So will we be able to switch ACs at level 50 or no?

[Trollsbane]

Sooooo. Armor type - that's it. The only distinction between classes. That must mean that warrior and paladin are the same class as they use the same armor type.

And weapons, Trolls you better be trolling. I'm yet to see a dual wielding Arms Warrior. Or dual wielding elemental shaman.

=/ They can though, even if it's not the best.

And no, armor type is not the only thing. It's just the thing off the top of my head that you couldn't refute, cause you have with the rest that has been thrown out there. =)

But don't be silly about the pally/warrior thing. More than one class can use the same type of armor.

[GarGar]

WoW:
I choose a base class at level 1 and then I choose my spec at level 10. I have 3 specs to choose from. Specs focus on different stats and therefore different gear. Specs offer different play styles because of different abilities they provide.

SWToR:
I choose a base class at level 1 and then I choose AC at level 10. I have 2 AC to choose from and then I have 2 specs within AC to choose from. Specs focus on different stats and therefore different gear. Specs offer different play styles because of different abilities they provide.

What's different? SWToR has more specs per class: 4 against 3 in wow (-druids). SWToR has more talent trees per class: 5 against 3 in wow.

What's different? Well it's actually more like this:

SWTOR:
I choose my story at level 1 then I choose my class at level 10. I don't even get most of my spells until I choose my AC, and when I do they're specific to that AC. Few spells are actually shared between the ACs.

Also it should be noted that even those two "shared" skill trees play differently based on your AC. Balance as a Shadow will still play like a rogue with DoTs, whereas Balance as a Sage will play more like a warlock. They're still more different than they are similar.

[Elim Garak]

=/ They can though, even if it's not the best.

Nope, Dual Wield is a part of SPEC features. Fury and Enh respectively

And no, armor type is not the only thing. It's just the thing off the top of my head that you couldn't refute, cause you have with the rest that has been thrown out there. =)

Armor is completely irrelevant, there are NO rules or laws about it. Different classes can use same armor type == same class can use different armor types

[Trollsbane]

Nope, Dual Wield is a part of SPEC features. Fury and Enh respectively

They used to be able to. That changed for Cata I am guessing?

Armor is completely irrelevant, there are NO rules or laws about it. Different classes can use same armor type == same class can use different armor types

Well, I can see there is no point in trying to convey to you the developer's philosophy or provide examples to show how they differ. You have your mind made up and will be displeased by what they want for their game. I'll drop out of this conversation now and let you hold to your opinion.

[GarGar]

Don't forget too, when an Inquisitor chooses their AC at 10+, they cease being an Inquisitor. They are now an Assassin, or they are now a Sorcerer. When you mouseover a player that has chosen their AC, they show up as "Level 15 Jedi Sentinel". They're not a "Level 15 Jedi Knight" that can choose to be a Sentinel one minute and a Guardian the next. (Unless of course they choose to play as a Knight without an AC, but I very much doubt we'll see many Jedi Knights or Sith Inquisitors outside of the starting planets.)

---------- Post added 2011-10-24 at 12:55 PM ----------

They used to be able to. That changed for Cata I am guessing?

Apparently yes. I just logged onto my Arms warrior to check too, cuz I didn't know they took away DW for warriors either.

[Ghosty]

But it will. that's the nature of balance. there's none. And with strict ACs that would be the PAIN for the players.



1. Classes are NOT mirrors. I can't be a republic sniper, I can't be an imperial gunslinger. I can't put my enemies on fire or dual weld blasters being a republic trooper. I can't blast my enemies with a heavy cannon being a bounty hunter. The list goes on and on. Jedi Sage =/= Sith Sorcerer. Every Class is DIFFERENT gameplay-wise.
2. Well, no need for p.2, actually.


Majority rules. We will see who's in majority about AC change. My prediction stands.

The Sith and Republic classes are indeed mirrors. A Sith Juggernaught and Jedi Knight Guardian will have mirroring skills and resource types, sure the skill names are different and the spell effects will look different, but if the skills are doing the same damage or have the same effect are they not the same? Because one class dual wields pistols while another uses a rifle, those are merely aesthetics. They will not play differently.

[SwiftSM]

Saying that an Assassin and a Sorcerer are alike because they share some abilities is like saying a Rogue and a Warlock are the same because they both have auto attack.

