"Advanced Classes = Fundamentally Different Class Designs"

This is an exact reason NOT to have it. When people swap randomly because of a nerf or buff or a perceived slight to their class by the developers it damages the continuity of the game. There are builds for a Gunslinger that are less reliant on cover. They are a little more hybridized but if that's how you want to play, try them. Demanding to change your class entirely on a whim isn't justification for the system. Learn to play the Scoundrel as you level. Instead of only 80% of the story being the same (non-class questing) 100% is the same.

And yes, you do have the time. Your time is not a known finite unless you're terminally ill. It may take you a while but you'll get that class to max level eventually.

Well, I would say my opinion DOES matter. I'm a paying customer (a happy one by the way) and they've provided this neat little forum for SUGGESTIONS.

I am doing exactly that, SUGGESTING that they reconsider their stance on changing ACs.

Are they likely to do it? Only time will tell. But if you chart the history of MMOs, the community has been able to impact changes in games. Examples are RMT for EVE Online, Real Name usage in Blizzard forums, Dual-Specs in WoW (which looks like it'll make it's way into SWTOR) and many, many others.

The joys of living in a free country, right? I have no issue with constructive debate and, for the most part, we've been able to participate in one here and for that, I'm grateful to you, VanorDM and many others who've been able to keep this to a discussion, not a trollfest of ugliness.

I'm sure that would be the case. On the other hand, if they would have allowed AC changes from the start, we'd probably be having a different debate, only our "sides" would be switched.

Regardless, I believe the game would be better with allowing AC changes and I will continue to fight for that change. As many have said, I may just be talking to a wall...but at least it's a wall named SUGGESTIONS.

Please re-read my previous posts where I state the reasons why ACs are different than Classes based on decisions that Bioware has made.

And on a side note, I really feel bad for rogues and mages. When did they become the helpless targets of this conversation!

Draw a connection to WoW, do Rogues and Mages share the EXACT SAME talent tree? Hmm...I didn't think so. Do Marauders and Juggernauts? Yes, the RAGE tree. And the talent tree is identical.

Well, I think commenting on what the best episode of any series would be a subjective decision.

Regarding changing the fundamental basis of the game, I would argue that the fundamental basis of the game SUPPORTS the ability to change ACs.

As illustrated in my earlier posts, the FUNDAMENTAL core of the four classes gives way to two tiers of specialization, one at the AC choice and another at the Talent Tree choice. Bioware currently gives players the ability to change the third tier (the Talent Tree choice) and gives players the CHOICE at level 10 in the second tier (the AC).

I am simply asking them to give players the ability to change their choice at the 2nd tier like they do in the third tier, throughout the game.

That's not my primary reasoning. In fact, many folks who have come to the defense of the current system seem to assume that I'm simply lazy and have no desire to re-level content.

I can attest that I am an awful altaholic. In that "other" game that we've all referenced, I have four characters at level cap, all of which are raiding or have completed the most recent release of content in varied levels of difficulty.

I have no problem re-doing content and as many have noted, re-leveling in other games is terrible compared to SWTOR. I trust that most of us agree that the leveling and story in SWTOR is second to none.

I have several characters in SWTOR and am thoroughly enjoying the journey of each character regardless of the content that may be similar.

If you trace back to my FIRST post on Page# 1, you'll see that my PRIMARY reasoning for allowing AC changes is to support end-game activities, specifically smaller end-game operation guilds.

As a guild and raid leader, I've seen far too often what happens when a raid (operation) team loses a key role (healer or tank). In other games, the ability to re-spec to fulfill another role gives the guild and team flexibility to handle whatever RL situations they may face.

In addition, as has been pointed out by others in this thread, there will always be a time when an AC and specific talent spec is the FotM (Flavor of the Month) and will be highly requested in PUG operations and hard mode encounters (where every percentage can make the difference between a wipe and a kill).

In the current rendition of the AC system, a player who selected a particular AC would be left out if the other AC became the go-to standard. Now granted, there have to be lines drawn and no, I am NOT in favor of giving players the ability to switch CORE classes at a whim. At present, no game allows that and for good reason. As, has been mentioned, that would completely negate choices made at level 10.

What all of this boils down to again is what I highlighted in another post:

And finally....

I really believe people are not giving Bioware or the Player-base the benefit of the doubt. WHEN a nerf or buff comes, people will change their AC or roll another toon. It's part of the MMO landscape.

Plus, Bioware can limit people "swap[ing] randomly" by instituting restrictions either through cost, an extensive quest-chain or limiting the number of AC changes per month/year/character life time.

Besides, we won't know how a change like this will effect the game. Do a search for WoW Dual spec or WoW Respec or WoW LFG tool and look at all of the folks who said it would kill the game. All of the above were implemented over two years ago and last I checked, that game still has a thriving community with people who enjoying playing the game.

There's a reason mods closed the last threads about this and linked the devs saying they have no plans to implement AC changing. You're beating a dead horse and all these arguments are the same words said differently. Its not coming any time soon.

I completely agree. I feel like when I choose my advanced class I am stuck in a box.

Please tell me what is the difference between a guardian dps and a sentinel dps since both are melee dps? Hmm?

The fact that you use wow as an example shows your very poor understanding of SWTOR design. There is simply no wow equivalent.

Let me put another poser. If the ACs are so different, why share the same skill tree? Why share 80% of the same abilities?

The problem is Bioware is hald-arse about their design. They arbitrarily decided different skill trees are "same" (hence allow re spec and even dual-spec) but somehow AC are not the same, even though some ACs plays the same way.

Really, the ONLY ACs that are VERY different are the consular/inquistor classes. Even then, despite having different roles (melee dps vs range dps), some of the same abilities are still being used regardless of which AC you go for.

And they may lock this thread as well...but as long as new folks keep bringing up the same issue, there's an opportunity for us to enlighten the community and the devs. I think it's good for Bioware and the community that we have this forum to present new ideas, discuss problems, bugs and even tell Bioware when they're wrong sometimes.

Just look at how quickly they back-tracked on fixing the "fix" for the GCD UI. It just goes to show that just because the devs say one thing now, doesn't mean it isn't possible for the future.

Except these threads are met with overwhelming disapproval, constant down votes and consistent mockery. You aren't "enlightening" anyone. You have an opinion based upon your desire to play the FotM class more readily than is currently available. Others are concerned with things like game balance and the sustainability of the system. You've taken the idea that what you want is what is best as a foregone conclusion. It isn't. It's a stupid idea, the majority of people weighing in on the issue have said as much since the first time it was brought up, and your crappy reasoning isn't winning anyone else over.

I don't understand where the disconnect is. Sometimes you have an idea that sounds great to you but is actually a turd. No matter how much you polish that turd it doesn't turn into a diamond. We aren't talking about something revolutionary, either. It's a very simple concept that you are suggesting. It just happens to be a very unpopular one as well. Everyone understands what you want. They understand your reasoning. They understand the benefits as you have laid them out. And they have weighed them against the dozens of counter arguments they have presented you with and decided that your idea sucks, the same way they did the first 20 times it was suggested.

We get it. You don't want to do the class missions over again. If you frame the ACs in a kind of "Ship of Theseus" manner they aren't really so different after all. Play style doesn't denote class. Sometimes people just want a taste of a different flavor. It's the same as respeccing from Holy to Prot in WoW! Blah, blah, blah. It's the same crap spit out over and over again. And you always get the same responses:

1) ACs are unique enough to constitute different classes. There is ability overlap, for sure, but no more than would be in any other MMO between two otherwise entirely different classes.

2) Allowing swaps between ACs would lead to a sharp decline in the player population of the "lesser" class, no matter how negligible the difference between the two was, because people will always min-max toward FotM.

3) The play styles are vastly different between ACs with the arguable exception of Mar/Jug/Sent/Guard.

4) Considering Ops is more like Sin than it is Sniper you could just as easily slide down the slope and allow full class respecs, which is obviously ludicrous on its face but actually makes more sense than most AC respecs.

etc., etc., etc.

What's funny is that if you had to choose your AC at character creation screen those crying now wouldn't be posting. BW tries to do something a little different by giving you 10 levels to try the feel of the class, resource management, some shared abilities before you lock in your choice.

So when BW GIVES you more control and choices people are upset? I kind of knew I wanted to be a tank but wasn't sure what style to choose from so I made a hunter and warrior to check out the mechanics. Hunter was more my playstyle so I chose powertech and my warrior wend marauder.

Id be angry if I locked in my choice at creation which is what a lot of these people crying want.

Are you talking about the "overwhelming response" in other threads? I mean here and I've read every post here... it's about 3 on 3 by my count of people that have weighed in somewhat regularly. And, we were having a discussion.

[-100 LightSide] to you for taking it up notch to the "attack" level with this post at the OP. I was a little surprised to see this come from you given your discussion up to that point.


If you're right and the community as a whole isn't in favor of this idea, too bad then (for us that want the change*), no problem. You too, should accept that whatever Bioware decides to do in this game be it popular or not as part of the game. Partake in what you will, and if the game as a whole loses appeal, then play something else.

But always be respectful of one another in the community. The General Forums have enough negative energy for the entire forums.


NINJAEDIT*

what's funny is that BW did make a decision. So you can't accept their decision but you want him to if BW changes their mind?