Thread: Tinker Class

Page 4 of 64 FirstFirst ...
2
3
4
5
6
14
54
... LastLast
  1. #61
    Pit Lord SourceOfInfection's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    In an expensive beach front condo I don't deserve.
    Posts
    2,442
    All I know is if there is a tinker class, the tank spec at the very least needs to involve shredders and spider tank suits to use.

    and the theme song will be

    Quote Originally Posted by Daralii View Post
    Her head is so far up her own asshole that I'm surprised she's not on the list of people she's fucked.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tradewind View Post
    Yes, it was Cummy. Cummy Fluffington.

  2. #62
    Quote Originally Posted by SourceOfInfection View Post
    All I know is if there is a tinker class, the tank spec at the very least needs to involve shredders and spider tank suits to use.
    Anyone can use Spider Tanks, you use them before Mimiron in Ulduar. Wouldn't make sense to give them to a class.

  3. #63
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    I would say that the things I posted are helpful in forming a conclusion or a judgment. Wouldn't you agree?

    For example, we have evidence that Blizzard has used WC3 hero units as inspiration for the expansion classes (Brewmaster and Death Knight). Thus, my conclusion would be that based on that evidence, Blizzard will continue that practice. Which WC3 hero is left to be an inspiration for a class?

    The Goblin Tinker.

    See how easy that was?
    .... I don't know how you comes to that consclusion... The evidence is Blizzard always making a class base on WC3 and there are a lot of WC3's heroes left. Evidence is something you use to prove "fact". Blizz also has never stated that they will follow this pattern. They broke all kinds of pattern before. What you are doing is speculating not proving.

  4. #64
    Quote Originally Posted by Jessicka View Post
    Anyone can use Spider Tanks, you use them before Mimiron in Ulduar. Wouldn't make sense to give them to a class.
    Can you take the tanks before Mimiron out of Ulduar? Use them to fight a boss? No? Didn't think so.

    Oh wait, any class can use totems! They'd better get right on taking totem spells away from shamans, seems like a major oversight to me.

  5. #65
    Elemental Lord Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    8,664
    Quote Originally Posted by Wildmoon View Post
    .... I don't know how you comes to that consclusion... The evidence is Blizzard always making a class base on WC3 and there are a lot of WC3's heroes left. Evidence is something you use to prove "fact". Blizz also has never stated that they will follow this pattern. They broke all kinds of pattern before. What you are doing is speculating not proving.
    Didn't you read my first post in this thread? Every other WC3 hero already has their abilities tied in with WoW classes. The only two that don't are the Goblin Tinker and the Goblin Alchemist. So no, there are only two WC3 heroes left. Both are goblin, and both are heavily technology based.

    The last two hero units that were in a similar situation were the Death Knight, and the Pandaren Brewmaster. It stands to reason that Blizzard will continue pulling from the same source it pulled its previous two expansion classes from.

    Keep in mind, you just wanted evidence, not confirmation. The fact of the matter is that there's plenty of evidence that the next class will be the Tinker. Saying that there is no evidence is a bold-faced lie.

  6. #66
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Didn't you read my first post in this thread? Every other WC3 hero already has their abilities tied in with WoW classes. The only two that don't are the Goblin Tinker and the Goblin Alchemist. So no, there are only two WC3 heroes left. Both are goblin, and both are heavily technology based.

    The last two hero units that were in a similar situation were the Death Knight, and the Pandaren Brewmaster. It stands to reason that Blizzard will continue pulling from the same source it pulled its previous two expansion classes from.

    Keep in mind, you just wanted evidence, not confirmation. The fact of the matter is that there's plenty of evidence that the next class will be the Tinker. Saying that there is no evidence is a bold-faced lie.
    I did and it didn't prove anything. Blizzard could always come up with something new and only use the theme. I am not denying the possibility of tinker here but I am pointing out that you have no evidence that Tinker is going to be the next class and you are not proving it. You are SPECULATING it base on WoW's history of development.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Didn't you read my first post in this thread? Every other WC3 hero already has their abilities tied in with WoW classes. The only two that don't are the Goblin Tinker and the Goblin Alchemist. So no, there are only two WC3 heroes left. Both are goblin, and both are heavily technology based.

    The last two hero units that were in a similar situation were the Death Knight, and the Pandaren Brewmaster. It stands to reason that Blizzard will continue pulling from the same source it pulled its previous two expansion classes from.

    Keep in mind, you just wanted evidence, not confirmation. The fact of the matter is that there's plenty of evidence that the next class will be the Tinker. Saying that there is no evidence is a bold-faced lie.
    I did and it didn't prove anything. Blizzard could always come up with something new and only use the theme. I am not denying the possibility of tinker here but I am pointing out that you have no evidence that Tinker is going to be the next class and you are not proving it. You are SPECULATING it base on WoW's history of development.

  7. #67
    Elemental Lord Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    8,664
    Quote Originally Posted by Talen View Post
    In that case, you are abandoning your core argument of a tinker being able to take on a Physical Ranged DPS role.
    That was never my core argument. My core argument has always been that Blizzard pulls classes from WC3 heroes. The last hero units are the Tinker and the Alchemist. Thus, the next (possibly final) WoW will be a Tinker/technology class.


    Petless Ranged DPS class. Like it or not, if Blizzard can create differences between Paladins, Warriors and DKs, they can do the same with Hunters and Rangers. Hunters use a Pet while Rangers do not is a big difference between Warriors and DKs, for example,
    Or Blizzard could just make Marksmanship the petless Hunter spec. Suddenly the entire purpose of Rangers is negated.


    In that they share a couple of moves. However, Rogues don't have the Spirit of Vengeance, nor the Warden "policeman" theme, nr do they share the look. Your theory that Rogues COULD get SoV later doesn't negate the fact they don't have it now....and, like Meta...its the one move that should be pat of the class.
    First off, no class is going to have a "policeman" theme, because a theme like that doesn't work in the game. What are they going to do? Handcuff the boss after they beat him and take him to prison? Simply nonsense.

    As for Rogues not having SoV, that's pretty irrelevant. Shaman don't have Big Bad Voodoo, but no ones going to create a Shadow Hunter class based around that one single ability. Logically, the best place for a Warden's playstyle to end up is in the Rogue class.

    And all three are plate wearing melee hybrids with a similar weapon set. You are opposing Wardens because they'll be a mail wearing class that uses physical ranged weaponry.
    I'm opposing Wardens because they're simply Rogues with a NELF backstory. Strip away the chasing Illidan theme, and you have a Rogue with Shadow powers. Heck, they already got Fan of Knives, and numerous Shadow Strike equivalents. Also Blizzard wants to rework the class next expansion. Do you honestly think they're not going to keep pulling from the Warden concept?

    The Hunter archetype is that of outdoorsman and survivalist. The Bounty Hunter theme doesn't really cross into that. Grizzly Adams doesn't have a lot of thematic crossover with Boba Fett. Its seen as the Ranged weapon specialist in game only because there is no other ranged combat class in game.
    You never saw Mantracker?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pklo4kSwOmE

    An outdoorsman, and a survivalist who also tracks people. He's a former bounty hunter too.

    What do you think Hunters use track humanoids for?

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Wildmoon View Post
    I did and it didn't prove anything. Blizzard could always come up with something new and only use the theme. I am not denying the possibility of tinker here but I am pointing out that you have no evidence that Tinker is going to be the next class and you are not proving it. You are SPECULATING it base on WoW's history of development.
    WoW's history of development (and everything else I listed earlier) IS the evidence.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Kuja View Post
    I think Tinker class would conflict with Engineering profession. They too can create all kinds of tinkering gadgets, both goblin and gnome engineers.
    Nope. Engineering creates items to sell on the auction house. A Tinker class uses abilities and skills to perform a role (Tank/DPS/Healing). The two wouldn't conflict at all.

  8. #68
    GC just had some more to say on the class:
    Greg Street ‏@Ghostcrawler 1h

    @NathanielCraver I've said before it depends on the treatment. Too easy for that class to be too wacky or precious.

    Greg Street ‏@Ghostcrawler 1h

    @NathanielCraver A more steampunk vibe sounds cool to me. A dude in a mech having misfires that poop out springs and gears less so.

    Greg Street ‏@Ghostcrawler 1h

    @NathanielCraver I don't know. Lucca from Chrono Trigger could work. A little bit of gnomish (tee hee) world enlarger goes a long way IMO.

    Greg Street ‏@Ghostcrawler 1h

    @NathanielCraver But maybe one of the designers will come up with a pitch perfect design that blows us away someday. Shrug.
    So again, nothing ruled out, but nothing ruled in either.

  9. #69
    Elemental Lord Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    8,664
    Quote Originally Posted by Jessicka View Post
    GC just had some more to say on the class:


    So again, nothing ruled out, but nothing ruled in either.
    That's some pretty positive feedback from GC. I'm actually pretty surprised.

  10. #70
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    That's some pretty positive feedback from GC. I'm actually pretty surprised.
    These tweets show blizzard hasnt even thought about it. Theyre not ruling it out, but i wouldnt go as far as to say theyre positive.

    Quote Originally Posted by Simulatio View Post
    A handful of people nut-busting about it on various forums does not equal popularity, and popularity does not equal good design.

  11. #71
    Quote Originally Posted by Sukhoi View Post
    These tweets show blizzard hasnt even thought about it. Theyre not ruling it out, but i wouldnt go as far as to say theyre positive.
    Yeah, a long way from 'all signs point to being next class next expansion'.

  12. #72
    Elemental Lord Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    8,664
    Quote Originally Posted by Sukhoi View Post
    These tweets show blizzard hasnt even thought about it. Theyre not ruling it out, but i wouldnt go as far as to say theyre positive.
    Keep in mind that GC would be unable to confirm the existence of the class even if they are working on it.

  13. #73
    Lucca isn't anything like the Warcraft 3 unit.

  14. #74
    Elemental Lord Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    8,664
    Quote Originally Posted by Jessicka View Post
    Yeah, a long way from 'all signs point to being next class next expansion'.
    All signs do point in that direction though. Tinker being the next class that is. Whether or not its happening in the next expansion remains to be seen. Tinker class is more of a "when" instead of an "if".

  15. #75
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Keep in mind that GC would be unable to confirm the existence of the class even if they are working on it.
    This pretty clearly shows it hasnt been thought about. You're reaching for stuff that isnt there.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    All signs do point in that direction though. Tinker being the next class that is. Whether or not its happening in the next expansion remains to be seen. Tinker class is more of a "when" instead of an "if".
    Nice try. It's an if. If its being speculated, it's an if.

    Serious question. Why do tinkerbells feel that adding tinker mobs is a hint to a tinker class.. There were wardens added in cata. Lots of Dhs in bc. There are tinkers literally every xpac added.

    Quote Originally Posted by Simulatio View Post
    A handful of people nut-busting about it on various forums does not equal popularity, and popularity does not equal good design.

  16. #76
    Elemental Lord Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    8,664
    Quote Originally Posted by Cooper View Post
    Lucca isn't anything like the Warcraft 3 unit.
    Yet she is like the Gnomish and Goblin Tinker enemies we've faced in the Brawler's Guild and elsewhere.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Sukhoi View Post
    This pretty clearly shows it hasnt been thought about. You're reaching for stuff that isnt there.
    Where in any of those tweets does it clearly show that? Again, GC wouldn't be able to confirm regardless.

    Nice try. It's an if. If its being speculated, it's an if.
    If you can find a better future class candidate that is tied to Warcraft, and doesn't overlap with existing classes, I'd love to see it.

  17. #77
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post



    Where in any of those tweets does it clearly show that? Again, GC wouldn't be able to confirm regardless.



    If you can find a better future class candidate that is tied to Warcraft, and doesn't overlap with existing classes, I'd love to see it.
    The way hes answering questions, it might be too whimsical, depends on how its implemented, someday maybe a developer. It's gcs way of saying its a stupid fucking idea. Hes obliged not to deny, but hes pretty damn close.

    And that timewalker concept beat the shit out of the tinker class. And a ranged wc3 priestess with a different name. Dark ranger/sea witch/priestess of the moon ranger.

    Quote Originally Posted by Simulatio View Post
    A handful of people nut-busting about it on various forums does not equal popularity, and popularity does not equal good design.

  18. #78
    Quote Originally Posted by Jessicka View Post
    So again, nothing ruled out, but nothing ruled in either.
    I think GC saying he's cool with a technology class in the game is saying a great deal.

    You guys didn't check out what he said about Bards and Demon Hunters? He outright ruled them both out. In this he's saying it works out just fine as long as its taken seriously as a concept.

    He also didn't mention an Engineering overlap one single time.

  19. #79
    Quote Originally Posted by Rhamses View Post

    You guys didn't check out what he said about Bards and Demon Hunters? He outright ruled them both out. In this he's saying it works out just fine as long as its taken seriously as a concept.
    No, he did not. At least not about Demon Hunters, I don't know about Bards. In fact, in this tweet you people claim is him ruling out demon hunters, he just asks what design room there is. That's actually less damning than "But maybe one of the designers will come up with a pitch perfect design that blows us away someday. Shrug." or "I've said before it depends on the treatment. Too easy for that class to be too wacky or precious."

    And by the way, "A little bit of gnomish (tee hee) world enlarger goes a long way IMO" IS mentioning the overlap with the engineering profession.
    Last edited by Cooper; 2013-08-31 at 10:11 PM.

  20. #80
    Elemental Lord Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    8,664
    Quote Originally Posted by Sukhoi View Post
    The way hes answering questions, it might be too whimsical, depends on how its implemented, someday maybe a developer. It's gcs way of saying its a stupid fucking idea. Hes obliged not to deny, but hes pretty damn close.
    Now who's reaching for stuff that's not there?

    And that timewalker concept beat the shit out of the tinker class. And a ranged wc3 priestess with a different name. Dark ranger/sea witch/priestess of the moon ranger.
    Timewalkers (and dragonsworn in general) have too much overlap with Mages. Also the fact that Mages got Timelord armor kind of backs that up.

    Ranged magic users would be pretty hard to pull off since there aren't any INT-based bows/xbows/guns in the game. Also that whole overlap with numerous classes in the game;

    Sea Witch: Mage/Hunter
    PotM: Hunter/Druid
    Dark Ranger: Hunter/Death Knights.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Cooper View Post
    No, he did not. At least not about Demon Hunters, I don't know about Bards. In fact, in this tweet you people claim is him ruling out demon hunters, he just asks what design room there is. That's actually less damning than "But maybe one of the designers will come up with a pitch perfect design that blows us away someday. Shrug." or "I've said before it depends on the treatment. Too easy for that class to be too wacky or precious."
    I find it amazing that people still can't figure that Demon Hunter tweet out. You do understand that when GC asks a player if there's enough design space for a DH class, he's in fact saying that there's no design space for the DH class? He even goes on to mention the classes that take the DHs design space away.

    Unbelievable.

Posting Permissions

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