ETA on Advanced Class change?

Again, rather than argue for advanced class switching, why not push for a tier above advanced class, that you would get at 50 or 55? The argument for advanced class switching as it stands now is really an argument for a recycling of what we already have. Demand better and more.

EDIT: If you REALLY want that advanced class switch, the only way I can ever see there being anything like a consensus on the matter is if it involved an xp penalty. I would not be against some form of xp bank. In other words, being able to dissolve old toons at a cost of 50-75% xp. So the remaining xp would go into a bank that you could use to simply make an auto-level 20 character.

"Earning." You do realize we are talking about a game, here, not the Medal of Honor?

It's a character class. In a computer game. You (and others) have lost sight of that.

You have not established that your hours leveling a Juggernaut have any value beyond some ill-conceived sense of pride you may feel regarding all the "hard work" you put into playing a game. Again, the only way AC change would affect you is to the extent you allow it to bother you.

We don't need any consensus. If BWEA thinks it's worth it to implement it (for some huge CC cost), they will.

It makes no difference what is earned, or where it is earned. That something is still EARNED.


Glad to see that you recognize that they are different classes and therefore would be a class change.

It makes no difference if you think it would affect other players. There have been plenty of other players explaining exactly how allowing class changes would affect us, but many of the people wishing to handed a new class are choosing to dismiss and ignore the fact that allowing class changes WOULD affect other players. They choose instead to hide behind arguments like:

"It's just a computer game"
"It won't affect you and I want it, so I should have it"
"We already have 'bads' and 'ninja looting' in the game"


If it's just a game, then play the game as the devs intended it to be played instead of demanding that the devs hand you things you want, but don't want to put any effort into obtaining.

We've already explained and shown many times that it WOULD affect everyone if they allowed class changes.

The existence of players who are not "leet" and players who choose to roll on virtual pixels that someone else feels that they deserve is not a reason to add class changes.

And you think you have scored some sort of point with this, or something? The answer is still "Who cares what someone else does with his character or his Cartel Coins?"

Except that the reason I think it would not affect other players is that it would in fact not affect other players.

Just repeating the same erroneous assertion over and over will not make it any less erroneous.

And it's not?

It won't, but keep insisting otherwise if it makes you feel better.

I don't care who wants it or who gets it. I'm content to let others play their game.

Oh, the effort. Sir Edmund Hillary would be so proud. If "the devs" make a change to the game, then obviously that's what they intend. So if they do allow AC changes, you should be content to play the game as "the devs" intend.

And they amount to nothing more than "I wouldn't like because I wouldn't like it," As I stated a while back, that's not a worthless reason, but it's no more compelling than "I like it because I like it."

No, the reason to add it would be that it brings more money into the game. I would not pay for it (I would not even waste my monthly CC on it), but seeming plenty of people would.

I don't "want" anything of the kind. I am involved in the conversation and participating in the pros and cons. So essentially you are making a judgement call that is completely off base and telling as to your position on the issue and how you handle those that do not agree with you. I confront the pros and cons on both sides that amount to an emotional tirade that holds no constructive logic in any form.

This is exactly the reason why your posts like this tend to have absolutely no credibility whatsoever.

I have posted the sensible pros and cons AND ridiculous responses by BOTH sides in this very thread. Take some time to do some research before you simply mark someone up as the "competition" or risk your posts looking rather foolish.

Here is just one example in a sea of many examples....

Now....looking for an answer to my question from the against folks....by someone that has some interest in actually discussing the pros and cons of the issue instead of washing their posts in predatory diatribe.

I would be interested in knowing how exactly a change like this "would harm the game"...as that seems a rather foolish contention, not to mention rather serving to the con side without any basic in logic.

...but a few folks have presented some compelling reasons against this sort of change.

It makes sense to pose that folks would be completely lost if they could simply change one AC to another since many play completely differently. There would have to be some kind of demotion to give a player the room to "learn the ropes", so to speak, for the option to make sense game wise.

There is no reason to punish other players that are set in their class by having folks running around that have no idea how to play the new AC they have chosen.

I suggested a max of two changes per character, with a demotion to either the level the change was originally made at (post storyline) or level 50, whichever is lower. The cooldown would be 30 days, and the second change would be permanent.

All points would be refunded, naturally, and armor would be removed to prevent folks from changing over to a medium armor AC while continuing to wear heavy armor.

....not to mention the point that folks would be more likely to change ACs on a whim to the FOTM instead of fighting against changes that were or are toxic to a class. This is a reason that caught my eye....the community has been active in preventing catastrophic changes to certain ACs, and that might be diminished, reducing the participation in that class altogether (and devaluing it for those that choose it).

I'm still on the fence on this one...ignoring the ridiculous contentions on both sides, like "the ACs are not different in any way" from the pro folks or "the change would harm the game" from the con folks, there are a few pros and cons on both sides that seem to have some validity. I think dismissing all of the cons out of hand is not a healthy way to move forward.

For all of you arguing against this change I would simply point you to Rift's system of souls. You can change classes completely, from a melee class to a ranged class, on the same character anytime as long as you aren't in combat. You don't have to level 2 rogues to play a melee stealth character and a ranged character on the same toon. People seem to cope just fine with this.

Was Rift's system of souls set up from the start?

Do you make a PERMANENT class choice in Rift as you do in this game when you choose an AC?

It is a good point, and one shouldn't simply dismiss the notion that the classes were designed to be permanent choices in the first place.

Though one must also consider that many things in the game were designed in a way that did not support many of the recent changes....including planetary comms. However it appears they were changes and the game could arguably be better for it.

But the game could arguably be worse for it. Let's use your example of planetary comms. Under the old system, you had to earn comms specific to a given planet and the gear you could purchase with those comms was equivalent to the content that awarded those comms. Under the new system, I can use my 55 assassin to go back to DK and farm planetary comms and then use those comms to buy the mods from corellia, a VERY substantial increase in level versus the content that awarded me those comms. Is this really an improvement?