[Shamburger]

Saying that an Assassin and a Sorcerer are alike because they share some abilities is like saying a Rogue and a Warlock are the same because they both have auto attack.

I wouldn't go that far, it's to easy to pick at.
A more accurate comparison for your argument would be that a Warlock and Death Knight are the same because they both have DoT's.

[SwiftSM]

I would go that far, I'd elaborate but I can't because of the NDA

[Ghosty]

So you truly don't see the different play styles of SW: Jagernaut and SW: marauder. or SI Sorcerer and Assassin etc. Following your theory in WoW you should be allowed to switch from mage to warlock because heck they are both casters and the quests are all the same. I'm sorry i had to drag WoW into this but that's the only MMORPG i have played

Or in WoW you could just roll a druid and play every role in the game! Melee dps, ranged dps, tank, and healer. None of the 4 specs played the same way, but you could play them all. Please stop with the WoW analogies they really don't fit SWToR at all.

I see pro and cons to both sides of this argument and am really torn as to how I feel about it. On one hand I would like to swap AC's if my guild really needs to fill an opening in a pinch, but don't really want to flip flop my AC every other day, as I have planned out how I want my characters and how their AC fits into their personalities.

So basically I'm of the mindset that whatever Bioware does I'll be fine with it.

[jearle]

The biggest mistake is to treat AC as a stand alone class. It's not that. AC is just an abstraction brought in to categorize 5 talent trees into pairs of 3 (with one shared tree) for the sake of user-friendliness.

I really see NO sound argument against it. And surely we do not have to prove that it is needed. That's obvious.

I really can't believe you're still arguing with this high level of stubbornness, its pretty frustrating.

The people who created the game, made it the way that 95% of the people in this thread are trying to explain to you.

ACs are there own, unique class, they are mirrored on each faction. If they do allow AC changes that is their decision, it still doesn't change the fact that the developers are telling you that an orange is orange and you want to say its not orange its blue.



---------- Post added 2011-10-24 at 04:27 PM ----------

And weapons, Trolls you better be trolling. I'm yet to see a dual wielding Arms Warrior. Or dual wielding elemental shaman.

Can tell you didn't play WoW back in the day when this opened up for all Warriors at level 20, so its cool to see you envisioning all MMOs with the WOTLK/Cata mindset, gg.

[Overlord Urahara]

I dont belive that you will be able to change your AC at 50 but I think there gonna let you do it a few times while leveling.

[Deleted]

I get the impression this is a argument between people who care what class they play and those that aren't really bothered and just want the convenience to switch between different AC's to plug a hole in a raid. The problem with the latter, besides removing the 'choices have consequence' feature that many people like, is that if you allow easy AC changing at cap, then players who like a particular AC WILL be put under pressure to change to a different play-style that they don't care for. Not so bad if it only happens occasionally, but it is quite likely they'll get stuck playing with that AC forever, as there is little incentive for other raiders to bother finding someone else who is suitable. If you don't care what you play, it's not a problem, but if you do, then it is.

[LoLHellcy]

1. AC is gained extremely early in the game and is usually a clear cut choice within a class, i.e. You want to heal? X AC You want to tank? X AC
2. You shouldn't be able to train for 40 levels as an Assassin and then all of a sudden be a Sorceror, doesn't make sense really, especially in a story driven mmo.
3. There are 3 specs within the same AC with multiple ways to spec each, this really shouldn't be an issue.
4. 8 character slots 4 classes on Republic and Empire with a total pool of 8 mirrored ACs. Looks to me like it was designed for you to reroll a character of each AC on both sides if you want to have 1 of each AC and see every story. Coincidence? I think not.
5. Yes it can, its completely changing your character, the armor they wear, possibly the role they fill. It is basically like buying an ebayed level 50 character.
6.It can effect other players. If you change from a pure DPS to a tank class and have no idea how to tank playters suffer. Reminds me of the massive tank rerolls in WoW when the LFD tool came out, horrid people.

This general idea of switching ACs caters to the FOTM players who see that something else is "more OP' and reroll it.
AC switching could lead to a massive swing in % of ACs due to this attitude.

I agree that it will exist in some form eventually due to massive outcry of ^ players, i hope it is on a long cooldown, with an extremely high cost.

