ETA on Advanced Class change?

This was probably presented as a counterpoint, so I will not point out it's obvious silliness (in my opinion naturally)....or the silliness of presenting this potential game change (allowing AC change) as something other games allow. Obviously this game is not other games. That is the most logical statement that can be made on this point IMO.

Of course it is a valid reason. It is, however, not a very strong reason to advocate the change. That in no way makes it invalid...simply weak.

That has no bearing on whether or not the suggestion is valid. It only has validity if you can offer reasons why your method is more fulfilling as a result of your restrictions. Otherwise it is posturing.

A reasonable logical contention presented in a very poor way. Let me flip it.

What is gained by allowing class change? The players gain the satisfaction of actually getting to play the class they want instead of taking the ridiculous punitive route of leveling a new character in a horrible AC as obsessive players would. Bw gains the extra favor that the player feels from connecting to a character they actually enjoy playing.

Both are valid points presented poorly by insulting another type of player. If you have to insult those that oppose your view you have a weak baseless argument to begin with and should be ignored.

You are capable of presenting logical arguments. Please stop posting diatribe. It is beneath you.

I don't think that is true at all. Despite some of the "rhetoric" that community member may or may not have posted some logical negatives to allowing this change have been presented. Ignoring that logic is silly...instead it is best to debate the positives and how they may or may not outweigh the negatives....

FOTM abuse - Any logical player would have to concede that a late game AC switch could be exploited depending on how it is designed, and this could impact class representation and player motivations with respect to bringing about positive changes to classes with problems.

Leveling process exploitation - This could be an issue, but it already an issue in the game with free respecs. The same arguments were presented against free respecs, and though the problem already exists it would likely increase with AC changes.

Lack of comfort/familiarity with changed AC - This could be a concern to a lesser degree, depending on how it is implemented. In general it seems about 5 levels and perhaps a dozen or so endgame raids can provide the kind of experience needed in the new AC, but at the time of change it could be said the player would not know how to play the AC correctly.

Reduction of reroll requirement mechanic that promotes game play - Folks would not have to reroll. That would reduce the amount of time folks have to play to reach the top of a desired class, and this is likely contrary to the original intent to encourage reroll.


All of these are valid concerns, though the impact and importance is certainly debatable. There are plenty of valid pro reasons as well.

Max 1 or 2 changes with high cost doesnt really that much hurt.

What happens when these forums are full of players who want to change their class a third time? After all, you already allowed them to change their class once or twice, why not third time? And a fourth time after that? And so on....

There already exists a restriction on the number of times a player can change their class. That number is zero. There is every reason to believe that raising that number would just open the floodgates to the cries demanding unlimited class changes.

Let's not start down that road by giving the mouse a cookie.

The more you talk about mice and cookies, the sillier your arguments look.

Why shouldn't players be able to change their AC as often as they like? I can respec as much as I want and it fundamentally changes my character when I do. I have no problems bouncing between Gunnery DPS and Combat Medic healing, I have to have different sets of gear for the two and the mechanics of each are very different.

Your insistence that the status quo is just fine still doesn't have merit. You have not one said why this would be bad, just your incessant insistence that zero is what it is and what it should only be because you lost your cookie to a mouse.

There is a huge difference between class changes and advanced class changes. AC's are surprisingly similar to each other in most circumstances whereas classes are different enough to merit allowing changing between the two instead of forcing people to grind through class story content they have already done.

I have presented time and time again evidence as to why AC's are different classes and that allowing class changes would be bad for this game. What I have said does not mesh with what you want, so you ignore it and use words like "sillier".

As someone in another thread pointed out, since I am not the one asking for a change in the way the game currently works, the onus is not on me to provide reasonable reasons why class changes should not be allowed, which I have done, BTW; but rather the onus is on those who wish to change the game so they can be allowed to change their class to provide reasonable justifications and proof of why this would be good for the game, which they have not done. No one has provided any kind of proof that it would make the game better, just some claims that "it wouldn't affect anyone else".

I think plenty of points have been made as to how it could improve the game, with just as much validity as those that are against it.

1) People make the wrong choices in AC
Especially early after choosing the AC, if someone discovers they have chosen the wrong AC they are either stuck with that AC or have to reroll and play through the content they JUST played through all over again. It's one thing to reroll a new AC at 55...it's quite another to do so at level 10, especially if this is your first character.

2) Choice is generally preferred by players in the genre
This has been demonstrated in the market time and time again, not to mention that the game did not fare well out of the gate, and one of the reasons often cited by launch players was that the game did not allow customization or choice. It is well known that the prior team was very much against allowing choices other than the ones they allowed by design.

3) Easier for folks to change over from DPS to pure healing or tank ACs
It can be argued that there are too may DPS characters in this game, and that DPS tend to have a problem getting in groups. For max level it may be adventurous to allow folks to be able to change their AC to one of the ones that perform better as a healer or tank, since some ACs do not support those roles very well. This could cause more healers and tanks to be available for groups.

4) Players would be more likely to level characters that are currently stagnant due to the wrong AC choice
This again refers to early change, the one that I am most likely to support, if any. I personally have a smuggler that sits at level 15 and has not been leveled since launch. I chose the wrong AC and simply made the character a crafter. Allowing an EARLY change would allow me to correct my bad AC choice and actually experience the smuggler story.


I would also point out that making the contention that players will ask for more is not a completely reputable contention. There are plenty of examples where players complained about how things were, things changed and the playerbase was satisfied for the most part.

