Will Tinkers be a class in WoW?

[Thimagryn]

They are useful for combat, they're simply not scaled to end-game use. In context of using them as you obtain them through the leveling process, they are completely useful against enemies of appropriate level. Keep in mind your direct quote has no context of end game or otherwise.

So yes, they are useful for combat.

[Drilnos]

They are useful for combat, they're simply not scaled to end-game use. In context of using them as you obtain them through the leveling process, they are completely useful against enemies of appropriate level. Keep in mind your direct quote has no context of end game or otherwise.

So yes, they are useful for combat.

Three of them are from MoP and no, they are not. In any context. Useful. Again, I say this as an engineer. The fact that you say they are constitutes a joke. The fact that you seem to believe it makes you yourself a joke. Alas, neither joke is very funny. More sad than anything.

[Deleted]

How are we discredited? I'm willing to bet that the majority that voted 0% don't know what we're talking about, or don't want another class in the game period.

Its a bit different than when we discredit Demon Hunter proponents based on logic and common sense

LOL u just crack me up man! U are Amazing *0_@+. I suggest you go and just review ALL the countless posts where you said that I was wrong for saying those exact same words that u written above: "Don't know what they are talking about"-remember when I said people should read my post till the end? "don't want another class period"-remember I also used to mention that?

And you even finish it off with "proponents based on logic and common sense"-WHAT THE FUCK?? I use logic and common sense better that u. at least I am not an HYPOCRITE

[Teriz]

They are useful for combat, they're simply not scaled to end-game use. In context of using them as you obtain them through the leveling process, they are completely useful against enemies of appropriate level. Keep in mind your direct quote has no context of end game or otherwise.

So yes, they are useful for combat.

Again, read my post. At level 90 I couldn't kill a level 84 Glade Porcupine with a G91 Landshark, the strongest bomb in the profession.

Which means at level 85 I couldn't kill a level 84 Glade Porcupine with a G91 Landshark.

[Thimagryn]

Again, read my post. At level 90 I couldn't kill a level 84 Glade Porcupine with a G91 Landshark, the strongest bomb in the profession.

Which means at level 85 I couldn't kill a level 84 Glade Porcupine with a G91 Landshark.

What's that have to do with anything? You're trying to make the case that an item has to be overpowered to become useful.

Casting any one spell would not kill a Glade Porcupine. In context, you have to cast many spells and deal enough damage to kill them. Casting one Wrath won't kill it, so is Wrath not useful for combat? Dragonlings don't kill anything, but it still provides damage and has use in combat (when used in level appropriate context). It contributes to the overall DPS you are dealing.

So it has its usefulness in combat. They don't have to be overpowered to be useful.

[Teriz]

What's that have to do with anything? You're trying to make the case that an item has to be overpowered to become useful.

No, I'm making the case that Engineers aren't useful for combat purposes, thus leaving a pretty huge design space open for a Tinker class to fill. Why? Because technology in WoW has been proven to be as powerful as any other source of power in the gameworld.

Casting any one spell would not kill a Glade Porcupine. In context, you have to cast many spells and deal enough damage to kill them. Casting one Wrath won't kill it, so is Wrath not useful for combat? Dragonlings don't kill anything, but it still provides damage and has use in combat (when used in level appropriate context). It contributes to the overall DPS you are dealing.

At level 90 I can cast Lightning bolt twice and kill it. In the case of the G91 Landshark, I'm not able to do that because it hits for crap and it has a 1 minute cooldown. Its not just the damage that is the problem. The problem is that it has a restrictive CD, has a limited number (because you have to craft it), and its horribly inefficient within your rotation because it has a cast time. Put all of that together, and you have what amounts to a toy, not a combat ability.

So it has its usefulness in combat.

Please explain how.

[Drilnos]

What's that have to do with anything? Casting any one spell would not kill a Glade Porcupine. In context, you have to cast many spells and deal enough damage to kill them. Casting one Wrath won't kill it, so is Wrath not useful for combat? Dragonlings don't kill anything, but it still provides damage and has use in combat (when used in level appropriate context). It contributes to the overall DPS you are dealing.

So it has its usefulness in combat. They don't have to be overpowered to be useful.

Listen. You keep saying this. So I'll say this one more time, real slow, in the probably vain hope that you have comprehension skills which outstrip your standard Chuck-E-Cheese automaton. I have experience. I did exactly what you're talking about. I leveled engineering at the same time as I leveled my engineer. I got all of these things at level. And they were garbage. The Goblin Dragon Gun got exactly one use, out of 50 charges. The Pyro Rockets overwrite the Synapse Springs, which are the profession perk. The bombs don't root long enough to let you do anything, and they don't do more damage than anything - anything else - that you could spend the GCD on from your own spellbook. The Dragonling Trinket had exactly one useful feature, which was the item level, letting you get into heroic 5 mans earlier. Any trinket of the same item level was better for dps, which frankly is a pretty goddamn sad state for the trinket-crafting profession to be in. The dragonling was a gimmick that had as much effect as a companion pet and didn't even have the decency to look mechanical.

If using an ability lowers your dps - at any level - that is the opposite of being useful. If an ability has a positive effect on your dps whose difference from zero is of interest only to statisticians, also, not useful. All of these items were complete and utter disappointments that got used once and never again. You are correct, they did not have to be overpowered to be useful. But it is a huge and strange leap in logic to claim that therefore, everything that isn't overpowered is useful.

[Ielenia]

My description was, quote, "Useful for combat." End quote. None of those things are. You seem to be mistaking the word "usable" for the word "useful." I could lob a Mini Mana Bomb in combat and it would do me roughly as much good, and I don't even need to be an engineer to do that.

You want 'useful for combat'? Fine. Here goes: Phase Fingers, Synapse Strings, Incendiary Fireworks Launcher. You want more? How about the Mind Amplification Dish? Or the Grounded Plasma Shield?

[Drilnos]

You want 'useful for combat'? Fine. Here goes: Phase Fingers, Synapse Strings, Incendiary Fireworks Launcher. You want more? How about the Mind Amplification Dish? Or the Grounded Plasma Shield?

I could list out the reasons why each of these suck, but I doubt you'd get past the first sentence.

[Ielenia]

If we look solely at theme and lore, there is a level of technology in the game world that the profession can't attain. If we look solely at theme and lore, there are a group of heroes called Tinkers who use their technology to protect and defeat their enemies

Wrong. There is nothing in-game, lore- or theme-wise that even suggests a limit to engineering. You're pulling that out from between your lower cheeks, if you allow me the cussing. Also, there is no hero that is a Tinker. All lore heroes fall into one of the player class archetypes. There are no 'Tinker' named hero in WC3, so you cannot argue lore.

Engineering cannot mimic their appearance or their abilities

That makes no sense. Of course engineering can mimic their abilities. Examples were shown multiple times throughout multiple threads.

In short, there is a pretty large open design space for a technology class in WoW.

No. No, there is not. There is not even a needle-head space for it, because the theme is taken by engineering, as it has been proven to (and ignored by) you multiple times in the past.

- - - Updated - - -

I could list out the reasons why each of these suck, but I doubt you'd get past the first sentence.

You do that, and I'll argue that engineering is BiS profession for some class/spec combos.

[Teriz]

Wrong. There is nothing in-game, lore- or theme-wise that even suggests a limit to engineering. You're pulling that out from between your lower cheeks, if you allow me the cussing.

Where did I say that? I said that there is a level of technology in the game world that shows a level of technology that the Engineering profession can't attain. Which indicates that the Engineering profession does NOT represent the whole of WoW technology.

Also, there is no hero that is a Tinker.

http://classic.battle.net/war3/neutr...intinker.shtml

All lore heroes fall into one of the player class archetypes. There are no 'Tinker' named hero in WC3, so you cannot argue lore.

You mean other than Gazlowe Rachet?

http://heroesofthestorm.gamepedia.com/Gazlowe

You lose.

That makes no sense. Of course engineering can mimic their abilities. Examples were shown multiple times throughout multiple threads.

You mean like where you compared the G91 Landshark and hand grenades to Cluster Rockets?

Yeah.....

No. No, there is not. There is not even a needle-head space for it, because the theme is taken by engineering, as it has been proven to (and ignored by) you multiple times in the past.

Except the FACTS are that a profession and a class do not occupy the same design space or theme.

[PowerOfTwo]

Yeah considering MoP is bassically gamings biggest asspull ever the ONLY impediment i see to tinkers is them actualy falling within an expansions theeme considering how well monk and dk meshed with their xpacs. But yeah if we can create a race based one a single piece of content art made as a joke like a decade ago and a calss off of 1 factionless hero unit (most classes got their abilityes not just from heroes but units as well) then tinkers can happen.

Voted 50% coz of the theeme thing and the massive warglaive wielding winged elephant on the room.

[Thimagryn]

I could list out the reasons why each of these suck, but I doubt you'd get past the first sentence.

You understand the reason they don't make it any more powerful is because they don't want Engineering overshadowing all other professions as the go-to DPS boost, as it was in Wrath of the Lich King.

The stats are homogenized to be relatively equal to all other profession boosts. Yet this does not make the dps applicable boosts useless, any more than using a spell that consists of 5% of your overall DPS doesn't make it 'not useful'.

[Teriz]

You understand the reason they don't make it any more powerful is because they don't want Engineering overshadowing all other professions as the go-to DPS boost, as it was in Wrath of the Lich King.

Which is kind of the point; A profession can never, and should never take the place of a class. If there was a technology class, those types of limits wouldn't be an issue, AND the technology class would be the home of all class-level tech such as Helix Blackfuse.

We have technology in the game that far surpasses Engineering, we have open design space for a technology class, and we have a WC3 hero (the source of all WoW classes) who uses similar advanced technology that we see in the game world, but not the profession.

A technology class makes perfect sense.

[Ielenia]

Where did I say that? I said that there is a level of technology in the game world that shows a level of technology that the Engineering profession can't attain. Which indicates that the Engineering profession does NOT represent the whole of WoW technology.

And I repeat: you are pulling that out of your ass. If you want to prove me wrong, tell me how those technology marvels came to be if not by engineer? Summoned from the nethers by the warlocks? Magically assembled by mages? Birthed from a hunter's pet? Or maybe was it just 'divine will' that made those technological wonders into being? The engineering profession in WoW is limitless, lore-wise, as we have flying fortresses, combat mechs and steam tanks.

http://classic.battle.net/war3/neutr...intinker.shtml

I meant there is no WoW hero that is a Tinker. And for further clarifications: true tinkers, not NPCs with the title 'Tinker'.

You mean other than Gazlowe Rachet?
You lose.

I do recall saying 'WC3'. As far as I know, 'WC3' in this forums mean 'Warcraft 3', not 'Heroes of the Storm'. Also Blizzard already said that 'Heroes of the Storm' is completely disconnected from Starcraft, Warcraft and Diablo games.

You mean like where you compared the G91 Landshark and hand grenades to Cluster Rockets?
Yeah.....

Mmhmm. You got it in one. Bravo.

Except the FACTS are that a profession and a class do not occupy the same design space or theme.

A profession and a class do not occupy the same space as long as they do not have the same theme. And the engineer and tinker both are of the technological gadgets theme. Lore-wise and in the world of Azeroth, engineering can make sawblades, can make lasers, can make war golems. The simple presence of those items proves engineering can do those things. However, the players are not allowed to do those simply because of balance issues.

[Thimagryn]

A technology class makes perfect sense.

Yet you can't turn around and say it doesn't share the same theme under the same breath. Engineering also uses technology.

[Teriz]

And I repeat: you are pulling that out of your ass. If you want to prove me wrong, tell me how those technology marvels came to be if not by engineer?

Because Helix Blackfuse for example isn't an Engineer, he's a Siegecrafter. Sicco Thermaplugg isn't an Engineer, he's a Mekgineer. Gelbin Mekkatorque isn't an Engineer, he's a High Tinker.

Summoned from the nethers by the warlocks? Magically assembled by mages? Birthed from a hunter's pet? Or maybe was it just 'divine will' that made those technological wonders into being? The engineering profession in WoW is limitless, lore-wise, as we have flying fortresses, combat mechs and steam tanks.

If we as players can't participate in any of that lore, then who cares?

I meant there is no WoW hero that is a Tinker. And for further clarifications: true tinkers, not NPCs with the title 'Tinker'.

Gelbin Mekkatorque, the head of the Gnomes is a Tinker.

You lose again.

I do recall saying 'WC3'. As far as I know, 'WC3' in this forums mean 'Warcraft 3', not 'Heroes of the Storm'. Also Blizzard already said that 'Heroes of the Storm' is completely disconnected from Starcraft, Warcraft and Diablo games.

Gazlowe was instrumental in the founding of Durator, along with Chen Stormstout and Rexxar.

A profession and a class do not occupy the same space as long as they do not have the same theme. And the engineer and tinker both are of the technological gadgets theme. Lore-wise and in the world of Azeroth, engineering can make sawblades, can make lasers, can make war golems. The simple presence of those items proves engineering can do those things.

They don't share the same theme. Tinker theme: Hero that uses technology to protect allies and defeat enemies. Engineering theme: Crafter who makes technology items.

However, the players are not allowed to do those simply because of balance issues.

Or simply because there's no technology class (yet).

- - - Updated - - -

Yet you can't turn around and say it doesn't share the same theme under the same breath. Engineering also uses technology.

Just because both use technology doesn't mean they share the same theme. Again, its like saying that Mages and Priest have the same theme because they both use magic.

[Biske]

Just because both use technology doesn't mean they share the same theme. Again, its like saying that Mages and Priest have the same theme because they both use magic.

Or like saying you can't have mages cuz there's already enchanting. That said, I'm kind of "meh" towards tinkers and "meh" towards demon hunters (although I see the latter as the least likely of the two).

[Maggibesti]

Most likely. I think we'll see many classes being added in the future. WoW isn't gonna die anytime soon, not even after 10 years. It might not be as great in 10 years of course, if any good at all, compare to now. But we should see like, 4-5(?) more classes in that time.

[Ielenia]

Because Helix Blackfuse for example isn't an Engineer, he's a Siegecrafter. Sicco Thermaplugg isn't an Engineer, he's a Mekgineer. Gelbin Mekkatorque isn't an Engineer, he's a High Tinker.

Please don't be stupid. Next you are going to tell me a pediatrician is not a medic? All of those examples you mentioned are engineers. To say they're not is stupid. Just like pediatricians ARE medics. Just like surgeons ARE medics.

If we as players can't participate in any of that lore, then who cares?

You obviously don't, as you're using game limitations as lore limitations.

Gelbin Mekkatorque, the head of the Gnomes is a Tinker.

No, he is the leader of the gnomes, and the title for it is not 'king', but 'High Tinker'.

Gazlowe was instrumental in the founding of Durator, along with Chen Stormstout and Rexxar.

Go read his 'WoWWiki' entry. He's a rogue, with the engineer profession. You just fell flat on your face, didn't you?

They don't share the same theme. Tinker theme: technology. Engineering theme: technology.

There. I boldened out and simplifying things for you. Hopefully you can see the theme overlap now.

Or simply because there's no technology class (yet).

You're just being dense, aren't you? Bet you're laughing on your chair in your mom's basement as how you can troll people and rill them up.