Hints at future class?

[Queen of Hamsters]

The mechanics do not matter, that is a poor argument.
It centered around changing into a demonic form.

Back on the original topic.
Completely grasping at straws to say that is some hint.
It in my view simply looked cool, and nothing else.

Indeed, and the argument against Demon Hunters always came down to "They can't make them happen, because Demonology Warlocks". The argument being unfounded or illogical, didn't stop it from being used. Same as how "Tinkerer can't happen because Engineering" is being used now. Blizzard can make changes, design choices and everything in-between to adapt the game to their visions. Engineering as a profession, won't stop Tinkerer from happening eventually. It will be made to adapt to the progress of the game, not the other way around.

[Kolvarg]

You realize that example makes zero sense, correct?

Demon hunter =/= Class that controls demons.
Engineer == profession that controls technology == Tinker

They didn't have to rework shit for the warlock in order to make Demon Hunters a possibility. They reworked many classes and warlocks just happen to be one of them.

First aid == profession that heals == Healer

Remove ALL healing specs, they're stupid!


Seriously though, while engineering has a lot of gadget and tech-related stuff, it doesn't make everyone who has it base their combat around it, especially not in PvE. It has some cool gadgets, enchants, and stuff, but when you are actually playing in active combat (which is the major essence of a class), it is (like most other professions) mostly irrelevant.

I imagine a tinker class would have similar gameplay to Gazlowe in HotS (or Engineering class thingie in GW2), which would be nothing like simply having Engineering profession.

And demonology is a spec based on controlling demons now. It used to be mainly around transforming into a demon and using demonic powers, much like Demon Hunters.

[Deleted]

So we have a new tinker thread every week?

No one cares about tinkers.

Well that's clearly and demonstrably untrue, as per this very thread.

Engineers (prof) are very limited in scope - most of their gadgets don't ever see the heat of battle and that is where the great distinction between them and a tinker class could be drawn.

[Queen of Hamsters]

That's subjective data that means nothing. You still are too insecure to admit that demon hunters were more in demand than tinkers, but "since there are no numbers", it's impossible to prove, so yes I can still say that archaeologists are just as popular as tinkers. Your logic is fun to use when it comes to denying reality.

Can't wait for archaeologist class to come out.

But your "data" does mean something then? If we were to compile a list of threads made regarding Tinkerers in WoW vs your Archeologist, which would be longer do you think?

And I don't have to agree to it, I never said anything to the contrary. You're making stuff up once more, and projecting it like a champ. You can keep looking forward to the Archeologist class though, if that makes you happy. I'll stick to believing that the Tinkerer is far more likely, especially when the only caveat would be that we have Engineering...

[Protean]

A tinker class would be really, really stupid. We already have engineers. Give them a goblin shredder trinket and there you go, it's a tinker.

A battle mage would be a significantly cooler idea. Ranged/Melee magic with mail/plate armor. The best part would be the deterrence of the cancer that is steampunk cosplay that would follow a tinker class release.

A warrior class would be really really stupid. We already have blacksmiths, give them swords and there you go, it's a warrior.


Do you realize how stupid an argument that is?

[LiiLoSNK]

First aid == profession that heals == Healer

Remove ALL healing specs, they're stupid!


Seriously though, while engineering has a lot of gadget and tech-related stuff, it doesn't make everyone who has it base their combat around it, especially not in PvE. It has some cool gadgets, enchants, and stuff, but when you are actually playing in active combat (which is the major essence of a class), it is (like most other professions) mostly irrelevant.

I imagine a tinker class would have similar gameplay to Gazlowe in HotS (or Engineering class thingie in GW2), which would be nothing like simply having Engineering profession.

And demonology is a spec based on controlling demons now. It used to be mainly around transforming into a demon and using demonic powers, much like Demon Hunters.

Bandages are not the same thing as holy light, druid nature voodoo, or other healing types. Your argument instantly falls flat on this point.

Engineering however is literally the exact thing a tinker would be except with cooldowns and damage adjustments. Shoot a rocket, shoot a lazer, make mechanical pets/turrets, etc.

And yes the demonology spec changes made warlocks more about controlling demons, but that doesn't mean locks aren't/weren't able to turn into demons themselves.

- - - Updated - - -

A warrior class would be really really stupid. We already have blacksmiths, give them swords and there you go, it's a warrior.


Do you realize how stupid an argument that is?

Yes I realize how stupid YOUR argument is. You're comparing things that aren't similar in any way, where as engineers and tinkers are literally the same thing. A blacksmith is not a warrior and vice versa. Your logic is fail.

[Desparil]

Im making some concepts for the Tank spec.

A giant robot hand that is like a reverse Death grip or a charge similar to the fel reaver??

Yes please!

About tanking i was thinking something like multiple transformation mech/tank modes, for example:

Siege mode: slow movement, high defense, low dps
Dps/ot mode: medium movement, medium defense, high dps
Kite mode: fast movement, low defense, medium dps

each with its own transformation, and when boss kills your mech you end up running around as goblin/gnome with 1hp(cant get healed!) waiting to get squashed

[Queen of Hamsters]

Well that's clearly and demonstrably untrue, as per this very thread.

Engineers (prof) are very limited in scope - most of their gadgets don't ever see the heat of battle and that is where the great distinction between them and a tinker class could be drawn.

Yup, there'd be adjustments made. Engineering would still remain as a novelty profession for toys, transmog, mounts etc but the damage-dealing and combat perks (which have already been nerfed) would all belong to the Tinkerers.

[LiiLoSNK]

But your "data" does mean something then? If we were to compile a list of threads made regarding Tinkerers in WoW vs your Archeologist, which would be longer do you think?

And I don't have to agree to it, I never said anything to the contrary. You're making stuff up once more, and projecting it like a champ. You can keep looking forward to the Archeologist class though, if that makes you happy. I'll stick to believing that the Tinkerer is far more likely.

My data is based on logic. Your data is based on desperation and insecurity.

When I say, "more people wanted demon hunters than people who wanted tinkers", I can use things like common sense. Illidan is more popular than any tinkerer that has ever existed. He's been the raid boss of his own endgame raid. How many tinkers have done that? Can more people name the tinker from wc3 or can more people name the demon hunter from wc3?

I know you don't have to agree to this easy to understand fact, but i'm just letting you know that you look infinitely more insecure and desperate the more you try to say that tinkers and demon hunters are on the same tier of what people wanted in the game. It's sad.

[Queen of Hamsters]

My data is based on logic. Your data is based on desperation and insecurity.

When I say, "more people wanted demon hunters than people who wanted tinkers", I can use things like common sense. Illidan is more popular than any tinkerer that has ever existed. He's been the raid boss of his own endgame raid. How many tinkers have done that? Can more people name the tinker from wc3 or can more people name the demon hunter from wc3?

I know you don't have to agree to this easy to understand fact, but i'm just letting you know that you look infinitely more insecure and desperate the more you try to say that tinkers and demon hunters are on the same tier of what people wanted in the game. It's sad.

I've never said that they're on the same tier, only that plenty people want them, plenty of people don't. Same as Demon Hunters.

You don't have data, you only think that you do. You've mostly resorted to petty namecalling, projections and a "I'm RIGHT BECAUSE I'M RIGHT!!!!!!!1" attitude throughout the thread.

Tinkerer as a class is perfectly logical, it's just that you don't agree because you don't WANT them.

[LiiLoSNK]

I've never said that they're on the same tier, only that plenty people want them, plenty of people don't. Same as Demon Hunters. The only one pretending to have numbers, is you.

You don't have data, you only think that you do. You've mostly resorted to petty namecalling, projections and a "I'm RIGHT BECAUSE I'M RIGHT!!!!!!!1" attitude throughout the thread.

Tinkerer as a class is perfectly logical, it's just that you don't agree because you don't WANT them.

If more people wanted tinkers than demon hunters, why aren't they a class yet? Yea that's what I thought. Your only argument is, "other games have tinkers", which only hurts you because that means blizzard knows that tinkers exist and haven't added them because they're unwanted and basically a really stupid idea for a class.

I know it's hard for you to admit being wrong which is why you'll keep dancing around it. I mean obviously, from my position its a really sad look for you, but hey, you think it's working so keep at it, kiddo! The "Hey guys I'm a tinker in real life. You can't prove me wrong because you don't have the dataa lol!" logic at its finest!

Tinkerer is exactly as logical as an archeologist class or any other stupid profession class. It's just that you don't agree because you don't want archeologist to be a class.

[Queen of Hamsters]

If more people wanted tinkers than demon hunters, why aren't they a class yet? Yea that's what I thought.

I know it's hard for you to admit being wrong which is why you'll keep dancing around it. I mean obviously, from my position its a really sad look for you, but hey, you think it's working so keep at it, kiddo! The "Hey guys I'm a tinker in real life. You can't prove me wrong because you don't have the dataa lol!" logic at its finest!

Tinkerer is exactly as logical as an archeologist class or any other stupid profession class. It's just that you don't agree because you don't want archeologist to be a class.

Again, I've never said that more people want this or that. That's YOUR mental gymnastics at work.

And no, haha, Archeologist is not as likely as the Tinkerer. Has nothing to do with me not wanting it, since as I said, I'd be entirely open to the concept. Your mentioning of the class concept in this thread can't really match all the mentions of the Tinkerer throughout the years, nor the presence of the concept in-game and in other games.

[burlap]

A tinker would be so incredibly boring and disingenuous. I hope the next class is more inspired than that.

[Desparil]

If more people wanted tinkers than demon hunters, why aren't they a class yet? Yea that's what I thought. Your only argument is, "other games have tinkers", which only hurts you because that means blizzard knows that tinkers exist and haven't added them because they're unwanted and basically a really stupid idea for a class.

I know it's hard for you to admit being wrong which is why you'll keep dancing around it. I mean obviously, from my position its a really sad look for you, but hey, you think it's working so keep at it, kiddo! The "Hey guys I'm a tinker in real life. You can't prove me wrong because you don't have the dataa lol!" logic at its finest!

Tinkerer is exactly as logical as an archeologist class or any other stupid profession class. It's just that you don't agree because you don't want archeologist to be a class.

I'm pretty sure people wanted demon hunters way more then monks and yet we got monks 2 expansions before dh...it means jack shit, they implement class when it fits theme they are going for.

[Deleted]

If more people wanted tinkers than demon hunters, why aren't they a class yet? Yea that's what I thought. Your only argument is, "other games have tinkers", which only hurts you because that means blizzard knows that tinkers exist and haven't added them because they're unwanted and basically a really stupid idea for a class.

I know it's hard for you to admit being wrong which is why you'll keep dancing around it. I mean obviously, from my position its a really sad look for you, but hey, you think it's working so keep at it, kiddo! The "Hey guys I'm a tinker in real life. You can't prove me wrong because you don't have the dataa lol!" logic at its finest!

Tinkerer is exactly as logical as an archeologist class or any other stupid profession class. It's just that you don't agree because you don't want archeologist to be a class.

He hasn't said 'more' once, yet you are fixed on that singular point.

[LiiLoSNK]

Again, I've never said that more people want this or that. That's YOUR mental gymnastics at work.

And no, haha, Archeologist is not as likely as the Tinkerer. Has nothing to do with me not wanting it, since as I said, I'd be entirely open to the concept.

You implied it and instantly defended it by saying "there's no numbers to prove tinkers aren't more wanted than demon hunters". You don't need numbers when you have tons of other evidence telling you what is more popular.

Someone probably brought up the idea of tinker in one of blizzards meetings 12 years ago during design, and they were like "no, that's really retarded. they can be a profession at best", and that's how engineers were born.

[Kolvarg]

Bandages are not the same thing as holy light, druid nature voodoo, or other healing types. Your argument instantly falls flat on this point.

Engineering however is literally the exact thing a tinker would be except with cooldowns and damage adjustments. Shoot a rocket, shoot a lazer, make mechanical pets/turrets, etc.

And yes the demonology spec changes made warlocks more about controlling demons, but that doesn't mean locks aren't/weren't able to turn into demons themselves

They heal, therefore they are the same!
Well then we need to remove either Holy Paladin or Holy priest, cause they're both just about holy light. ANd merge arms and fury into the same spec because they're both just about hitting your enemies with big weapons.


Being able to put out mechanical pets/turrets, shooting rockets or shooting lazers are nothing like actually using those abilities actively in combat.
A profession that allows you to do neat visual stuff and some very occasional and almost meaningless stuff in combat != A class that uses also tech-related stuff in an active rotation of tech-related abilities + a toolkit of tech-related utilities to deal with enemies with combat.

It's like saying hunters don't need to have combat pets because they already have companion pets.

[LiiLoSNK]

I'm pretty sure people wanted demon hunters way more then monks and yet we got monks 2 expansions before dh...it means jack shit, they implement class when it fits theme they are going for.

They already had demon hunters in the works and had to fine-tune the new lore. Demon Hunters have been in concept way longer than monks.

[Desparil]

They already had demon hunters in the works and had to fine-tune the new lore. Demon Hunters have been in concept way longer than monks.

It could be same for tinkers, they would fit nicely if we get expansion with south seas where we get kezan and gnomerang they wouldnt even have to tune lore for them.

[LiiLoSNK]

They heal, therefore they are the same!
Well then we need to remove either Holy Paladin or Holy priest, cause they're both just about holy light. ANd merge arms and fury into the same spec because they're both just about hitting your enemies with big weapons.


Being able to put out mechanical pets/turrets, shooting rockets or shooting lazers are nothing like actually using those abilities actively in combat.
A profession that allows you to do neat visual stuff and some very occasional and almost meaningless stuff in combat != A class that uses also tech-related stuff in an active rotation of tech-related abilities + a toolkit of tech-related utilities to deal with enemies with combat.

It's like saying hunters don't need to have combat pets because they already have companion pets.

The healing isn't the same at all. There's actual differences based on which class is doing the healing.

Engineers and tinkers however are doing the same things. Engineers make rockets/lazers that do damage. Tinkers Make rockets/lazers that do damage. Why not make a class that's actually original in the sense that it's not a glorified profession?