Anywhere you put the class and level, you really need to include the AA level since AA is really more important than adventure level these days. Like the character screen. Like the alt list, OR any list where adventure level is listed.
CoLD MeTaL wrote: I agree with showing AAs in more places, but I think I'd rather group with a level 90 at 250 AAs than a level 89 with 320 AAs.
Kryvak@Everfrost wrote: You might be surprised. And the choice would be morelikely 89 with 320 vs a 90 with 120, and i bet you would prefer the 89 for anything but tank.
Plenty of casual guilds with characters that aren't capped at 90 yet. I've known alt-a-holics who never got any of their alts beyond 70-ish. Different playstyle simply, they still shouldn't be discounted. But that doesn't change the fact that AAs are a pretty important value to report indeed.
Kryvak@Everfrost wrote: I also agree with showing more AA. but the idea AA is more important is false. a level 90/0 naked templar duels a level 10/320 beastlord in crafted AoD reactant gear and the templar doesnt use any heals or CAs. who wins and is it close? level>gear>skill>aa level difference is especially powerful at 89 due to gear restrictions.
