercenary right out of the gate, then it would be more credible for people like Ratajack and his all-capsing the phrase "fundamentally different designs".

 

But not entirely credible, as anyone with a brain would still be able to see that Bounty Hunter Variant I is pretty-much the same as Bounty Hunter Variant II. Even with the 60 token, you can choose your subclass right off the bat, and notice how the subclasses choices go: 4 sets of 2. Not just blatantly 8 "classes" to choose from, there's 4 sets of adjacent subclasses to pick from ... as though they're eerily similar, or something.

[Ratajack]

And how you define ACs doesn't matter one iota, either. They are subclasses, the proof of it is inherently obvious.

 

Knight versus Smuggler? Those are different classes, those are the ones with "FUUUUUUUUNDAMMMMENTALLLLLLY DIFFFFFFERENT CLASSSSSSSSSS DESIGNNNNNNNS!"

 

Whereas Vanguard versus Commando? They branched off from the same class making them subclasses of the Trooper class. I don't know why you can't see that.

 

Knight versus Smuggler is apples and oranges, we're not asking for those. Scoundrels versus Gunslingers, that's Galas and Granny Smiths; that's what we're asking for. And yet, you're stuck on this tired rhetoric that the subclasses are infinitely different from eachother.

 

In fact, from today on, I resolve to call them subclasses; 'cause that's what they really are.

 

 

 

While the different between subclasses is minor, there still is a difference, and I would prefer it stay that way. It's not like the OP of this thread is asking to change between full classes, only subclasses.

 

 

 

No, the similarity between full classes is about 25%. The subclasses branched from the same full class; thus being subclasses. Now, I wouldn't be able to make that argument if I didn't start off as a Bounty Hunter, and was later offered the choice to become a Powertech or a Mercenary. If there never was a Bounty Hunter class, and you had to pick between Powertech or Mercenary right out of the gate, then it would be more credible for people like Ratajack and his all-capsing the phrase "fundamentally different designs".

 

But not entirely credible, as anyone with a brain would still be able to see that Bounty Hunter Variant I is pretty-much the same as Bounty Hunter Variant II. Even with the 60 token, you can choose your subclass right off the bat, and notice how the subclasses choices go: 4 sets of 2. Not just blatantly 8 "classes" to choose from, there's 4 sets of adjacent subclasses to pick from ... as though they're eerily similar, or something.

 

I forgot that YOU were solely responsible for this game, and that YOU know better than the devs, and only YOUR opinion counts.

 

You are right. My opinion matters not one iota.

 

The ONLY opinion that DOES matter is that of the DEVS. They are the ones who said that AC's were FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT CLASS DESIGNS, and that AC's were treated as FULL CLASSES, not subclasses. Those are not MY words, but the words of the DEVS. I did not define the AC's as FULL CLASSES. The DEVS did that.

 

You can call them whatever you want to call them, but the only thing that matters is how the DEVS define the classes.

 

You want "proof" that AC's are not simply subclasses? Go check your guild roster. How many characters over level 10 have Trooper or Bounty hunter listed as their CLASS? How many characters above level 10 have their CLASS listed as commando, vanguard, mercenary or powertech?

Edited January 27, 2016 by Ratajack

[TX_Angel]

I do not think changing class (AC) should be allowed. I think the devs were right when they designed the classes so that no single character has access to tanking skills, healing skills and DPS skills AT ANY TIME, not just at the same time.

 

And I think that decision in 2016 is no longer the correct one and it should be changed.

 

The days of complex MMOs with 20 alts and strict limits are gone. Adaptive armor is a good example of such a change. It used to be that "heavy armor" looked it and could only be worn by some classes, now your Jedi can look like a trooper and your trooper can dress like a Jedi.

 

Why? Because it is a GAME, and player happiness is really all that matters.

[TX_Angel]

I forgot that YOU were solely responsible for this game, and that YOU know better than the devs, and only YOUR opinion counts.

 

You are right. My opinion matters not one iota.

 

Your opinion matters, and you're entitled to your opinion and viewpoint.

 

What I think you're missing is that you were in the majority viewpoint pre-4.0, but that a lot of people see that post 4.0, those viewpoints have changed.

 

You're welcome to keep posting, but have you not noticed that many of the old voices are silent?

 

Times change, things change, and this can be one of those...

[TX_Angel]

You want "proof" that AC's are not simply subclasses? Go check your guild roster. How many characters over level 10 have Trooper or Bounty hunter listed as their CLASS? How many characters above level 10 have their CLASS listed as commando, vanguard, mercenary or powertech?

 

You're being Pedantic...

[Ratajack]

And I think that decision in 2016 is no longer the correct one and it should be changed.

 

The days of complex MMOs with 20 alts and strict limits are gone. Adaptive armor is a good example of such a change. It used to be that "heavy armor" looked it and could only be worn by some classes, now your Jedi can look like a trooper and your trooper can dress like a Jedi.

 

Why? Because it is a GAME, and player happiness is really all that matters.

 

We can voice our opinions. We can even agree to disagree.

 

As I said, in the end, the ONLY opinion that matters is that of the DEVS.

 

It would seem that the devs still think the original design intent was the correct one, given their total and complete silence on this matter, and the fact that we cannot change classes.

[TX_Angel]

We can voice our opinions. We can even agree to disagree.

 

True.

 

As I said, in the end, the ONLY opinion that matters is that of the DEVS.

 

It would seem that the devs still think the original design intent was the correct one, given their total and complete silence on this matter, and the fact that we cannot change classes.

 

Well, actually in the end, the only opinion that matters is the player base, since if they don't like the game and leave, the devs will be out of a job.

 

That being said, regarding the complete and total silence... remind me again how many people even asked for level sync, much less a single post from the devs on it in 4 years?

 

How about asking for companions to be all roles with no gear?

 

Lots of things have just "happened" without a word in advance from the devs, so that isn't the end all, be all of answers.

 

It won't be true, right until it is. If it shows up one day without notice, so be it. If not, then so be it.

[Gwena]

I think the OP makes some good points. Since we are now able to buy a brand new level 60 character of any class we want (and let us be honest, those last 5 levels are very fast), would it be so much of a stretch to want to buy an AC change for an existing character, especially if it was also a fairly pricey CM item? I hope the devs will consider it.

 

Granted, I admit that this is something that I personally want. I have a level 65 Sith Assassin that I like very much. But often, I wish this character was a Sorcerer, as whenever I contemplate grouping or doing more challenging content I am reminded of how melee DPS is not my best role. I honestly wasn't expecting to like the Inquisitor class as much as I did (in terms of non-combat factors); had I realized how much the character would grow on me, I would have chosen the AC I knew I'd be more comfortable with instead of the "eh, this could be fun for a change" one. xD

 

I would happily reroll and either buy a level 60 token or even level up a Sorcerer from scratch. But over the time I've played this character I've accumulated a lot of items that are now very expensive or even impossible to replace. What was a 950K mount is now rarely listed on the GTN. The 200K gloves are now 800K. The weapon I got from a heroic is no longer available. The dye I picked up for 300K is now over a million. Etc, etc. Not to mention companions and Alliance! Point being, the leveling would be the easy part if I wanted to remake my Assassin as a Sorcerer.

Edited January 27, 2016 by Gwena

[ZahirS]

/Signed

 

Hope devs are looking into this OP.

[ekwalizer]

You're being Pedantic...

 

That doesn't equate to being wrong.

[TX_Angel]

That doesn't equate to being wrong.

 

No, it doesn't, but it doesn't make him right either...

 

He is being very narrow in his view to try and extract a defense for his position while ignoring everything else around it.

 

---

 

Pre-4.0, I understood why some people didn't want AC changes. After all, people who instantly become a tank when they used to be a healer would now queue for stuff and derp around, having no idea what they are doing.

 

Post 4.0, that is happening anyway, thanks to instant level 60 toons. Even those toons leveled the "normal" way, thanks to 6x XP and level sync, people are getting to 65 in 2 days without knowing what they are doing anyway, so that is beside the point now.

 

You could argue that 12x XP killed it in the first place, but if it did, then 4.0 just beat the horse completely flat.

 

The challenge is to avoid a circular arrangement, which his points become very quickly.

 

"The design intent"

"The devs opinion/vision"

"Here is the exact wording of one thing, thus my point is correct"

 

And so on...

 

Much of the reasons to not have AC, such as people being roles they know nothing about, has been lost to post-4.0. So what are the new reasons? The only reason can't be "because devs that no longer work here decided in 2009 that you couldn't change AC".

 

That isn't a reason, that is the sort of defense you use when you no longer have a rational defense. Lots of stuff used to be one way, then time passed, and another way happens.

 

He has been asked multiple times why he cares so much about other player's being able to change AC, and the only thing he has is "well that wasn't the design intent" and "the devs haven't said anything about it, so that is a ringing endorsement of my views"

 

You know what else the devs did? They said before 4.0 launched that the BSG packs would be on the CM PERMANENTLY. It turns out that in dev world, that word actually means "about 2 months or so".

