Possible Expansion Leak

[Teriz]

any source with this statement of your or are we just supposed to say whatever we want without any proof whatsoever ? There are plenty of things blizz said they wouild never do only to go and do it later anyway so even if they did say that it still means very little...

Yeah, but Blizzard will never introduce a class into the game that overlaps spectacularly with existing classes. That's exactly what Demon Hunters do. Not only do they overlap with agility melee classes, they also overlap with Warlock abilities. Even the name overlaps with an existing class.

New players might confuse demon hunters and hunters. Sure, this may sound like a silly reason, but Blizzard has been very specific in their moves to make sure that new players can easily get acquainted with the game and find themselves in the area most appealing to them. Why would someone click “hunter” when they can click “demon hunter”. That would be similar to choosing “paladin” over “more-awesome-paladin” if it were an option.

---------- Post added 2013-05-15 at 11:30 AM ----------

According to who exactly?. this patchy piece of "leaked" information.

Possibility, yes, anything is possible. Its also "possible" that a clown class will make its way into the game, slapping mobs with inflatable balloons, my point is anyone could have fabricated this sketchy information. We (including me) only WANT to buy into it because its a dream scenario, a new spec for each class etc...

But is it ever a possiblity strong possibility, not until actual evidence presents itself from Blizzard, or an announcement has made. i think its safe to say this is all tin foil hat shinanigans. Fun too speculate though

I'm talking about Warlocks becoming the game's version of Demon Hunters, and a Tinker class entering WoW. Both are strong possibilities because both make sense given the current trajectory of the game.

Clearly Blizzard is dumping Demon Hunter attributes into the Demonology tree to make Warlocks a more appealing class. So it makes sense that eventually Warlocks will become even more Demon Hunter-like over the course of the next few expansions.

The Tinker and the Alchemist are the last hero units from WC3 that have no abilities present in WoW. Also they are thematically different than any other class in the game. In addition, a Tinker class just so happens to fit every class gap in the game currently. Unlike other class concepts, there wouldn't be any overlap with a Tinker-style class in the game.

[Deleted]

So the original thread has been deleted. How interesting.

If you want to go back through the history of completely fake "leaks" that turned out to be true completely:

Yeah also fun fact on the Pandaren there is a blue somewhere saying they were originally intended to be an alliance race in TBC. Guess what happened? The work put into them was obviously saved until better timing. People act Blizzard went mad and lost it when they decided upon MOP but I bet Pandarens were planned way back from the start.

This is what I'm hoping is similar with 4th specs.

[Strangewayes]

Yeah, but Blizzard will never introduce a class into the game that overlaps spectacularly with existing classes. That's exactly what Demon Hunters do. Not only do they overlap with agility melee classes, they also overlap with Warlock abilities. Even the name overlaps with an existing class.

Exactly why this supposed "leak" makes sense. Druids now have a 4th spec. Due to the talent tree changes. That sets precedent for 4th specs. Since Warlocks have at least half of their abilities crossing over with Demon Hunters, the only way to implement any sort of "Demon Hunter" would be to make a 4th Warlock spec utilizing cloth armor, melee magic attacks combined with weapons.

If I was a designer, and had players over the years ask for things like Demon hunter and Petless Hunter, what better way to implement it than with a stripping of the talent trees to a perk system to allow such changes to become new specs?

Any other avenue, such as removing classes or adding classes that are extremely similar, would be confusing for the playerbase. But if I split a class into 4 specs. I could address player concerns about homogenization by divvying up class abilities between the new specs to reduce ability bloat and at the same time provide a more focused role for each spec. Plus the players get a new type of playstyle. It's a win-win.

It sounds like a heap of work, yes. But people doubted that MoP would feature both a new race and new class within the same expansion. Thinking that amount of work would be impossible to complete.

[ElvenArcher]

Crapdaren was a race meant for BC? How can you people believe ANYTHING they say to you? Of course they'll say anything to back up this stupid race. How would they have made any sense in hell in a Dark Portal/Warcraft 2 centered expansion, they didn't make their bland appearance till Warcraft 3, and even then it was pretty useless.

Freaking sheep. Baaa-baaa-baaa.

[Dolus]

Yeah, but Blizzard will never introduce a class into the game that overlaps spectacularly with existing classes. That's exactly what Demon Hunters do. Not only do they overlap with agility melee classes, they also overlap with Warlock abilities. Even the name overlaps with an existing class.

New players might confuse demon hunters and hunters. Sure, this may sound like a silly reason, but Blizzard has been very specific in their moves to make sure that new players can easily get acquainted with the game and find themselves in the area most appealing to them. Why would someone click “hunter” when they can click “demon hunter”. That would be similar to choosing “paladin” over “more-awesome-paladin” if it were an option.

---------- Post added 2013-05-15 at 11:30 AM ----------



I'm talking about Warlocks becoming the game's version of Demon Hunters, and a Tinker class entering WoW. Both are strong possibilities because both make sense given the current trajectory of the game.