The most recent examples I can think of would be 4 action bars for Preferred players, planetary comms moved to 100 and QT down to 30 minutes.

So according to you, the game shouldn't have rules or consequences?? Players shouldn't be held accountable for the choices they make?? Bioware should just give away content and allow people to do whatever they want..

Choice is a moot argument.. People have all the choices in the world.. They just have to live with that choice.. You are saying they don't..

Easier is not a good reason for anything in an MMO. There is no point in playing something if it is to easy.. Bioware is in the business to make money, not to accommodate people that just want easy and convenient.. Laziness is not a good attribute to promote in an MMO..

There is no basis for your last argument.. It isn't that hard to roll a new character.. Nobody should just be allowed to get a free character or a character they didn't earn..

You have also said nothing about balance of the game.. Things that would truly impact the game..

You have also said nothing about the argument that if Bioware allows it once, they would be pressured into allowing it again and again..

Class swapping goes against the idea of even having a class.. What is the point of having a class if we can just change it at well..

How good is a game that doesn't hold players accountable for choices they make??

What of the classes that are DPS only?? How many Sentinels would change to Guardians so they can tank and DPS.. How many gunslingers would go scoundrel so they can heal and dps??

Nobody seems to want to look at this issue from the big picture.. There would be a dramatic impact on the game..

Bottom line here is this.. The game says that when you choose your AC it is permanent.. Well.. People need to come to terms with what that word means.. Bioware shouldn't have to change the rules of the game to accommodate a few people that are to lazy to roll a new character.. Perhaps MMO's are not a good game for them if they are to lazy to abide by the rules..

Why am I calling people lazy?? Because it is the only true reason to allow class swapping.. As shown above.. There is no other..

I'd like to know exactly how you come to that conclusion. It would be an interesting read I'm sure.

Fair enough. Calling players lazy and claiming that is a reason against is far more of a moot argument than choice ever will be.

The argument that "easier is not a good reason for anything in an MMO" is not only a tried and true argument against the addition of ANY convenience feature according to hardcore players, including most of those that have been added recently, it is not a popular sentiment. It is one that is simply held by a minority of hardcore players and does not represent the casual majority.

There is no basis for my last argument because I am not posing an argument, other than to say that there are at least as many sensible and reputable points for adding it the game as there are against....and i posted BOTH.

Balance. Balance can not be achieved. Period. It is a foolish and unproductive endeavor. The history of this game and countless others stand in evidence.

...which is proof you did not bother to read even the post you quoted. Read it and get back to me.

This is one of the most ridiculous statement I have heard on this forum. Your assigning meaning to something that has ZERO meaning. This is a video game....were not talking about getting a tattoo here.

As good as any other game on the market. "Choice should mean something" is the absolute weakest and most pathetic reason I have ever heard to NOT do something in designing a game.

This is exactly how the original dev staff felt. The game fell flat on it's face as a result. It is a toxic point of view that has no place in modern mmos period.

That is precisely the point. Again, it seems you did not bother to read the actual post you quoted.

I think plenty of people know the impact and have come to terms with the idea that the original dev staff wanted wanted many choices to be permanent. Thankfully most of them are gone and the game is better for it.

You may not agree with the "choice is better" path the game has taken lately, and that is your right. But holding on to the past is probably not going to be a fruitful endeavor.

Actually I'm pretty sure you are calling people lazy for another reason. I think that reason is pretty obvious.


Let me clue you in on a bit of information....I am not an advocate of the change. I am an advocate of a common sense discussion, therefore I post the SENSIBLE reasons FOR AND AGAINST.

You might check next time before you assume someone is an advocate for a change you desire. You seem to do that quite a bit.

Just in case you want to make the silly claim that I have never posted the points against.....

I don't think that is true at all. Despite some of the "rhetoric" that community member may or may not have posted some logical negatives to allowing this change have been presented. Ignoring that logic is silly...instead it is best to debate the positives and how they may or may not outweigh the negatives....

FOTM abuse - Any logical player would have to concede that a late game AC switch could be exploited depending on how it is designed, and this could impact class representation and player motivations with respect to bringing about positive changes to classes with problems.

Leveling process exploitation - This could be an issue, but it already an issue in the game with free respecs. The same arguments were presented against free respecs, and though the problem already exists it would likely increase with AC changes.

Lack of comfort/familiarity with changed AC - This could be a concern to a lesser degree, depending on how it is implemented. In general it seems about 5 levels and perhaps a dozen or so endgame raids can provide the kind of experience needed in the new AC, but at the time of change it could be said the player would not know how to play the AC correctly.

Reduction of reroll requirement mechanic that promotes game play - Folks would not have to reroll. That would reduce the amount of time folks have to play to reach the top of a desired class, and this is likely contrary to the original intent to encourage reroll.


All of these are valid concerns, though the impact and importance is certainly debatable. There are plenty of valid pro reasons as well.

With all do respect.. Have you read your own post lately??

And no.. There is no other reason to call someone lazy.. At it's core, laziness is the only reason to want Class swapping.. It is really that simple.. Some people just don't want to roll another character.. That is what it boils down to.. In the simplest of terms..

The game says their choice is permanent.. Why shouldn't people be forced to live with that rule?? Why should that rule be changed to accommodate them??

As others and myself have said.. There is no argument for class swapping.. Your claims to the contrary are simply incorrect.. People can roll a new character.. They can delete the old character if they want.. But the integrity of the classes should be maintained.. Rules in a game should be changed because a few people are to lazy to roll another character.. The game is very clear on the issue.. Your class is permanent.. There is nothing else to add..