Jump to content

ETA on Advanced Class change?


Recommended Posts

Whoever it was saying the game is based on players not having every AC is correct. No AC in this game can do that and thats a good thing.

 

An unlimited, on the fly AC swap would be too much. The classes that can hit every role would be the catch all, limiting all other classes especially if they could tank, heal and DPS (both ranged and melee) as well as the other classes with limited role access.

 

It just doesn't work out well logistically for this game allowing AC swapping anytime given how it;'s designed and setup thru classes and AC's

 

However, an AC swap with limiting factors prevents the need to balance a tri-spec class, as well as keep the loot whoring to the levels that we current deal with. Making little change in that area.

 

Plus, limitations on an AC swap helps smooth out the rough edges some gamers have by allowing even the option of an AC swap. Some may never like it, but putting a limitation on it keeps things in check.

 

Don't see the point, if you already have a lot invested in a character and have achieved things you want to carryover, you have clearly achieved some measure of success in your current AC. ( ie. why fix things that arent broken) If the character you want to switch is pre lvl 40, re roll.

 

It's resources being pushed in a direction that has little benefit IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 5.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

You cannot even remain consistent in your own defense. Which is it you want-a one time deal, or multiple times? You cannot have both.

 

Where did I say, multiple times? Please provide this quote.... My posts, want the AC change to assist people whit a past mistake... I generally follow this course. I may alter some ideas, due to ones I see from others, that are better.... However, you will not, find a post where I state, it should be multiple time. Now, if BW wants to take in lots of money, which they will, I will NOT be at all surprised, they do allow it to be multiple times at a price each time. Ill still survive.... It will NOT affect my game play.

 

Show me that quote please....

Edited by Themanthatisi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't see the point, if you already have a lot invested in a character and have achieved things you want to carryover, you have clearly achieved some measure of success in your current AC. ( ie. why fix things that arent broken) If the character you want to switch is pre lvl 40, re roll.

 

It's resources being pushed in a direction that has little benefit IMO.

 

To be fair this is just an opinion.

 

First, I feel the "reroll" option has little validity as an argument. The whole point of this option would be so that there would not be a need for reroll...so proposing the very thing folks are trying to avoid is silly at best IMO.

 

Second, the contention toward wasted resources, or the resource/benefit ratio is speculative at best. There is no way any of us can know what effect this would have on the game, no more than the dozens of threads that predicted that almost every change since F2P was a bad move for the game.....some of those predictions by the very same posters in this thread, using the very same arguments.

 

YOU may feel it is a waste of resources, but that does not mean the majority will feel that way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[spatology] may feel it is a waste of resources, but that does not mean the majority will feel that way.

That's exactly the point. It's his opinion (as you noted in the part of your post I snipped). Implementing it would take some development resources. He obviously feels the benefits (if any) gained would not be worth that effort. I happen to think they would be. Which is why this argument boils down to nothing more than "I like it" versus "I don't like it." BWEA will make the call based on economics, not notions of "fairness" or "laziness" or how well forum denizens formed their arguments and counter-arguments.

Edited by branmakmuffin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What kind of nonsense scenarios are people spinning in their fevered imaginations?

"nonsense scenarios" and "fevered imaginations"

 

Why be nasty?

If that's how someone wants to spend 100s of CCs, who are you (or anyone else) to tell them they shouldn't?

In your attempt to lash out, you failed to notice that I'm NOT telling anyone they shouldn't have an AC respec. As a matter of fact, I'm not even particularly against it.

 

I am interested in discussing it, however. Are you?

Edited by Khevar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"nonsense scenarios" and "fevered imaginations" Why be nasty?

I specifically did not mention names for a reason. Did you think that was aimed at you?

 

I am interested in discussing it, however. Are you?

I've boiled it down to its essentials more than once: do you like the idea or do you not like the idea (or do you not really care one way or the other)? That's all there is to it. All the other pseudo-intellectual jiggery-pokery is just fluff and people posting so others can see how erudite or sarcastic they are.

Edited by branmakmuffin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's exactly the point. It's his opinion (as you noted in the part of your post I snipped). Implementing it would take some development resources. He obviously feels the benefits (if any) gained would not be worth that effort. I happen to think they would be. Which is why this argument boils down to nothing more than "I like it" versus "I don't like it." BWEA will make the call based on economics, not notions of "fairness" or "laziness" or how well forum denizens formed their arguments and counter-arguments.