Clearly Blizzard is dumping Demon Hunter attributes into the Demonology tree to make Warlocks a more appealing class. So it makes sense that eventually Warlocks will become even more Demon Hunter-like over the course of the next few expansions.

The Tinker and the Alchemist are the last hero units from WC3 that have no abilities present in WoW. Also they are thematically different than any other class in the game. In addition, a Tinker class just so happens to fit every class gap in the game currently. Unlike other class concepts, there wouldn't be any overlap with a Tinker-style class in the game.

People could just as easily confuse the Engineering profession with a Tinker class... and the Alchemy profession with the Alchemist class.

"Yeah, but Blizzard will never introduce a class into the game that overlaps spectacularly with existing classes."

You mean how Death Knights are basically Warlocks with armor? Or, Warlock / Warrior hybrid?

I wouldn't put anything past Blizzard.

[Deleted]

IF this is true after all , i hope demon hunters would be a Hunter spec Or dark ranger , seems pretty cool

[ElvenArcher]

People could just as easily confuse the Engineering profession with a Tinker class... and the Alchemy profession with the Alchemist class.

"Yeah, but Blizzard will never introduce a class into the game that overlaps spectacularly with existing classes."

You mean how Death Knights are basically Warlocks with armor? Or, Warlock / Warrior hybrid?

I wouldn't put anything past Blizzard.

Deathknights are nothing like Warlocks. This statement is stupid.

[Poochy]

Exactly why this supposed "leak" makes sense. Druids now have a 4th spec. Due to the talent tree changes. That sets precedent for 4th specs. Since Warlocks have at least half of their abilities crossing over with Demon Hunters, the only way to implement any sort of "Demon Hunter" would be to make a 4th Warlock spec utilizing cloth armor, melee magic attacks combined with weapons.

If I was a designer, and had players over the years ask for things like Demon hunter and Petless Hunter, what better way to implement it than with a stripping of the talent trees to a perk system to allow such changes to become new specs?

Any other avenue, such as removing classes or adding classes that are extremely similar, would be confusing for the playerbase. But if I split a class into 4 specs. I could address player concerns about homogenization by divvying up class abilities between the new specs to reduce ability bloat and at the same time provide a more focused role for each spec. Plus the players get a new type of playstyle. It's a win-win.

It sounds like a heap of work, yes. But people doubted that MoP would feature both a new race and new class within the same expansion. Thinking that amount of work would be impossible to complete.

I don't think DH 4th spec would cull the people asking for DHs. Some people say warlocks can be DHs, others don't. Either way, I don't think a 4th spec would cull people because it isn't the same thing, warlocks are warlocks. Just as paladins are paladins and priests are priests.

Either way I think we should just wait and see what blizzcon has for us for us before saying something will or won't happen. Only blizz can say what they can or can't or won't do. Whatever makes sense with the expac will happen, but they need something to make the expac appealing, 4th specs and updated player models would be a default addition, not an expac addition.

[Dolus]

Crapdaren was a race meant for BC? How can you people believe ANYTHING they say to you? Of course they'll say anything to back up this stupid race. How would they have made any sense in hell in a Dark Portal/Warcraft 2 centered expansion, they didn't make their bland appearance till Warcraft 3, and even then it was pretty useless.

Freaking sheep. Baaa-baaa-baaa.

QQ more? SWTOR and GW2 are at your disposal.

---------- Post added 2013-05-15 at 06:46 AM ----------

I don't think DH 4th spec would cull the people asking for DHs. Some people say warlocks can be DHs, others don't. Either way, I don't think a 4th spec would cull people because it isn't the same thing, warlocks are warlocks. Just as paladins are paladins and priests are priests.

Either way I think we should just wait and see what blizzcon has for us for us before saying something will or won't happen. Only blizz can say what they can or can't or won't do. Whatever makes sense with the expac will happen, but they need something to make the expac appealing, 4th specs and updated player models would be a default addition, not an expac addition.

Agreed... I'm in the same boat as you on this.

[Strangewayes]

Only blizz can say what they can or can't or won't do. Whatever makes sense with the expac will happen, but they need something to make the expac appealing, 4th specs and updated player models would be a default addition, not an expac addition.

Yes, you're right, but I think this leak would be exactly what people would need to get excited if it was revealed at Blizzcon. Any less, and I think people might be underwhelmed.

[n0n3]

If it wasnt true why the topic would get deleted from official forums. Most likely some of the icons are just placeholders but it gives an idea about what that spec is supposed to be.
Demon hunter makes sense to be added to hunter class basically they'll use shadow to imbue their arrows.

[Teriz]

People could just as easily confuse the Engineering profession with a Tinker class... and the Alchemy profession with the Alchemist class.

How would they do that when none of the Engineering profession's abilities exist within the Tinker class? And there wouldn't be an Alchemy class, it would be merged with Tinkers since the two are related concepts.

"Yeah, but Blizzard will never introduce a class into the game that overlaps spectacularly with existing classes."

You mean how Death Knights are basically Warlocks with armor? Or, Warlock / Warrior hybrid?