1) Everyone who picks up the game is going to know exactly what they'll want to play at end-game, and knows exactly what role they'll want to fill (let alone something like the class's playstyle)
2) All MMOs are story driven, SWTOR just forces you to pay attention to it.
3) Yes it will, chances are one AC will be better than another for min/max purposes.
4) Expecting people to level 8 characters to experience 4 classes is insane and a good way to burn out your game's population very quickly.
5) Your class is your class you chose at creation, the AC is honestly just a cool way of customizing that same class a bit further.
6) People can level all the way to max as a role and have no idea to play it. There have always been players who suck at their role, using respecs to misappropriate blame is wrong imo.
7) If you don't let people switch ACs; then you're still going to see that massive switch, just with a lot more effort put into something that is marginally better. (People will always want you to be min/max, imagine if you had to reroll your paladin because you speced ret instead of holy?)

[Shardik]

1) Everyone who picks up the game is going to know exactly what they'll want to play at end-game, and knows exactly what role they'll want to fill (let alone something like the class's playstyle)
2) All MMOs are story driven, SWTOR just forces you to pay attention to it.
3) Yes it will, chances are one AC will be better than another for min/max purposes.
4) Expecting people to level 8 characters to experience 4 classes is insane and a good way to burn out your game's population very quickly.
5) Your class is your class you chose at creation, the AC is honestly just a cool way of customizing that same class a bit further.
6) People can level all the way to max as a role and have no idea to play it. There have always been players who suck at their role, using respecs to misappropriate blame is wrong imo.
7) If you don't let people switch ACs; then you're still going to see that massive switch, just with a lot more effort put into something that is marginally better. (People will always want you to be min/max, imagine if you had to reroll your paladin because you speced ret instead of holy?)

would people respec from ret to holy to min/max their dps? its more along the lines of switching from ret to mage because the whole playstyle and current stat weights would favor it more.

Either way I feel the ACs should stay seperate otherwise we only get 4 classes vs 8, which hurts diversity (which really doesn't matter) and if they want the ACs to be different classes then that is their choice, seen it done like that in dozens of other mmos.

[Deckon]

1) Everyone who picks up the game is going to know exactly what they'll want to play at end-game, and knows exactly what role they'll want to fill (let alone something like the class's playstyle)
2) All MMOs are story driven, SWTOR just forces you to pay attention to it.
3) Yes it will, chances are one AC will be better than another for min/max purposes.
4) Expecting people to level 8 characters to experience 4 classes is insane and a good way to burn out your game's population very quickly.
5) Your class is your class you chose at creation, the AC is honestly just a cool way of customizing that same class a bit further.
6) People can level all the way to max as a role and have no idea to play it. There have always been players who suck at their role, using respecs to misappropriate blame is wrong imo.
7) If you don't let people switch ACs; then you're still going to see that massive switch, just with a lot more effort put into something that is marginally better. (People will always want you to be min/max, imagine if you had to reroll your paladin because you speced ret instead of holy?)

1) The information for the AC's and classes is located in many locations, it's even been stated that the character creation screen does a decent job of describing both the class, and the AC's associated with it. How well they describe them is something we will have to wait for the NDA to be lifted, or for the game to come out and experience it for ourselves. This argument overestimates the lack of interest/knowledge in the game, or a lack of intelligence in the players. Granted there will be SOME people who don't make an educated decision, but to dumb down the game because their lack of foresight seems just as idiotic as the person making the decision in the first place.

2) There is NO indication that this game will not be a time sink, if you aren't going to like your AC choice, I'm am quite certain you will discover that LONG before 50. And the argument "My guild might need a tank, and an AC change will fix that." Recruit more tanks...

3) BW has stated that they are taking balancing very serious, and that the DPS of one AC should be VERY similar to that of another (equal gear, equal skill of the player not withstanding). Admittedly balance is an elusive thing, and difficult to nail, but to argue min/maxing is weak as well. ANYONE who will min/max will do their research once the NDA's lifted, and a plethora of information is released on each class, they will make their informed decisions, and after launch, given balancing patches, they will either be willing to reroll, or still pulling decent numbers, especially compared to those who don't min/max. You make it sound as if someone who is going to min/max won't do any research.

4) If you roll a Healing AC, say Sith Sorc, and find you want to tank instead, you can still roll a Sith Jug, and tank, experience a whole new story, and have the toon to heal IF your guild needs it. Class story is something that, to me, SUPPORTS not having AC changes. Instead of allowing you to play 1 toon with BOTH AC's, you can experience more of the game on a different class, and still be able to play all the roles you wish. BW allowing AC's seems like their are shortening the life of their product by giving an excuse for people not to play through a second or third time.

