"Advanced Classes = Fundamentally Different Class Designs"

You said anything in an MMO affects everyone, so that is why you so vehemently oppose AC switching. If I vehemently oppose development time being wasted on new operations should I use that excuse?

You realize that line of argument, if not useless to begin with, became so when you said "wasted"?

In any case: There's a fundamental difference between ruining an element of the game and adding content that supports a given playstyle.

And, in any case, there's literally no argument for AC switching that doesn't fall apart on the fact that classes are not a thing to be changed (that's just the nature of them), and the fact that with any other game, you'd need to reroll.

So what is being 'ruined'?

By adding content for raiders development time is taken from other areas-I do not raid so I have no use for this content. It theoretically shouldn't hurt my playing but it does for some reason (just like AC swap apparently gives you ulcers). Hell it's bad enough that crafters are expected to raid for patterns due to players' inability to think beyond 'raid' at endgame.

LFG shouldn't affect anyone's play either right? Macros, addons, same-gender romance, lfg tools, dual spec-no one HAS to use any of these, so why does it matter to you or anyone what I do with my toons? Why is respeccing a standard feature but AC switching the death of this game?

If it's a class then why can I have a sith warrior I take into warzones? Not a juggernaut, not a marauder, a warrior. It's a specialization- a SPEC, not a class.

You can say that all you want - it isn't going to make it true.

Just like you saying 'it somehow ruins my gameplay for you to have the option' doesn't make that true.

Choosing your AC is one of the few choices in this game that actually matters. Let's keep it that way.

So bring back companion death-that way you'll still have a real choice to make in the game.

Or drop respecs-your talents are locked. Make a mistake? Reroll! Now that's hardcore and a choice that counts!

Gosh, you leave for a few days and look what you miss. A whole bunch more of the same.

One might "derive" that, but that would be as incorrect as the rest of your misrepresentations. The post to which you refer was a general observation, which puts it in the class of opinion.

However, it's an observation that's not without the potential for evidence. I could go through and analyze the content of every post on this topic for rhetorical fallacies and willful misinterpretations just like I'm doing to yours, then offer as evidence those numbers. I'm perfectly content to let it stand as pure opinion and let the readers of the threads be the judge, however.

Of course, where that goes into pure conjecture is what happens in the future for the side which tends to be less logically coherent and intellectually honest. I'd think that its nature as conjecture was self-evident, but I explain it because you are appearing to have difficulty grasping rhetorical nuances.

I agree entirely. And overgeneralizing is something I find the anti-AC-change camp doing quite a bit. In this specific instance, you're treating the generalized opinion as fact and attempting to work that angle, which is another error and misrepresentation on your part.

I believe I read you calling for mature discussion in this thread. Well, this is your opportunity. Shoddy rhetorical tactics aren't mature discussion. You want to continue to use them, then you can expect me to take you to school--just as I would expect the same in return.

Your immediate reponse to this appears to be to retreat rather than defend or man up and apologize, essentially committing the equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and going la-la-la, I'm not listening.

I conclude from this that your request for mature discussion was insincere. Or that you honestly believe one thing is another, which would fit the pattern of the rest of your statements.

I have another assertion to offer: That you did in fact read the entire post, just like you're reading the entirety of this one, and will find yourself powerless to refrain from responding to it.

At this point I'm responding to your legion of misrepresentations and bad rhetoric, which is not the topic of the thread, that's entirely true. My strategy with this is to get back to an actual discussion, but that's not going to happen until you're honestly debating, so I'm addressing that first. I expect that in response you'll bluster for cover, and then cut and run, per the standard troll playbook--please do prove me wrong.

Attacking the people rather than their arguments is not a straw man. A straw man is when Party 1 advances argument A. Party 2 then says that Party 1 was advancing argument B, and/or proceeds to work against argument B rather than against argument A that Party 1 actually advanced.

Attacking people rather than their arguments is called ad hominem, from the Latin for "to the man". You may already know all this, but I explain because you don't seem to be demonstrating any grasp of it. You are consistently confusing one thing for another.

And, of course, I was doing neither thing. I was opining on the characteristics of the arguments, not the people. And so when someone accuses someone else of doing something rhetorically that they're actually not...well, guess what you're doing. Again.

If you don't actually know what terms like straw man and ad hominem actually mean, you will encounter difficulty in attempting to make them work for you. I'd submit that you're unlikely to learn it in context from reading the Internet. An excellent overall reference is "Thinking from A to Z", by Nigel Warburton. It's definitely worth a read.

I would much rather see them start defining the ACs separately rather than blending them together. I want to see AC stories, companions, and quests - they can't add stuff like that if they allow people to 'respec' their class.

Seconded, I'd like some deviation added between the two. It doesn't even have to be much, just some storyline, and I'd suggest throwing in an AC-restricted companion as well. Make it a droid, so voice overs won't be too expensive (though more fully voiced companions would always be better).

The AC's all have a different preference for companions types, so it'd be a very good way to make some companions tailored specifically to one AC, without risking to overpower the other AC. An example would be, giving snipers and gunslingers a tanking companion that has a medium in-combat self heal. It could make things too easy for operatives and scoundrels, but it doesn't, since those won't get that companion. They'd get a different companion instead.