Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ...
2
3
4
5
LastLast
  1. #61
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by NoobistTV-Metro View Post
    Wont be another one for 2 expansions. That's how it goes, in case you can't tell!
    2 expansions. Thats cute. Fighting who exactly?

  2. #62
    So many classes, I don't even have time to level them all. The only 'possible' one I can see that would come are Tinkers, but I'd rather not. 4th Spec is just too much as well. Druids have 4th specialization because they decided to split Feral into two specialization. I think Unholy DKs should've been a Necromancer spec, with range spells instead of melee.

    Off-topic: In my opinion, Shadow Priest should not exist. After playing a Priest, every NPCs assumes that I am the light wielder even if I'm specialized in shadow. Like in Class Halls where the NPCs says "May the light be with you". Or, how they forced Zabra Hexx as a Shadow Priest even though he was a worshiper of the light. I think they should have made a Holy-type DPS Priest, and made Affliction Warlocks more Twilight-themed due to the lore about Shinfel Blightsworn taking knowledge from the Twilight's Hammer after the Cataclysm, and how she has experienced the powers of corruption during the fight with Cho'gall in Bastion Twilight.

  3. #63
    Quote Originally Posted by Titmeister View Post
    2 expansions. Thats cute. Fighting who exactly?
    Doesn't matter. There's way way more than 2 more coming.

    And holy shit no we don't need any more classes. They can't even make the ones we have unique enough.

  4. #64
    Artifacts and whatnots do not preclude new classes in any way. This very expansion Blizz added a new spec, changed how most worked and even switched a Hunter spec from ranged to melee. That pretty much shows that they can do whatever they feel like regardless of the game's status quo.
    I think there is always room for new classes/specs AS LONG AS THEY ARE DIFFERENT FROM WHAT WE ALREADY HAVE.
    Didn't play much of DH but for what I seen they are fairly interesting, huge focus on mobility and heavy AoE(I know jack about DH tanks)

    Now, things that I would personally enjoy on that subject:

    A third DH spec. It reeeaally bothers me that they have only 2. They could have a caster spec or, even better, a physical ranged spec. We have only 2 of those now.

    Fourth specs for some classes - wouldn't have to be all of them, Druids are the only ones with 4 and the world did not explode.
    Shamans could have a tank spec. Hell, they had a taunt for a long time, and we don't have any mail tanks. A ranged Rogue might be interesting too. I've seen people asking for Mage tanking(Spellbreakers) and Mage healing(something to do with time). There is probably a lot of room to get creative, but again, only as long as it is different from most other specs.(Let's say, a Rogue spec that is mostly ranged but jumps from melee to range with tons of mobility, with its best atribute being its ability to handle multiple high hp targets, shining on, let's say, Eye, Cenarius and Xavius)

    For a new class I'm on the Tinker boat. I do not believe engeneering precludes a tech based class in the same way Enchanting does not preclude mages.
    Also, a mail wearing pure dps class with some physical range would be very nice.

    It could go something like this -
    Angility ranged spec based on hard hitting shots while using gadgets such as different granades, jetpacks, missiles and whatnot.
    Intellect ranged spec focused on technomancy summoning golems and turrets instead of attacking directly.
    Strenght spec that could use a shredder like mech as a cooldown.

    Of course, all of the issues raised on this tread are mostly valid. New classes create balancing issues and make other classes overall less unique. But they also freshen up the game and shake the status quo a little. I wouldn't mind seeing some additions in the future.

    But seriously, why do DH only have 2 specs? 3rd one could be anything. Could be a freaking healer that has healthglaives, who cares.

  5. #65
    I believe that Blizz is devoting less resources to the current game, and after the year ends the game will be more or less on autopilot for all the attention they'll give it. It's like they dumped 7.1 and left it...with only a few people on call for tweaks.
    A new class demands original work, something that I don't think Blizz is interested in doing anymore.

  6. #66
    This feels like a thread that was intended to start the Tinkerer discussion again.

    The entire section of your post about specs was the same length as the section about Tinkerers.

  7. #67
    Mechagnome Maletalana's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Molten Core, BRM
    Posts
    694
    Quote Originally Posted by skannerz22 View Post
    next new class is necromancer
    it's the only class relating to lore still unmade which has a lot of popularity
    I see this a lot, but still, can you really differentiate between unholy Dk and a necro? Sure melee v ranged, but beyond that does the class identity not revolve around summoning undead minions and using shadow magic? There would have to be a much more substantial threshold between the 2 specs/classes for them to take hold.

  8. #68
    Quote Originally Posted by Joakim View Post
    When did we get a ranged dps, tho? Thats like really stupid, tbh. DK, melee, monk, melee, DH, melee.
    lets see... we've had plate, leather, leather... so assuming next class will be clothie or mail user, its probably a ranged dps.

  9. #69
    Deleted
    I dunno, after seeing the ammount of work that went into Hearthstones Gadgetzan remake, and how Hearthstone released a karazhan themed pack before wow did....