 

But again, I have to point out that some folks are on the fence...like me....and therefore need to discuss it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I specifically did not mention names for a reason. Did you think that was aimed at you?

 

 

I've boiled it down to its essentials more than once: do you like the idea or do you not like the idea (or do you not really care one way or the other)? That's all there is to it. All the other pseudo-intellectual jiggery-pokery is just fluff and people posting so others can see how erudite or sarcastic they are.

 

indeed

 

basically this thread does come down to...

 

 

do you like the idea or do you not like the idea (or do you not really care one way or the other)?

Edited by astrobearx
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure, but your ultimate opinion will have no bearing on BWEA's choice (not that that's a reason to not discuss it).

 

I don't know about that....many of our opinions at launch and up to the launch of F2P seemed to have a bearing on BW choice with respect to many of the recent changes....which they pointed out publicly on more than one occasion.

 

Now my opinion is naturally no more important than navel lint. But the overall consensus may have some weight. Bioware does seem to pay attention to customer feedback and suggestions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I specifically did not mention names for a reason. Did you think that was aimed at you?

Your comments "nonsensical post" were aimed at MajikMyst.

 

When I gave my interpretation of his post (without even mentioning if I agreed with it or not), you further related it it "fevered imaginations"

 

I've boiled it down to its essentials more than once: do you like the idea or do you not like the idea (or do you not really care one way or the other)? That's all there is to it. All the other pseudo-intellectual jiggery-pokery is just fluff and people posting so others can see how erudite or sarcastic they are.

Again with the nastiness "pseudo-intellectual jiggery-pokery"

 

It's true, people either don't like the idea, or they like the idea. But instead of people posting "I like it" or "I don't like it" people are trying to explain why they do or don't like it. This is what a discussion is all about.

 

The main thing that resonated with me as a potential con, is the idea that players would "need" on loot drops for the "alternate AC spec." I've spent hours on threads about loot rules, arguing against some of the people in this very thread, with me saying "Need is for main toon upgrade", "Greed is for companions"

 

It isn't a stretch to see arguments about "I was a Shadow Tank in a FP, and a Sage just ninja'd a Shield offhand for his 'alternate AC offspec'"

 

Is this enough to say "no AC respec"? Probably not. But it's worth talking about.

Edited by Khevar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your comments "nonsensical post" were aimed at MajikMyst.

Are you MajikMyst?

 

The main thing that resonated with me as a potential con, is the idea that players would "need" on loot drops for the "alternate AC spec." I've spent hours on threads about loot rules, arguing against some of the people in this very thread, with me saying "Need is for main toon upgrade", "Greed is for companions"

People select "Need" inappropriately anyway. Brut really, who cares? It's a game. That's what is so hard to understand about the "against it" folks. They are getting so angry about a game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, in all fairness some of the pro folks have gotten a bit animated as well.

For my part, that stems from incredulity that anyone gets so angry about it. The way some of the "anti" folks talk, you'd think it would directly impact their ability to earn a living.

Edited by branmakmuffin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For my part, that stems from incredulity that anyone gets so angry about it. The way some of the "anti" folks talk, you'd think it would directly impact their ability to earn a living.

 

I understand your point. Just as an aside, I wasn't directing my point at you specifically, just keeping it fair in general.

 

I've seen emotional points made on both sides....and I myself have gotten a bit worked up when attacked by certain specific members that were under the impression that I was in the pro group. But those particular posters have a LONG history of trolling behavior on the forums...all one has to do is look up their post history.

 

One poster in particular does little else besides trolling at every opportunity obviously without regard for forum rules.

 

They know who they are.

 

At any rate, I feel that the discussion should continue so the idea can get refined into something that the majority would likely accept...speculative naturally, but I think that is what some folks are trying to accomplish here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where did I say, multiple times? Please provide this quote.... My posts, want the AC change to assist people whit a past mistake... I generally follow this course. I may alter some ideas, due to ones I see from others, that are better.... However, you will not, find a post where I state, it should be multiple time. Now, if BW wants to take in lots of money, which they will, I will NOT be at all surprised, they do allow it to be multiple times at a price each time. Ill still survive.... It will NOT affect my game play.

 

Show me that quote please....

