View Poll Results: What is the probability that the Tinker can be the next class ( IYO)

Voters
1260. You may not vote on this poll
  • 0%

    660 52.38%
  • 0-10%

    189 15.00%
  • 10-20%

    58 4.60%
  • 20-30%

    51 4.05%
  • 30-40%

    30 2.38%
  • 40-50%

    58 4.60%
  • 50-60%

    48 3.81%
  • 60-70%

    34 2.70%
  • 70-80%

    38 3.02%
  • 80-90%

    25 1.98%
  • 90-100%

    69 5.48%
Page 2 of 121 FirstFirst
1
2
3
4
12
52
102
... LastLast
  1. #21

  2. #22
    The Lightbringer Blitzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    3,211
    They would have to remove engineering from the game. Blizzard said back in cata if they had kept adding the things they wanted, it would become its own class.
    “It is either easy or impossible.” - Salvador Dali

    WoW characters:
    Greed [Priest] -
    Blitzo[Warrior] -Rex[Hunter] -Jax [Paladin] -
    Gluttony [Mage]

  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by Xeones View Post
    I don't see demon hunter ever being added to the game since it has basically been given to Demo locks. I don't get the logic.
    What's there go get? There are demon hunter npcs, there are no tinker npcs. There were monk npcs, then they got added as a class. If you follow the pattern, demon hunters would be added since there already are npcs. Heck, I thought monks where just rogues that used their hands instead. But like I said, who knows. That's just my reasoning.

  4. #24
    Warchief
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Behind you
    Posts
    2,099
    Quote Originally Posted by dzikitukan View Post
    enchanted do you mean something like that? http://wowhead.com/npc=67490#screenshots:id=336740
    Yep in an exaggerated statement, I wished for it to be a class like the "tinker".

  5. #25
    Tinker is too whimsycal, it is extremely hard to introduce tinker as serious class that also fits in the expansion theme and I cant imagine expansion where tinkers fit perfectly like DK in wotlk and monk in mop.

    Blizzard devs think its too whimsycal, so its unlikely they are coming any time soon.

  6. #26
    The Lightbringer Blitzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    3,211
    Quote Originally Posted by Cle View Post
    Tinker is too whimsycal, it is extremely hard to introduce tinker as serious class that also fits in the expansion theme and I cant imagine expansion where tinkers fit perfectly like DK in wotlk and monk in mop.

    Blizzard devs think its too whimsycal, so its unlikely they are coming any time soon.
    I'd argue the exact opposite. The name is whimsical, the idea behind it is.

    Think of the terminator in WoW with guns/bombs/missiles/turrets ect.
    “It is either easy or impossible.” - Salvador Dali

    WoW characters:
    Greed [Priest] -
    Blitzo[Warrior] -Rex[Hunter] -Jax [Paladin] -
    Gluttony [Mage]

  7. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by Blitzo View Post
    I'd argue the exact opposite. The name is whimsical, the idea behind it is.

    Think of the terminator in WoW with guns/bombs/missiles/turrets ect.
    Tinkers have been comedic relief since the dawn of time.

  8. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by Blitzo View Post
    I'd argue the exact opposite. The name is whimsical, the idea behind it is.

    Think of the terminator in WoW with guns/bombs/missiles/turrets ect.
    Why stop there? If we're just going to throw out Tinkers from Warcraft in favor of the Terminator,..
    If you like my draw-rings. http://yig.deviantart.com/
    If you can't find them for some reason beyond that page. http://yig.deviantart.com/gallery/
    WOW screenshot and concept art gallery http://smg.photobucket.com/user/evilknick/library/WoW

  9. #29
    Elemental Lord Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    8,777
    Quote Originally Posted by Mokoshne View Post
    Creating Xplodium Charge's are nothing like engineers creating throwable bombs.
    Creating Rock-It! Turret's is nothing like engineers dropping Moll-E or blingtron.
    Creating Deth Lazer's is nothing like engineers fireworks attachment to gloves.
    Correct.

    A turret that damages and slows a target is NOTHING like a mailbox or a robot that gives you gifts.
    A Laser that increases damage the longer you charge it is NOTHING like a damage proc from an item enhancement.

    You have a case with throwable bombs. However, since they don't scale, are items that have to be crafted, and can pretty much only kill creeps once you enter upper Vanilla content, I'm confident in saying that those two are NOTHING alike either.

    Your resource regeneration / cd reduction of picking up scraps of old creations is nothing like how engineers can salvage dead mechanical creatures.
    I didn't know that Engineers could reduce cooldowns and more rapidly regenerate their resources by picking up nuts and bolts from mechanical creatures. Please link me to this incredible Engineering passive.

    A new class needs to feel original and different from aspects already in game, just reusing old mechanics will not get people excited. I have my opinion you have yours but do not go accusing people of being ignorant. Lets be civil =)
    Except no old mechanics have been used, and a profession operates nothing like a class. Your comparisons are absurd.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Zantos View Post
    What's there go get? There are demon hunter npcs, there are no tinker npcs. There were monk npcs, then they got added as a class. If you follow the pattern, demon hunters would be added since there already are npcs. Heck, I thought monks where just rogues that used their hands instead. But like I said, who knows. That's just my reasoning.
    Gelbin Mekkatorque, Gazlowe Rachet, Master Tinker Trini, Tinkerer Gizlock, Siflaed Coldhammer, Helix Blackfuse, Mekgineer Thermaplugg just to name a few.

    Wowhead is your friend.

  10. #30

  11. #31
    I knew Teriz was gonna be here the moment i saw the title.

    Anyway, tinker is a stupid concept for a class. Ghostcrawler also said that it wouldn't fit well in the game (not exactly, but I don't remember the exact words he used) but it was pretty much just his polite way of saying it's a stupid idea and he was tired of people asking about tinker 24/7

  12. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by Zantos View Post
    What's there go get? There are demon hunter npcs, there are no tinker npcs. There were monk npcs, then they got added as a class. If you follow the pattern, demon hunters would be added since there already are npcs. Heck, I thought monks where just rogues that used their hands instead. But like I said, who knows. That's just my reasoning.
    That is some poor reasoning. Engineer/Tinker pretty similar. Close enough in my book anyways.

    But you didn't really provide a pattern. You just showed a link. The only real pattern the classes have is being based on WC3 heros. In that sense Demon Hunters from WC3 had Mana Burn, Immolation, Evasion (passive), and Meta. Mana Burn and Drain have been removed from the game, it's obvious they dislike the mechanic from a balance POV and this is basically what the class would need to be based around. Immolation and Meta already belong to warlocks. Do they remove that? Just copy it? How do you overcome that? Evasion isn't something you balance a class around.

    So now we are at the point where we try to figure out what could you possibly even do with a Demon Hunter? It's basically just a rogue with what is left. We really don't need another leather AGI melee class. This is what has baffled me for years with people asking for it. I don't understand the reasoning.

    Now with tinker we have pocket factory, cluster rockets, a passive buff to other abilities, and transforming into a robot. Were I blizz I would go ahead and merge this class idea with the alchemist slightly to give it a healing spec. Even with out this we have versatile options in which to take it from a tank that uses heavy machinery to take hits to a agility ranged dps that fires a variety of tech based projectiles. At no point do I see overlap from this class idea with others currently in the game.

  13. #33
    Elemental Lord Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    8,777
    Quote Originally Posted by Cle View Post
    Tinker require expansion theme where they fit in, I cant foresee expansion for tinkers.
    Tinkers could have fit into Cataclysm as a new class due to the addition of Goblins. Tinkers could have fit into WoD as a new class due to Garrosh taking technology back to old Draenor and weaponizing the Orcs into the Iron Horde. Tinkers could fit into a South Sea expansion where we explore Kezan, Undermine, and use technology to venture under the sea.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Darkvoltinx View Post
    what tech would tinkers be?
    goblin or gnome?
    Goblins would use Goblin tech, Gnomes would use Gnome tech.

    Its no different than the race-based Druid forms, or the race-based Shaman Totems.

  14. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post

    Goblins would use Goblin tech, Gnomes would use Gnome tech.

    Its no different than the race-based Druid forms, or the race-based Shaman Totems.
    the class would have to be opened up to more than 2 races or its a waste of time.

  15. #35
    Elemental Lord Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    8,777
    Quote Originally Posted by Blitzo View Post
    They would have to remove engineering from the game. Blizzard said back in cata if they had kept adding the things they wanted, it would become its own class.
    No they wouldn't. Where do people come up with this nonsense?

    Professions and classes occupy two completely different design spaces. A player tanking a raid as a Tinker is going to have no effect on an Engineer getting items together to craft a Gyrocopter

  16. #36
    with all the balancing issues they have, don't expect another class for at least another expansion.
    Stormspellz -mugthol
    Battletag - Stormz#1438

  17. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by Darkvoltinx View Post
    the class would have to be opened up to more than 2 races or its a waste of time.
    It should be open to just about any race. We've seen engineers from every every race by now in the game. Goblins and Gnomes just happen to be the most common ones.

  18. #38
    Elemental Lord Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    8,777
    Quote Originally Posted by Darkvoltinx View Post
    the class would have to be opened up to more than 2 races or its a waste of time.
    Druids are only available to 4 races, and its one of the most popular classes in the game.

    But in the end, the races who couldn't be Tinkers would be Tauren and Night Elves, due to their rejection of technology.

    Everyone else is fair game. Horde uses Goblin tech, Alliance uses Gnome/Dwarven tech.

  19. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by Xeones View Post
    It should be open to just about any race. We've seen engineers from every every race by now in the game. Goblins and Gnomes just happen to be the most common ones.
    well teriz seems to think only goblins and gnomes should have it.

  20. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by Xeones View Post
    That is some poor reasoning. Engineer/Tinker pretty similar. Close enough in my book anyways.

    But you didn't really provide a pattern. You just showed a link. The only real pattern the classes have is being based on WC3 heros. In that sense Demon Hunters from WC3 had Mana Burn, Immolation, Evasion (passive), and Meta. Mana Burn and Drain have been removed from the game, it's obvious they dislike the mechanic from a balance POV and this is basically what the class would need to be based around. Immolation and Meta already belong to warlocks. Do they remove that? Just copy it? How do you overcome that? Evasion isn't something you balance a class around.

    So now we are at the point where we try to figure out what could you possibly even do with a Demon Hunter? It's basically just a rogue with what is left. We really don't need another leather AGI melee class. This is what has baffled me for years with people asking for it. I don't understand the reasoning.

    Now with tinker we have pocket factory, cluster rockets, a passive buff to other abilities, and transforming into a robot. Were I blizz I would go ahead and merge this class idea with the alchemist slightly to give it a healing spec. Even with out this we have versatile options in which to take it from a tank that uses heavy machinery to take hits to a agility ranged dps that fires a variety of tech based projectiles. At no point do I see overlap from this class idea with others currently in the game.
    Use one of the threads this tired argument has gone through 1000 circles already over this.
    You just ruled out monks and deathknights using selective judgment.

    I whistled for a cab, and when it came near, the license plate said fresh and had a dice in the mirror.
    If you like my draw-rings. http://yig.deviantart.com/
    If you can't find them for some reason beyond that page. http://yig.deviantart.com/gallery/
    WOW screenshot and concept art gallery http://smg.photobucket.com/user/evilknick/library/WoW

Posting Permissions

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