    I think that a reworked Gadgetzan along with a south seas/old god themed- all be it abit more lighthearted xpac after all the doom and gloom.

    Think like mists, starts off very jolly and adventurous, just a new part of the world to explore. But as patches come along, we realise that sealing the tomb of sargeras... something else got loose. Or something like that...

    Anyhow, WoWs tech has come much further along than it were, and I can def see the tinkerer fit such a setting, with races being draenei, blood elf, goblin and gnome and with specs for gnomish, goblin and crystalforge engineering(aka outland and draenei crap).

  10. #70
    Mechagnome Maletalana's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Molten Core, BRM
    Posts
    694
    Quote Originally Posted by Thalerin View Post
    Combat rogue used very much feel like a berserker.
    See the issue here then is that, unfortunately, the berserker feeling that you remember got taken from rogues and given to fury warriors, who felt similar to them since the beginning.

    Combat and Fury both felt like berserkers, the ONLY difference being leather v plate.

    Blizz made the decision to give "berserker" feel to the fury warrior, and then created pirate spec for rogues.

    If you were in the crowd that loved combat, you need to reroll fury war or learn pirate rogue.

    Sure, that sucks, but Blizz has to make decisions sometimes, and sometimes they are counter to your opinions.

    I would rather Blizz keep making radical decisions and changing things up, rather than stick to the same thing and never implement for years.

  11. #71
    Quote Originally Posted by Fang7986 View Post
    I would rather see sub-races for each race like Broken Draenai, Brown Orcs, Dark Iron Dwarves, etc and/or a new spec for each class, than a new class.
    good joke.

  12. #72
    Quote Originally Posted by Solarnova View Post
    Way too many classes already, and Blizz is running out of colors to use.
    Quite the contrary. More classes should be the next logical thing to add, there are so many good rpg classes that arent in the game. As for colours, its not an issue whatsoever.

  13. #73
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Thalerin View Post
    With artifacts, class mounts, order halls, class quests being so prevalent now, does that mean we will never see new classes, or even specs?
    That would be funny. So far the trends have been quite different from this.
    Quote Originally Posted by Thalerin View Post
    I mean, there are so many things I still want to see, with speccs and classes. for example-

    Speccs:
    DK: Cloth wearing necromancer / lich specc
    Like the new necro in Heart of Thorns? I suspect blizzdevs might know about cloth death knight in Heart of Thorns.

    Quote Originally Posted by Thalerin View Post
    Rogue: Barbarian / Brute / berserker, very much like combat rogue used to be, throwing axes, light leather armor with big axes or fist weps
    You're talking about fury warriors. They're in the game already. If rogue class lacks a spec, it's a dual-pistol-wielding one. Ain't gonna happen.

    Quote Originally Posted by Thalerin View Post
    Mage : Spellsword, melee mage unlocks shields and stuff can tank
    As long as gameplay is different enough from DK.

    Quote Originally Posted by Thalerin View Post
    Paladin, Dark paladin, uses shadowmagic like a shadow priest to empower them, melee debuffer suffering strike weakness bla bla bla.
    Last time I checked, paladins in WoW were defined by their complete devotion to the Light. Whether they healed or dpsed or tanked, it was all about light.

    Quote Originally Posted by Thalerin View Post
    And for classes:
    Tinkerer, mail users, uses mechs, specs like alchemy that heals by spraying potions around and buffs, ranged dps with guns and throwing bombs and tank, give them a good mech suit like Gelbin, make the class only for goblins and gnomes.
    No.

  14. #74
    Engineering is a fun profession but basically making it into a spec I have no interest in.

    If there is to be another basic class I'd rather see a fleshed out gun/bow class that doesn't use pets.

  15. #75

  16. #76
    I'm more concerned with order halls and our class stories in the future.

    I mean everyone has basically been promoted to the leader of a faction. Death Knights especially are now Death Lords, working with the new lich king and commanding an army of death knights and undead, they revived and command a new edition of the four horsemen, and so on.

    Blizzard will either have to keep expanding on and continuing the order hall business forever or we simply sweep it all under the rug like it never happened and we're left going "Oh hey, you remember that one time I was commander of all the death knights and then... you know... suddenly i wasnt anymore?"

    I'm genuinely curious what will happen. Makes no sense to suddenly stop using our armies that we command in the future but blizzard has sucked at storytelling for a long time so who knows.

    Same goes for our artifact weapons though. We have the best of the best weapons we can possibly get. Maybe a lot of them were coughed up on the spot but weapons made from the shards of frostmourne, the ashbringer, the scythe of elune... I mean these are badass artifacts and you would realistically never replace them. So I wonder how that translates to the next expansion as well.

    I can't imagine we just "decide" to stop using the best weapons in the world.
    I like ponies and I really don't care what you have to say about that.

  17. #77
    I prefer subraces over new classes tbh or atleast new races. Sitting here waiting for Ogres and Vrykul to be playable.

    But I think they would add a 4th spec for other classes (I mean Druid got Guardian so, and Warrior in wod got Gladiator Stance)

  18. #78
    My guess is that Khadgar uses them to close the portal in ToS during the next expansions starting quest chain.