 

 

Ask and ye shall receive:

 

No, but with pages and pages of replies and people making their thoughts knows, you will notice, i am not for this also becoming a free-for-all.... If you were addressing that specific part, it could be better, for the people following this, to see you quote it.... I would have agreed with you if that was the case.

 

I want AC changes, I do want restrictions on it.... A field respec of classes, NO.... I also think it would be a one time deal, with a 30 day period to return back, but that's it (per toon). I want to see this implemented as a way for people to correct a bad choice, not so people have options to heal, while tanking or anything else crazy like that.

 

 

A "one time deal" is exactly that. You only get ONE chance at something, not a chance and then "oops, I made a mistake, let me change my mind" . "A one time time deal, with a 30 day period to return back" means it would not be a "one time deal". It would be a multiple time deal. Maybe you should pay more attention to what you write.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...

 

A "one time deal" is exactly that. You only get ONE chance at something, not a chance and then "oops, I made a mistake, let me change my mind" . "A one time time deal, with a 30 day period to return back" means it would not be a "one time deal". It would be a multiple time deal. Maybe you should pay more attention to what you write.

It sounds like he's saying "one chance to change it", and if you decided you made a mistake it would revert back, as long as you reverted back within 30 days. And having blown your one chance you're now done with AC changes on that toon.

 

That's not the same as a multiple time deal.

Edited by Khevar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It sounds like he's saying "one chance to change it", and if you decided you made a mistake it would revert back, as long as you reverted back within 30 days. And having blown your one chance you're now done with AC changes on that toon.

 

That's not the same as a multiple time deal.

 

I concur with this. I think it is clear what was meant...not to allow multiple changes on a whim, perhaps one or two changes to serve those that simply wish to correct a mistake....if I am reading that right.

 

That seems to be the most common compromise suggestion. It differs a bit on cool down time, amount of changes allowed, and level at which it should be allowed.

 

I favor shortly after the first time you choose, if anything. I'm still pretty iffy on allowing it later on. But I haven't made up my mind yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It sounds like he's saying "one chance to change it", but if you decided you made a mistake it would revert back, as long as you reverted back within 30 days.

 

That's not the same as a multiple time deal.

 

 

More than one change is multiple times. You cannot argue simple math.

 

Was that poster asking to be able to change unlimited times? No.

 

I understand his intent, but my point is we have people arguing to allow them to change class because "I made a mistake", "this class is too weak", "I refuse to level another character" or whatever reason they deem sufficient. We have some of those people asking for restrictions, while trying to leave themselves wiggle room, even in their own proposed restrictions.

 

If they cannot even refrain from trying to leave themselves wiggle room in their own proposed restrictions, why should I believe that those same people will not be back here 3 months after BW allows class changes (IF they allow class changes) asking for more opportunities to change class because their new class got nerfed, the other class got buffed, their guild now needs a tank and not a healer, or whatever new reason they have for wanting to change class again? After all, they allowed it once, why not a second time?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Want to change classes? Roll a new toon.

 

It's not that difficult, and it's sure not as if leveling is difficult, either. You'll have your FOTM in no time....:)

 

 

 

I don't get the big deal here. You want to change your appearance after creation? Roll a new alt. You should have used some foresight when you created the character in the first place. You shouldn't blame Bioware for your own ineptitude. Bioware will never shift resources from important content to allow players to play Barbie fun house, period.

 

Want to use gear that has a heavy look on a light armor character? Well, guess what. Too bad. Just roll a heavy armor character if that's what you want.

 

They made it clear that gear appearance is important to visually identify each class. They will never allow sorcerers and counselors to wear heavy gear. That would look ridiculous.

 

Your ignorant. You want to switch your spec? Fine. Just reroll or pony up the fee. They will never allow free respecs. It's way too easy to roll an alternate and level it up. Your just being lazy and cheap.

 

Asking for conversion of comms is just plain laziness. If you want to gear up your alts, you can just run heroics on the planets that match the level needed. Simple. Bioware should not cater to lazy players.

 

 

 

Some of my favorite contentions made from what I consider the hardcore players crowd. Yet those changes came to be. And the game is better for it IMO. It is just plain silly, as it was then, to contend that reroll is the only option that makes sense. It is a cop out that I believe folks use when they simply do not like an idea.

 

If the past is any indicator, at least with the staff in place at present it seems it is a contention that is usually ignored.

Edited by LordArtemis
Link to comment
Share on other sites


×
×
  • Create New...