5) BW has stated, in their terminology, and descriptions that AC's ARE classes. You may spout that it's semantics, but the creator of the game has stated exactly what AC's are and how they are intended. So your statement is opinion, not fact.

6) And allowing AC's changes to give them abilities they've never used will help reduce their confusion, and make them better players? You cannot deny that should someone that's of average skill or better switches AC's for the first time, their performance will be lackluster at best initially at least. And there very well may be nuances that they will miss as they didn't level that AC, and didn't discover the best moves to use given certain uncommon situations? Sure you can read up on the class, get an idea on rotations and such, and preform better than if you did it blind, but there is something to be said in playing a class (AC) to endgame, and learning the in's and outs, as opposed to simply being given an ac at 50 and being told to "Have fun".

7) Your example isn't very applicable in this situation, as you are describing a talent respec, to a class reroll. The AC's have talent systems, and those can be respec'd. And I don't think AC switching will be nearly as massive as you are implying. Many new toons will be alt's over complete rerolls for FOTM, but the latter will happen to a degree. I seriously doubt though, that the game will be so severely unbalanced each patch as to require such a massive flux of min/max players to reroll every patch. And if there is, it'll only take 8 patches and all the min/max players will be covered...(This last bit was sarcasim, please don't think I'm serious about that.)

[Elim Garak]

I really can't believe you're still arguing with this high level of stubbornness, its pretty frustrating.

I'm not stubborn - I just have not been proven wrong. Do not confuse these two.

The people who created the game, made it the way that 95% of the people in this thread are trying to explain to you.

We are not arguing about the game, we are arguing about "what is class and what is not"

ACs are there own, unique class, they are mirrored on each faction. If they do allow AC changes that is their decision, it still doesn't change the fact that the developers are telling you that an orange is orange and you want to say its not orange its blue.

No, devs tell me that the fruit is an orange, but I look at it and see an apple.

Can tell you didn't play WoW back in the day when this opened up for all Warriors at level 20, so its cool to see you envisioning all MMOs with the WOTLK/Cata mindset, gg.

Don't be ridiculous. We are talking "current" not "past". Also the fact that all dual wielding classes could dual wield in any spec back then and can't now - just shows that I am right - such things do not matter in our "separate class" debate.

---------- Post added 2011-10-25 at 12:46 PM ----------

skip

1. It's a common knowledge that people do not read in-game texts (by "people" I mean - majority, by "do not read" I mean - skip a lot of it).
2. I'm quite certain that's not the only reason why people would want to switch AC at level 50.
3. Research is a dynamic process. We are talking MMO and Balance here.
4. But I like my Sith Sorc, I like her name. Why should I play another toon? With another name? With NO gear at all? Yes I can collect the Assassin gear beforehand.
5. That's an appeal to authority - not an argument. Nevertheless they ARE testing the AC change. So I'll just make an appeal to authority too.
6. That's a lame argument. When I leveled my pally I was Retribution and then at level 70 I switched (right away) to Holy. I didn't know how to play it - AT ALL. I was click-healing and all that. I turned out to be the great healer for my guild. In late WotLK I tried Prot - turned out to be a good tank (off-tanked thru t11). Learning curve is not that steep. It's not quantum physics.
7. AC change demand is massive enough on beta for devs to test it.

[morderith]

I'm not stubborn - I just have not been proven wrong. Do not confuse these two.

And as it stands you have yet to be proven right either. You haven't provided any more compelling evidence than those who say that each AC is a seperate class. The fact that you still adamantly argue your point as being the sole truth is being stubborn as there has been ample evidence against your view

[Elim Garak]

And as it stands you have yet to be proven right either. You haven't provided any more compelling evidence than those who say that each AC is a seperate class. The fact that you still adamantly argue your point as being the sole truth is being stubborn as there has been ample evidence against your view

I am not the one making the claim that AC == separate class. I do not need to prove anything. And all so called "ample evidence" was debunked by me and others.

[vizzle]

Mehh.

I still don't really care if they do or don't, but I think it'd be stupid if they don't allow AC switches. All I know is... I won't be rolling two of the same class just to play the other AC. Cannot. Be. Bothered.