I wouldn't put anything past Blizzard.

Yeah, that is a pretty dumb statement. Death Knights are scourge/undead. Warlocks are Demonic. DKs are melee fighters while Warlocks are ranged casters. There's a big thematic difference there across the board.

[Kalcheus]

A few things:
First off, until the trademark of Mists of Pandaria was discovered, anyone claiming Pandas in the next xpac were speculating. Just because something speculated turns out to be true doesn't mean the original speculation was done with anything resembling evidence.

Second, yes a Demon Hunter class would be extremely popular from a fanbase perspective. A Tinker class, on the other hand, would make a lot more sense from a game design perspective. You could easily do all 4 (ranged dps, melee dps, healer, tank) roles with a Tinker if you want (altho Blizz may skip melee dps). You could fill in gaps for drops by making it mail class that also uses ranged weapons (heck, even the tank Tinker (Tanker, (c)2013 Chrth) could equip a ranged weapon because their tanking abilities would be based on mech rather than weapon damage - altho that could cause the Great Feral-Hunter Wars of Old to return). It'd be very easy to give a Tinker a distinct set of abilities as opposed to a Demon Hunter who would share some (many?) with Warlocks, despite what some people linking "white smoke flare" as an ability would think. And you'd solve the problem of people whining for a petless Hunter spec.

Does it add subs? Probably not. Does a Demon Hunter add subs? Maybe. I'd argue that the return of the Burning Legion would constitute the bulk of returning subs moreso than the class choice.

Conversely, we know that class imbalance is a huge concern and may be responsible for eroding subs. Adding another class and/or more specs on top of it? That appears to be folly to me. But I'm not Blizzard, so they might think they can do so without issues.

...

Ultimately, though, what it comes down to in the Tinker vs Demon Hunter debate is this: which class would be a better one to fight the Burning Legion with? Considering the Demon Hunters we've encountered in the game haven't all been right in the head, maybe a Tinker class would be the best defense after all.

For as we all know, Magic abilities are -33% against Mechanical pets.

[onesBronson]

Maybe its a fake, maybe it isn't. I'm leaning more towards the fake side...buuuuut, in the event if this does happen in the future. That 4th shaman spec better be a tank spec or...I'll be thoroughly disappointed

[Deleted]

Poor attempt, spacing's off, reused icons from existing spells. The purple skull icon for the fourth DK spec poped up in some fan thread once, so it's hard to imagine it's legit. I think it's fake.

I hope there is never going to be a fourth spec, they have enough dificulties balancing 34 specs and giving them all a place within the game. They shouldn't even think about making that 48 specs (if they add a new class with four specs as well).

[ssviolett]

Tinker! 4th spec! Drooled my keyboard.
Too bad it is fake :\

[ElvenArcher]

QQ more? SWTOR and GW2 are at your disposal.

Lol what? Double lol what for a loser who still uses the expression qq.

[Celista]

If it wasnt true why the topic would get deleted from official forums. Most likely some of the icons are just placeholders but it gives an idea about what that spec is supposed to be.
Demon hunter makes sense to be added to hunter class basically they'll use shadow to imbue their arrows.

Blizzard deletes a lot of things from the official forums.

Every expansion people are willing to believe anyone who posts something that they claim is an "expansion leak". How many of those were actual, legitimate leaks where the leak turns out to be a feature of the next xpac or even remotely accurate in the vaguest sense? 0. Yup, exactly 0. Over the course of 4 expansions.

The possibility of this being an actual leak is 0%. Not 0.001%, not 1%. 0% likely.

People need to stop being so gullible.

[Deleted]

Blizzard deletes a lot of things from the official forums.

Every expansion people are willing to believe anyone who posts something that they claim is an "expansion leak". How many of those were actual, legitimate leaks where the leak turns out to be a feature of the next xpac or even remotely accurate in the vaguest sense? 0. Yup, exactly 0. Over the course of 4 expansions.

The possibility of this being an actual leak is 0%. Not 0.001%, not 1%. 0% likely.

People need to stop being so gullible.

I recall a few leaks to be fair that came true. The panda image, that document listing all future expansion packs + levelling zones and halloween masks of worgen and goblins to be a few.

[Ursiel]

If this is true, here's what I think each spec might be... possibly:

Warrior: Dragoon - Focus on spears and dragon-ish abilities
Mage: Blood Mage - Focus on stealing life from your enemies
Rogue: No idea. Possibly a ranged spec? Like hunter without need of pet?
Hunter: Demon Hunter - Maybe melee hunter! (They can still use melee weps after all...)
Shaman: Earthshaker or something Shaman-y like that. A tanking spec maybe.
Priest: Honestly no idea. Shadowfrost maybe, but I don't think that'd really fit a priest.
Warlock: Warlock tanking?
Paladin: Shockadin?
Death Knight: Maybe a blood dps spec?
Monk: Ranged dps spec? Maybe something similar to ele sham, but with more kung fu.
Then the last class pff hell if I know.