 

The devs also said "we won't again go 14 months between operations". Yea, guess what, we did!

 

So I wouldn't put a whole lot of faith in anything they post here, it is all subject to change on a whim.

 

---

 

So we come back to, "why would anyone be against it at this point, in 2016?" I haven't seen a reason posted that it would cause any kind of harm. I do see a number of people posting that they would like it and are willing to pay for it.

 

I can think of 2 toons I have that I'd be willing to change their AC on. Not because I don't have the other AC, but because of their armor, pets, etc. I have 3 commandos and 1 vanguard, I really, really don't like the vanguard AC, so I'd like to change that into a 4th commando. I like the name, I like the armor, it is an old toon that I haven't played for a long time, she is wearing armor that no longer exists in the game.

 

How does my changing her to a commando hurt anyone?

[ekwalizer]

No, it doesn't, but it doesn't make him right either...

 

He is being very narrow in his view to try and extract a defense for his position while ignoring everything else around it.

---

Pre-4.0, I understood why some people didn't want AC changes. After all, people who instantly become a tank when they used to be a healer would now queue for stuff and derp around, having no idea what they are doing.

 

Post 4.0, that is happening anyway, thanks to instant level 60 toons. Even those toons leveled the "normal" way, thanks to 6x XP and level sync, people are getting to 65 in 2 days without knowing what they are doing anyway, so that is beside the point now.

 

You could argue that 12x XP killed it in the first place, but if it did, then 4.0 just beat the horse completely flat.

 

The challenge is to avoid a circular arrangement, which his points become very quickly.

 

"The design intent"

"The devs opinion/vision"

"Here is the exact wording of one thing, thus my point is correct"

 

And so on...

 

Much of the reasons to not have AC, such as people being roles they know nothing about, has been lost to post-4.0. So what are the new reasons? The only reason can't be "because devs that no longer work here decided in 2009 that you couldn't change AC".

 

That isn't a reason, that is the sort of defense you use when you no longer have a rational defense. Lots of stuff used to be one way, then time passed, and another way happens.

 

He has been asked multiple times why he cares so much about other player's being able to change AC, and the only thing he has is "well that wasn't the design intent" and "the devs haven't said anything about it, so that is a ringing endorsement of my views"

 

You know what else the devs did? They said before 4.0 launched that the BSG packs would be on the CM PERMANENTLY. It turns out that in dev world, that word actually means "about 2 months or so".

 

The devs also said "we won't again go 14 months between operations". Yea, guess what, we did!

 

So I wouldn't put a whole lot of faith in anything they post here, it is all subject to change on a whim.

 

---

 

So we come back to, "why would anyone be against it at this point, in 2016?" I haven't seen a reason posted that it would cause any kind of harm. I do see a number of people posting that they would like it and are willing to pay for it.

 

I can think of 2 toons I have that I'd be willing to change their AC on. Not because I don't have the other AC, but because of their armor, pets, etc. I have 3 commandos and 1 vanguard, I really, really don't like the vanguard AC, so I'd like to change that into a 4th commando. I like the name, I like the armor, it is an old toon that I haven't played for a long time, she is wearing armor that no longer exists in the game.

 

How does my changing her to a commando hurt anyone?

 

You make some good points but you also negate some obvious ones to the counter point (Edit: I meant to write omit, not negate). As I said earlier, in this thread, we are hard-capped on character slots. AC respec "on the fly" (and we both know that is what it will be) allows for virtually unlimited respecs into and out of FotM "ACs".

 

How does it hurt anyone isn't the question that should be asked. The question that should be asked is how does it make the game better for everyone?

 

There are no armor appearances that no longer exists in the game. You can get reskins of Columi, Tionese, Rakata gear from the GTN or via the CM.

 

I have actually been in both camps on this issue. Way back in late 2012(ish) I "wished" that my Merc could have been a PT .... because PTs were far superior in PvP. Know what I did? You guessed it.

 

Ironically, it turned out that I didn't like PT nearly as much as I thought I would. Of course my roster still contains three PTs at 60+ (and a 60 VG). A lot of that has to do with consolidation onto a single server since I was able to boost my roster by 18 slots and transfers are 90cc per. But I digress.

 

As I said earlier, if it were done correctly, I think a lot of the anti's could cross the picket line. But, from the perspective of old school MMOers .... when was the last time Bioware did anything correctly in this game?

 

I do, however, like what we discussed last night about abolishing ACs outright and using a drop down menu for discipline selection.

Edited January 28, 2016 by ekwalizer