View Poll Results: What do you think?

Voters
758. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yeah, it makes sense.

    408 53.83%
  • Nah, it has to be a New Class!

    86 11.35%
  • Nah, it'll just be one or the other.

    141 18.60%
  • Nothing will be added in the next expansion.

    123 16.23%
Page 15 of 24 FirstFirst ...
5
13
14
15
16
17
... LastLast
  1. #281
    Free Food!?!?! Tziva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    WHEREVER I WANT AINT NO ONE GONNA DO NOTHIN ABOUT IT IMMA T-REX
    Posts
    10,298
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    I think the massive Demon Hunter thread has forced me to disagree with this belief. For starters, you'd have to develop this new class from scratch. You would have to make sure it fills a niche that is absent or underrepresented. Then you have to create the necessary lore functions for this class to be in the game. Once you have that in place, you need to develop class flavor and uniqueness. That requires new abilities, new talents, and completely new animations. Then you need to 3 distinct specs that again cannot overlap significantly with other classes.

    Certainly the numbers are higher with 4th specs, but 4th spec depth is a lot lower. Not to mention it boosts the current classes in the game.
    You're only comparing initial development time here, though. While I agree developing a new class from the ground-up probably requires more development time, adding fourth specs for everyone is a huge long-term increase in what needs to be invested in class balance and general maintenance. Already balancing is such an enormous task because (a) it's a constantly ongoing process that needs tweaked every patch (b) it's extremely finicky; a small number change in one place can have big consequences elsewhere - nevermind the idea of entire new abilities and their impact. Adding a fourth spec to every existing class would be an epic clusterfuck as far as PvP but even a daunting task just for PvE tuning, and the time devotion to it would be a perpetual process long after the expansion adding them was released.

    Like I said, I really like the idea, so if they think they're up to the task, I'm all for it. I just don't think it's realistic from a development time/resource situation and that we're more likely to get one new class, or none at all.
    AbathurSnuggles: Blizzard Alpha Videos

    For Moderation Concerns, please contact a Global:
    TzivaDarsithisRaduxArleeSimcaElysiaZaelsino

  2. #282
    You're grossly underestimating the changes in the Demonology spec. Metamorphosis alone was a massive change from what it was in Cataclysm. It was already a burst CD in Cataclysm. In MoP its almost like a Druid form, with a lot more abilities. It also revolved around a resource system. There is also Imp Swarm, the shadowbolt changes, and the change to Hand of Gul'dan. And of course there's Dark Apotheosis.

    Demonology is nothing like what it was in Cataclysm.
    Warlock is the only class I have 2 of. One I leveled from 85 to 90 as destro, the other one as demo. I played all 3 specs before in Cata (I've played every class and almost every spec in Cata at end level). I also know the vast problems the warlock class experienced during the entire expansion of Cataclysm. I read that entire document, some parts more than once. One of the reasons was I was considering rerolling to warlock in end of Cata. I know exactly how important Metamorphosis is, its history, it is a signature spell of the spec. It wouldn't be an easy task to replace it, but that doesn't mean it is impossibru. You could, for example, rename it.

    I think most Warlock players would jump for joy if they received a Demon Hunter spec. I can't imagine them being too upset about it, especially if it tanks, is melee or psuedo-melee.
    Irrelevant, I'd like to ask them if they'd prefer such a 4th spec in the context of a class design (see my above URL). If you were to develop 10 specs, except for druid, well those people playing those classes would possibly enjoy them, but that doesn't mean the WoW player base wouldn't enjoy class and spec balance, or a 12th class.

    I never said any different. I was talking about flavor vs. niche and how they aren't the same thing.
    My understanding was you were just assigning 2 words which mean the same to two aspects one of which you support, one of which you don't. That by itself doesn't support or refute any argument though.

    I looked up the words in dictionary. A niche is a specialisation. Now, what exactly does flavor mean in your dictionary because I think we're using different dictionaries here. As far as I'm concerned it boils down to same in context of class and spec design.

    Case in point: there are 3 energy-based classes and 5 energy-based specs. Feral druid, windwalker monk, and rogue (assassination, combat, subtlety). You can call these "energy flavors" or "energy specialisation" or "energy niches" it all means the same. But lord, wait, there's this thing called class specialisation. Yeah of course there is but that's a different context!

    The only overlap between those classes is that they all use magic. Since its established that there are different types of magic out there, it stands to reason that there would be different types of casters. Its pretty ridiculous to believe that anyone would consider a Mage who utilizes Arcane magic, fire magic, and ice magic is overlapping heavily with a Shaman who is using Elemental magic, totems, and restorative magic. Further I don't anyone would imagine much overlap between those two casters and Druids who use nature magic from Plants, animals, and the stars.
    Because the classes are well defined with their own lore / background, and have unique abilities. If you were to make a DH a hunter clone, then yeah its pointless. If a warlock was a mage clone, pointless. But that isn't what proponents of the demon hunter class propose or support, that is how you describe it; your straw man.

    Which means it boils down to your matter of perspective and taste and all that subjective riddle.

    Given we got 2 classes who use mail (unique) and 1 class which uses guns/(x)bows, it makes sense to include a class which uses these. Whether the class is a demon hunter, a ranger, a tinker, or what not is something entirely different.

    Yeah, a resource being used by different classes isn't really the same thing.
    Not for you apparently...

    Its the abilities and a class' niche in the game that causes overlap
    No, that is the overlap you care about. The one you put value on. There's a lot more overlap, "but those not really the same" really, not the same.

    As for Warlocks, several spells were re-used. They just were used in different ways. For example, Metamorphosis was changed significantly, as was Shadowbolt. Hand of Gul'Dan was changed completely, talent concepts were expanded, Blizzard gave the Warlocks new ways to interact with their pets, etc. Blizzard didn't reinvent the wheel with the new Lock specs, they just updated it using the previous themes and making them more distinct from each other. IMO they were very successful at that, and the rising Warlock population is proof of that.

    The point is; Its far easier to expand on an theme than it is to create a brand new one.
    LOL they overhauled an existing spec indeed which is exactly what I argue for (fixing current specs, redefining them). You are the one suggesting new specs. If they had to add a fourth spec as well the quality of the overhaul would be much less, if not complete horseshit afterthought (ie. shadow priest) and class balance in every tier would be even more difficult than it already is.

    The only difficult part is the base which is made at the start of the expansion because it defines if the class is possible at all (can you get that in your head?), and then finding, designing, and reiterating the niche for the 3 specs. Without that no new class. The balance and such is far less work, and every new tier it is less work with 37 specs than with 44. Not because 44 - 37 = 7, because complexity is exponential.

    Sometimes, an old class must adapt to a new class. Warriors and paladins sharing loot with DK, for example. Or death coil being renamed to mortal coil. Or holy paladins no longer standing in melee range because monks reside there now. Or hunters sharing weapons with a new range.
    "When i am done with you, you won't trust your own mind."

  3. #283
    Elemental Lord Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    8,454
    Quote Originally Posted by Tziva View Post
    You're only comparing initial development time here, though. While I agree developing a new class from the ground-up probably requires more development time, adding fourth specs for everyone is a huge long-term increase in what needs to be invested in class balance and general maintenance. Already balancing is such an enormous task because (a) it's a constantly ongoing process that needs tweaked every patch (b) it's extremely finicky; a small number change in one place can have big consequences elsewhere - nevermind the idea of entire new abilities and their impact. Adding a fourth spec to every existing class would be an epic clusterfuck as far as PvP but even a daunting task just for PvE tuning, and the time devotion to it would be a perpetual process long after the expansion adding them was released.

    Like I said, I really like the idea, so if they think they're up to the task, I'm all for it. I just don't think it's realistic from a development time/resource situation and that we're more likely to get one new class, or none at all.
    Very valid points. Given what you've said here, what do you think Blizzard will do for the next expansion?

    Every expansion they bring in a new race or class. Last time they did both (sorta), so do you think Blizzard is going to do for expansion 5 which also just so happens to fall on WoWs 10th anniversary?

    We know it's gotta be big, that's for sure.

  4. #284
    Every expansion more race + class combos were possible.

    In TBC they added 2 new race, no new class.

    In WotLK they added a new class, no new race.

    In Cata they added a 2 new races, no new class.

    In MoP they added one new class, one new race for each faction. The zen middleground.

    Defining which new class and race(s) are coming in the next expansion is, as we established, closely tied to what the theme of the next expansion is going to be.

    As for 10 years, that doesn't mean it has to be something big or in the size you imply. Makes sense, yes, but doesn't rule out something less bombarding.

    Nor even game related. Imagine the Warcraft movie, for example.
    Last edited by lolalola; 2013-01-31 at 02:17 AM.
    "When i am done with you, you won't trust your own mind."

  5. #285
    Free Food!?!?! Tziva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    WHEREVER I WANT AINT NO ONE GONNA DO NOTHIN ABOUT IT IMMA T-REX
    Posts
    10,298
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Very valid points. Given what you've said here, what do you think Blizzard will do for the next expansion?

    Every expansion they bring in a new race or class. Last time they did both (sorta), so do you think Blizzard is going to do for expansion 5 which also just so happens to fall on WoWs 10th anniversary?
    Honestly? If I had to guess, probably two new races and no class this time around. Can't say I'd mind if I was wrong, though. New classes are fun, and plus you don't get an extra slot to play through new races - you do for classes.

    I wouldn't expect anything special with regards to the expansion itself due to the anniversary, though. We'll probably get a pet or a fun item in the mail and maybe if we're lucky some sort of fanfare on the forums or in-game. Just little fun.
    AbathurSnuggles: Blizzard Alpha Videos

    For Moderation Concerns, please contact a Global:
    TzivaDarsithisRaduxArleeSimcaElysiaZaelsino

  6. #286
    Elemental Lord Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    8,454
    Quote Originally Posted by lolalola View Post
    Warlock is the only class I have 2 of. One I leveled from 85 to 90 as destro, the other one as demo. I played all 3 specs before in Cata (I've played every class and almost every spec in Cata at end level). I also know the vast problems the warlock class experienced during the entire expansion of Cataclysm. I read that entire document, some parts more than once. One of the reasons was I was considering rerolling to warlock in end of Cata. I know exactly how important Metamorphosis is, its history, it is a signature spell of the spec. It wouldn't be an easy task to replace it, but that doesn't mean it is impossibru. You could, for example, rename it.
    Are you arguing that Blizzard would copy Metamorphosis into a proposed DH spec? Let's please keep that discussion in the other thread.

    Irrelevant, I'd like to ask them if they'd prefer such a 4th spec in the context of a class design (see my above URL). If you were to develop 10 specs, except for druid, well those people playing those classes would possibly enjoy them, but that doesn't mean the WoW player base wouldn't enjoy class and spec balance, or a 12th class.
    I'm sure they would enjoy class and spec balance, but that isn't the selling the point for a new expansion. New races and new classes are. The only reason I'm doubting a new class is because we just got Monks, and their implementation has had some issues. A new class entering the mix could completely overshadow them, especially if its a hero class of some sort. A 4th spec wouldn't cause that problem.

    My understanding was you were just assigning 2 words which mean the same to two aspects one of which you support, one of which you don't. That by itself doesn't support or refute any argument though.

    I looked up the words in dictionary. A niche is a specialisation. Now, what exactly does flavor mean in your dictionary because I think we're using different dictionaries here. As far as I'm concerned it boils down to same in context of class and spec design.

    Case in point: there are 3 energy-based classes and 5 energy-based specs. Feral druid, windwalker monk, and rogue (assassination, combat, subtlety). You can call these "energy flavors" or "energy specialisation" or "energy niches" it all means the same. But lord, wait, there's this thing called class specialisation. Yeah of course there is but that's a different context!
    You need to look at the rest of the definition;

    Niche:
    2. a : a place, employment, status, or activity for which a person or thing is best fitted
    In other words, the Monk's place is WoW is the agile Martial Arts fighter common in numerous RP games.

    Flavor in this context is what makes the WoW version of Monk unique against other versions in other games. For example, you can instantly tell the difference between a WoW Monk and a Monk from Final Fantasy XI.


    Because the classes are well defined with their own lore / background, and have unique abilities. If you were to make a DH a hunter clone, then yeah its pointless. If a warlock was a mage clone, pointless. But that isn't what proponents of the demon hunter class propose or support, that is how you describe it; your straw man.

    That's MY straw man? Really?

    @Ghostcrawler You've said WoW cannot support an infinite number of classes.With DK and now Monks added will we ever see a Demon Hunter class
    [quote=Ghostcrawler: @Aulper7 Is there enough design space there not occupied by DK, warlock, hunter, warrior?[/quote]

    Must be a popular straw man.

    Not for you apparently...

    No, that is the overlap you care about. The one you put value on. There's a lot more overlap, "but those not really the same" really, not the same.
    Then please explain how a Paladin and a Mage overlap each other simply because they both use mana.


    The only difficult part is the base which is made at the start of the expansion because it defines if the class is possible at all (can you get that in your head?), and then finding, designing, and reiterating the niche for the 3 specs. Without that no new class. The balance and such is far less work, and every new tier it is less work with 37 specs than with 44. Not because 44 - 37 = 7, because complexity is exponential.
    I definitely agree that in long term, 4th spec would be tougher to manage than adding a new class and balancing from that point. However we are talking the difference of 2 additional classes, which I don't believe is a huge issue.

    ---------- Post added 2013-01-31 at 01:15 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Tziva View Post
    Honestly? If I had to guess, probably two new races and no class this time around. Can't say I'd mind if I was wrong, though. New classes are fun, and plus you don't get an extra slot to play through new races - you do for classes.

    I wouldn't expect anything special with regards to the expansion itself due to the anniversary, though. We'll probably get a pet or a fun item in the mail and maybe if we're lucky some sort of fanfare on the forums or in-game. Just little fun.
    And what 2 races would that be? I've heard some people say Ethereals or Ogres. I'm interested to hear your take.

  7. #287
    Stood in the Fire Kalium's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Somewhere and nowhere... all at once... though it's not important.
    Posts
    457
    What if the 4th spec was only unlocked once you leveled that character to 95?

  8. #288
    Id side more for rogues getting a refined ranged dps spec over a tank spec, but that's just my take on the deal

  9. #289
    I rather have Blizz properly balance the current amount of class/spec before adding any thing else. Nothing new, please....

  10. #290
    Elemental Lord Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    8,454
    Quote Originally Posted by Kalium View Post
    What if the 4th spec was only unlocked once you leveled that character to 95?
    Nah. Imagine leveling all the way up to 95 and then you suddenly get this entirely new spec and you have to relearn to play it? I think it should available from jump, that way people can get used to playing it.

  11. #291
    Bloodsail Admiral dryankem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    London, ON, Canada
    Posts
    1,226
    I'd love to see a forth spec on some of the classes (ranged rogue and shockadin would be awesome), but I highly doubt it.

    I'm guessing at 2 new races or possibly a 3rd (1 alliance, 1 horde and 1 neutral). The flavour could be Alliance and Horde add another ally in their struggles while a third race gets caught in the middle. The 2 races that join the alliance and horde can be from the various races currently available and the 3rd being something completely new as we enter a new dimension.

  12. #292
    Free Food!?!?! Tziva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    WHEREVER I WANT AINT NO ONE GONNA DO NOTHIN ABOUT IT IMMA T-REX
    Posts
    10,298
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    And what 2 races would that be? I've heard some people say Ethereals or Ogres. I'm interested to hear your take.
    I haven't the slightest clue. It depends on what the next expansion's theme is.

    I wouldn't be surprised to see ogres as a Horde race someday, but Ethereals seem more likely to be a neutral race if they become playable, and I don't see them implementing one faction-specific race and one neutral race. Granted, I know very little about WoW's lore because I don't read the books, but Ethereals also don't seem to have big enough numbers or background story to suddenly turn them into an entire new faction. And I think it's more likely that if they are going to write a bunch of new foundational lore for a new race that they'd do it more like the Draenei and Pandaren with something totally new rather than suddenly add a bunch for guys we've seen for awhile but don't really have a story for.

    But I really haven't a clue.

    I'm primarily guessing new on races just because they just added a new class, and likely due to the time/resource involvement of implementing those, Blizzard seems to like to alternate expansions where we get those.

    But I think there will be some kind of new player characters, and races seem a lot easier to add. Sure, they probably require a lot of frontloaded development time doing the models and animations and designing their starting zone, but once you're done there is no ongoing maintenance like with a new class.

    But that's all completely conjecture.
    AbathurSnuggles: Blizzard Alpha Videos

    For Moderation Concerns, please contact a Global:
    TzivaDarsithisRaduxArleeSimcaElysiaZaelsino

  13. #293
    The Patient
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    214
    I'd rather see them just remove class restrictions entirely and work on updating play models and re-working classes to fit with the different races. i.e new druid forms, etc. Doubt they will add any new classes in the next expansion; especially since they just released the monk class.

  14. #294
    Well, they have already said they are working on new models for all the races, so that's going to happen eventually or gradually over time, regardless of new races/classes/specs.

    On point, adding specs is less work than adding a class. The majority of the animations are already in the game as specs tend to share half to 3/4ths of abilities with the other specs. I don't know if adding 10 specs is less work than adding 1 class or not. From an art perspective, it's probably about the same, but it's a lot more work from a design and balance perspective.

    On top of that, Blizzard has proven that they want any additions to the game to fit the theme of the expansion. They may eventually add a 4th spec to every class, but I don't see them doing it all at once.

    If they were going to go the 4th spec route, if the next expansion indeed is a Burning Legion expansion, I see Demon Hunter Lock 4th spec, and probably Shockadins and Inquisitors (Holy specs to counter demons).

  15. #295
    Herald of the Titans Wishblade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Here, There and Everywhere
    Posts
    2,610
    Seeing new models for Vanilla/BC races are on their way I doubt we'll see a new race. With all the work put into the current races new models I doubt they'd work on another race too, but that's just me.

    Plus, if they added a new race they'd have to give it some nice lore and all, and I feel they still need to give the current races some love as it is. Draenei and Worgen I haven't seen much activity from in any major fashion, 'cept a bit of Draenei in BC. Blood Elves are getting some love in 5.1 and 5.2 and had a role in BC, and goblins at least are around to blow shit up constantly, but nothing major either I feel.

    And we've yet to see Pandaren activity in either faction, but I suppose we've got enough Pandaren activity because of Pandaria. So in a new expansion I'd hope we'd see some Pandaren in our faction's forces, or at least have Ji and Aysa be active in some way.

    Class-wise I'd say they'd rather make a new class rather than 10 new specs for the existing classes. That's 3,3 "classes". So if anything I'd say a new class might makes it's appearance, but I sure wouldn't mind if we just got new expansion'y stuff and kept focus on the current races and only had to keep balancing the current classes.

    So I'm thinking no new races or classes or specs. Just more love to the ones we already have.
    "Reminds me of a dog, you stare at it while it's playing outside... Running around in a circle, then stopping up, wagging with a wide "grin". Jumping around until you call for the dog, then it lowers its tail because it think it's done something bad... And then you throw the ball, seeing the tail go straight into the air in bliss! ^^" - Gehco
    Wishblade of Draenor EU

  16. #296
    Elemental Lord Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    8,454
    Quote Originally Posted by Wishblade View Post
    So I'm thinking no new races or classes or specs. Just more love to the ones we already have.
    Well considering the current state of the game, Blizzard may need to do something dramatic like a 4th spec to keep up interest.

  17. #297
    I say screw it, return to the original tree formula, copy Rift's tree+root design (more points in one spec, more powerful abilities for that spec), and return to us a sense of creativity, control, and customization. I don't care if 50% of my talent points *seemed* to be mandatory, the fun in creating new specs was trying to decide which supposed *mandatory* talents you could live without to get those cool talents in a different tree. Talents now are not cutting it, glyphs do jack and are equally uninteresting and unimportant. It really feels like you pick up your carbon copy-factory line character from walmart and you're ready to go. Not fun.

  18. #298
    as a dk i would personally LOVE the necromancer idea that this person put up however they wont add a 4th spec to anyone outside of druids because as they claimed a while ago...druids are the only "real" hybrid class. Granted that was before the homogenization they have done.

    edit: actually i think making unholy that necromancer spec would be a good idea going into next expansion. IMO would make sense
    Last edited by valliant13; 2013-02-01 at 12:33 AM.

  19. #299
    Elemental Lord Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    8,454
    Quote Originally Posted by Absintheminded View Post
    I say screw it, return to the original tree formula, copy Rift's tree+root design (more points in one spec, more powerful abilities for that spec), and return to us a sense of creativity, control, and customization. I don't care if 50% of my talent points *seemed* to be mandatory, the fun in creating new specs was trying to decide which supposed *mandatory* talents you could live without to get those cool talents in a different tree. Talents now are not cutting it, glyphs do jack and are equally uninteresting and unimportant. It really feels like you pick up your carbon copy-factory line character from walmart and you're ready to go. Not fun.
    I will agree that the glyphs are pretty lackluster in this expansion, the Talents are awesome. WAY better than the talents in Cataclysm. You actually have real choice this go-around.

    I know people created weird specs and stuff, but the talent system gives you a lot more customization than the old system did.

    ---------- Post added 2013-02-01 at 12:55 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by valliant13 View Post
    as a dk i would personally LOVE the necromancer idea that this person put up however they wont add a 4th spec to anyone outside of druids because as they claimed a while ago...druids are the only "real" hybrid class. Granted that was before the homogenization they have done.

    edit: actually i think making unholy that necromancer spec would be a good idea going into next expansion. IMO would make sense
    I really think Shaman and Warlocks have a pretty good case for a 4th spec.

  20. #300
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Well considering the current state of the game, Blizzard may need to do something dramatic like a 4th spec to keep up interest.
    Really nice someone posts 4 arguments and a conclusion. Your reply: ignore the 4 arguments, quote the conclusion basically saying "I'm right" which is ridiculous considering one of the arguments GP used was

    Class-wise I'd say they'd rather make a new class rather than 10 new specs
    Which totally addresses your reply to the conclusion!

    Given your robot mode to posts like this I can only conclude you are not here to discuss your theory in an objective manner. You're here because you have an agenda, are biased, and you only hear what you want to hear and read what you want to read.
    "When i am done with you, you won't trust your own mind."

Posting Permissions

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