  19. #79
    Quote Originally Posted by egeszsegere View Post
    brute/barbarian/berserker rogue? no! those are more warriorish. rogues fight with finesse, warriors are all about brute force combat.
    agree, any future rogue should be ranged. dual pistol wielding / little crossbows like the demon hunter in diablo. its been discussed here before, but it could be the first mid range spec, with a minimum and maximum range...so like must be 10 yards away but not further than 20 yards. could be kewl
    No sense crying over spilt beer, unless you're drunk...

  20. #80
    Quote Originally Posted by FelPlague View Post
    umm no... the necromancer is in the game its called a warlock, and a unholy dk
    most likley the next would be a tinkerer, as they are quite abit in te lore
    warlock's aren't necromancer's though, not even close, and before you say "oh but demo is already a swarm spec" have you seen shadow priest and aff lock throughout the years? There's precedent for them having 2 specs be superficially similar while being different when you get into the specifics of how they play, so having demo and a necromancer with a swarm oriented spec would be fine. On top of that, unholy DK's aren't necromancer's either and they're melee which is already a huge gameplay difference that they can utilize in order to differentiate the classes.

    Besides all of that, they have a plot thread for the LK with Bolvar and revisiting all of that gives us a perfect tie in for necromancer; whereas, there's not really any huge lore tie ins that they can use as a springboard for introducing tinkerers as a class. I mean think about it, they'd have to introduce some major lore developments involving Gnomeregan and Kezan to make adding tinkerer's be relevant while we have been seeing progressively more activity regarding Bolvar and the scourge for the past 2 expansions which might be their way of bringing that back to the front of player's heads so that it doesn't seem out of nowhere, meanwhile there's been no such developments with anything related to tinkerers in the story aside from Mechatorque getting a model update and a mech suit.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by WintersLegion View Post
    I see Warlock and Necromancer as being different enough you could have both, but if they added Necromancers now Unholy DK's would lose their class fantasy.
    How does having a necromancer remove Unholy DK's class fantasy? I mean, does having holy priest remove holy pally's class fantasy? I mean, logically speaking a holy pally is just a holy priest that lifts and wears plate, so what's wrong with an unholy dk pretty much being a necromancer that lifts and wears plate? We only need 1 of 2 things in order to differentiate classes, either a difference in fantasy (afflock and spriest) where the lore surrounding them is different even though the gameplay is remarkably similar, or a difference in gameplay (holy priest and holy pally) who despite having very similar class fantasies and lorewise being almost the same thing, have very different gameplay styles thus allowing us to differentiate between them.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by FelPlague View Post
    and how is a necromancer differant from a warlock (other then the undead bit cause that comes from unholy dk)
    shadows and afflictions... sounds warlock, soul magic and fire magic.... sounds like warlocks...
    There's things that they can play around with on necromancer that don't make sense on a lock. For example, necromancers could have a lich form that activates upon death that acts like a holy priests guardian spirit, but for the sake of damage rather than healing. Necromancers could rely on a builder system where they summon lesser undead and frankenstein them together into greater undead (like aboms, plague hounds, and flesh golems which are just piles of corpses stitched together and animated) which would differentiate it from the current demonology playstyle. Besides that, Ion himself has stated that they were more going for a witch doctor feel for the demo warlock where the demon's stick around for a while rather than an expendable swarm spec, so we could see them change demo to have a more static number of units that you manage which would open up some space for another swarm spec. On top of that, you can say all you want about how the undead bit comes from unholy dk, but until they actually put them together then it's not in the game because you can't play an unholy dk warlock combo as of yet. This is like saying that pallies were completely unnecessary because we already had priests and warriors, so there was no reason to put in a priestly warrior.

    Also, why would a necromancer use fire magic? Isn't that typically what is used against undead with the whole burn the corpse thing and "cleansing fire"? Besides that, shadows and afflictions sounds warlock, huh? I mean for afflictions fine, but destro barely even uses those and demo only really uses shadows. And what about shadow priest? Sounds pretty shadow priest too, but wait blizz wouldn't want to add in a class that is at all similar to something else, right?

    The point is that there's more than enough room to differentiate a necromancer from any other class in the game by either having a difference in class fantasy (in regard to warlock) or gameplay (in regard to dk) and that the specific combination of class fantasy and gameplay is appealing to quite a few people out there so as to make it that people would prefer it over others like how there are shadow priests who would never touch affliction despite the similarities and vice versa. As someone who has mained both a dk and a warlock in raids, I would love necromancer because it gives me the best of both worlds as far as both of them go and if it doesn't majorly suck, I'd swap mains over to it in a heartbeat.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Vargulf View Post
    agree, any future rogue should be ranged. dual pistol wielding / little crossbows like the demon hunter in diablo. its been discussed here before, but it could be the first mid range spec, with a minimum and maximum range...so like must be 10 yards away but not further than 20 yards. could be kewl
    hunters had something like that and they got rid of it because it wasn't really that cool :/

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •