Will Tinkers be a class in WoW?

[Hatecore]

What was the last word from Blizz on Tinkers?

Surely if you have enough time to reply to almost every post in this thread you must of pestered them on Twitter until you got some sort of answer?

I still think there is 0% chance currently, like the other 600+ people, but that's just me, well it isn't, but you get it.

Well this was the last

Not sure. Might be a little too whimsical for WoW. Would depend on the treatment.

[fixx]

There is no evasion. The point is that profession and class thematic overlap means nothing.

It means everything because Goblin Tinker unit already exists in WoW, as an engineering skill instead of class.

Actually almost all have. The ones who haven't have becomes aspects of existing WoW classes. The only ones who haven't participated in this process are the Goblin Tinker and the Goblin Alchemist. The last WC3 hero unit who was in a similar position: The Brewmaster.

Speaking of WC3 hero units
Paladin : made into WoW class
Archmage : not gonna happen, it's just a mage title
Mountain King : not gonna happen, it's dwarf warrior
Blood Mage : not gonna happen, it's blood elf mage
Blademaster : not gonna happen, it's orc warrior
Far Seer : not gonna happen, it's orc shaman
Tauren Chieftain: not gonna happen, it's tauren warrior
Shadow Hunter : not gonna happen, it's just troll hunter with bit of extra flavor found in alchemist profession
...
Goblin Alchemist : not gonna happen, it's part of generic alchemy skill along with several other units/heroes like Shadow Hunter
Goblin Tinker : not gonna happen, it was turned into engineering skil
Dark Ranger : not gonna happen, it's just hunter with some abilities that went to warlock class

Not gonna bother going through whole list but the point remains... Most of WC3 heroes will not turn into WoW classes, it's the basic units where the core classes come from with the exception of paladin, death knight and monk so far. I honestly don't see full-blown class potential in any of the common suggestions of Demon Hunter, Dark Ranger or Tinker because all of those heroes flavor already exists in other classes. If there's going to be new classes, those will be something totally new and only touching old ideas like the monk was with one of the three talent trees only coming from WC3.

Well actually that's incorrect. One shoots A rocket. The other shoots a cluster of rockets.

Hence why one is called Hand-Mounted Pyro Rocket, while the other is called Cluster Rocket.

Furthermore, the Tinker ability was called Cluster Rocket, and it was an AoE damage attack. Thus the representative of Cluster Rocket in WoW is Cluster Rocket.

While you keep arguing with semantics (in this case what the abilities are called, not what they actually do) and fail to admit the hypothetical tinker class and the existing engineering skill are thematically the same this conversation is going nowhere.

[Rhamses]

Stop? Why? Just because we're finding holes in your and Teriz' arguments? Also, here's your 'AoE' damage: Rocket!!

Blatantly ignoring a fact and repeating that blatant ignorance over and over again isn't finding holes in people's arguments man. In fact, it's something else entirely, and it does little to elevate the conversation.

Like your post here for example; Why are you trying so desperately to link Cluster Rocket to items that are clearly not Cluster Rocket? What's even more embarrassing about this is that Teriz already showed you an ability actually called Cluster Rocket that actually resembles the Tinker ability.

You compound that nonsense with hypocrisy, because I distinctly remember Teriz pointing out WC3 abilities to you that appeared in the classes, and you repeatedly denied that those abilities were similar, were representations of the ability in WoW, or were even related to those abilities at all.

Elusive Brawler doesn't represent Drunken Brawler (when we KNOW that Blizzard changed the name), yet the Hand Mounted Pyro Rocket and the G1 Landshark represents Cluster Rocket?

Again, that isn't finding holes in people's arguments. Quite the opposite actually.

[Teriz]

It means everything because Goblin Tinker unit already exists in WoW, as an engineering skill instead of class.

So where's the Goblin Tinker's abilities in Engineering?

Speaking of WC3 hero units
Paladin : made into WoW class
Archmage : not gonna happen, it's just a mage title

Which is why its abilities wound up in the Mage class.

Mountain King : not gonna happen, it's dwarf warrior

Which is why its abilities went to Warriors.

Blood Mage : not gonna happen, it's blood elf mage

Which is why its abilities went to Mages and Warlocks.

Blademaster : not gonna happen, it's orc warrior

Which is why its ultimate went to Warriors, Mirror Image went to Mages, and Windwalk (Stealth) went to Rogues.

Far Seer : not gonna happen, it's orc shaman

Which is why its abilities went to Shaman.

Tauren Chieftain: not gonna happen, it's tauren warrior

Which is why its abilities went to Warriors, Shaman, and the Tauren racial ability.

Shadow Hunter : not gonna happen, it's just troll hunter with bit of extra flavor found in alchemist profession

Nope, just a Shaman with a throwing weapon. Which is why 3/4 of its abilities are in the Shaman class.

Goblin Alchemist : not gonna happen, it's part of generic alchemy skill along with several other units/heroes like Shadow Hunter

Then where are the Goblin Alchemist's abilities within Alchemy?

Goblin Tinker : not gonna happen, it was turned into engineering skil

Same question. Where's the Tinker skills in Engineering?

Dark Ranger : not gonna happen, it's just hunter with some abilities that went to warlock class

Now you're getting it.

Not gonna bother going through whole list but the point remains... Most of WC3 heroes will not turn into WoW classes, it's the basic units where the core classes come from with the exception of paladin, death knight and monk so far. I honestly don't see full-blown class potential in any of the common suggestions of Demon Hunter, Dark Ranger or Tinker because all of those heroes flavor already exists in other classes. If there's going to be new classes, those will be something totally new and only touching old ideas like the monk was with one of the three talent trees only coming from WC3.

The hero itself doesn't need to come from WC3, only the abilities. If the class is a generic RPG class, then Blizzard will split up several related WC3 ability sets up in order to facilitate the class. For example, the Warrior, the Mage and the Rogue received abilities from several classes. On the other hand, the Druid, Death a Knight, Shaman, and Warlock only received abilities from Druid, Shaman, Undead, and Warlock based units and heroes.

Finally, we had classes which were more direct translations of the WC3 heroes; The Priest, the Paladin, and the Monk. They were only sourced from one WC3 unit.

Where does that leave the last two unused hero units? Since their abilities don't exist in the classes or the professions, yet we know that they exist within WoW, then the only conclusion we could draw is that Blizzard is either saving them for something, or not going to use them at all. Considering that there's going to be at least one more class in WoW, and the Tinker and Alchemist hero just happens to fall into an unused class thematic, I find the second conclusion highly unlikely.

While you keep arguing with semantics (in this case what the abilities are called, not what they actually do) and fail to admit the hypothetical tinker class and the existing engineering skill are thematically the same this conversation is going nowhere.

Read my response again buddy. My argument is BASED on what Cluster Rocket can do. Hand-Mounted Pyro Rocket works differently, has a different name, and has a different effect. How can it be the same thing?

[Tisane]

I don't think that will happen, not soon anyway. There are several reasons why Tinkers (and others) could ('should') become a class in WoW, but there are thousands of more reasons why Tinkers (and others) will probably not become a class any time soon.

[fixx]

Where does that leave the last two unused hero units? Since their abilities don't exist in the classes or the professions, yet we know that they exist within WoW, then the only conclusion we could draw is that Blizzard is either saving them for something, or not going to use them at all. Considering that there's going to be at least one more class in WoW, and the Tinker and Alchemist hero just happens to fall into an unused class thematic, I find the second conclusion highly unlikely.

Both tinker and alchemist are already used as professions, not classes. There's very little actual design space left to add more classes into WoW without overlapping with the existing ones big time while still sticking to the fantasy cliches more or less. Odds are more likely that there will not be any new class added from old WC games for that very reason, and maybe not any class at all since so far adding classes has been huge clusterfuck of balancing nightmare. 11 classes and 34 specs is already a lot.

Especially something like tinker would be the biggest headache ever for designers which is one more reason it's definitely not coming. Just think of how big pain engineering has been over the years for the game balancing effort to make it useful and not totally OP in PvP. For the same reason any class that occupies the same thematic space (creating toys to do stuff for him) would be a nightmare to balance.

Most likely tinker and alchemist were dropped to profession instead of class because those tend towards "support" playstyle which doesn't exist in WoW as a party role.

Read my response again buddy. My argument is BASED on what Cluster Rocket can do. Hand-Mounted Pyro Rocket works differently, has a different name, and has a different effect. How can it be the same thing?

You still don't get the difference between theme and anal-retentive nitpicking.

Cluster Rocket does aoe stun and aoe damage, both effects exists in multiple classes already. also for engineers in some form. If you're looking for identical abilities you wont find everything even from basic classes that would map directly between WoW and WC3, but when you start looking at the effects instead of numbers "rockets falling from the sky dealing damage" you do find the exact same effect from current engineering skill.

[Teriz]

What was the last word from Blizz on Tinkers?

Surely if you have enough time to reply to almost every post in this thread you must of pestered them on Twitter until you got some sort of answer?

The last word from Blizzard on Tinkers is that their implementation would depend on their tone. Which is far more favorable than the overlap problem they expressed with Demon Hunters, and the "too soft" argument they made with Bards.

That goes well with my belief that there simply is no other option. Every other option either has no place in the Warcraft universe, or is too similar to existing classes.

I still think there is 0% chance currently, like the other 600+ people, but that's just me, well it isn't, but you get it.

52% feel that there is no chance. 48% feels that there is a chance.

You think that's an overwhelming majority?

- - - Updated - - -

Both tinker and alchemist are already used as professions, not classes. There's very little actual design space left to add more classes into WoW without overlapping with the existing ones big time while still sticking to the fantasy cliches more or less.

How can there be little design space when professions aren't classes and the class-like WC3 abilities don't exist within the professions? How can there be an issue of overlap when no existing WoW class has a tech theme, or uses the aforementioned Tinker or Alchemist abilities?

Your argument isn't logical.

Odds are more likely that there will not be any new class added from old WC games for that very reason, and maybe not any class at all since so far adding classes has been huge clusterfuck of balancing nightmare. 11 classes and 34 specs is already a lot.

Please link us to the post where Blizzard said that balancing 11 classes and 34 specs is a balancing nightmare. If you can't find such a post, then you're merely projecting your viewpoint onto the Blizzard staff.

Especially something like tinker would be the biggest headache ever for designers which is one more reason it's definitely not coming. Just think of how big pain engineering has been over the years for the game balancing effort to make it useful and not totally OP in PvP. For the same reason any class that occupies the same thematic space (creating toys to do stuff for him) would be a nightmare to balance.

Um, Engineering has been a balancing pain because Blizzard tried to make it a unique profession by giving it items it could use in combat. That issue won't exist in a class, because a class is designed to have offensive and defensive capabilities.

You still don't get the difference between theme and anal-retentive nitpicking.

Cluster Rocket does aoe stun and aoe damage, both effects exists in multiple classes already. also for engineers in some form. If you're looking for identical abilities you wont find everything even from basic classes that would map directly between WoW and WC3, but when you start looking at the effects instead of numbers "rockets falling from the sky dealing damage" you do find the exact same effect from current engineering skill.

Link me to some of these engineering abilities. If you're talking about Hand-Mounted Pyro Rocket, you're wrong. It's not the same effect, doesn't have the same name, and its an item enchant instead of an ability. It doesn't even fall from the sky....

Also why do we need to scour Engineering for an item that isn't remotely similar to the ability in question when we have the ability in question already? Are you trying to desperately find an Engineering=Tinker link that doesn't exist?

I would say yes.

[Ielenia]

Blatantly ignoring a fact and repeating that blatant ignorance over and over again isn't finding holes in people's arguments man. In fact, it's something else entirely, and it does little to elevate the conversation.
Like your post here for example; Why are you trying so desperately to link Cluster Rocket to items that are clearly not Cluster Rocket? What's even more embarrassing about this is that Teriz already showed you an ability actually called Cluster Rocket that actually resembles the Tinker ability.

You said:

Which doesn't change the fact that one is AoE and one is single target.

When I pointed out that the 'cluster rocket' Teriz pointed out is actually just a single entity that does damage. One rocket miss, all do. If doing 'AoE' is all that matters, I gave you something that does exactly that, that comes from engineering. That is what having a hole in your argument means.

You compound that nonsense with hypocrisy, because I distinctly remember Teriz pointing out WC3 abilities to you that appeared in the classes, and you repeatedly denied that those abilities were similar, were representations of the ability in WoW, or were even related to those abilities at all.
Elusive Brawler doesn't represent Drunken Brawler (when we KNOW that Blizzard changed the name), yet the Hand Mounted Pyro Rocket and the G1 Landshark represents Cluster Rocket?
Again, that isn't finding holes in people's arguments. Quite the opposite actually.

And I dare you to re-read that post you linked. Teriz gave four abilities. Out of those four, I recognized three there were adapted and brought to WoW, with only one of them being a 100% new creation for WoW.
Elusive Brawler was created from scratch for Monks. None of its effects reflect any of the Pandaren Brewmaster's abilities. Meanwhile the Landshark does. ranged AoE damage, just like you asked.

- - - Updated - - -

52% feel that there is no chance. 48% feels that there is a chance.
You think that's an overwhelming majority?

If you are going to make it binary, make it fair. <50% for 'no' and >50% for 'yes'.

And since 0-20% is basically 'no chance' when compared to the other percentages, just adding those three we have nearly 70%, so yes, that's over two times the amount for 'yes', so it's overwhelming majority.

[Teriz]

[B]
When I pointed out that the 'cluster rocket' Teriz pointed out is actually just a single entity that does damage. One rocket miss, all do. If doing 'AoE' is all that matters, I gave you something that does exactly that, that comes from engineering. That is what having a hole in your argument means.

AoE matters because it differentiates the ability from a single target ability. Surely you understand this don't you?

That's not even getting into the other problems of your "argument";

G1 Landshark:
-Ground Based mine
-Item
-Single target that does splash damage
-1 minute CD

Cluster Rocket:
-Air Based rocket(s)
-Ability
-Radius AoE attack
-15 second CD

And let's not forget that your argument is that G1 Landshark represents this WC3 ability in WoW;

Cluster Rocket
Bombards an area with rockets, stunning enemy land units for 1 second and damaging nearby enemy units.

Wouldn't Cluster Rocket represent Cluster Rocket in WoW?

And I dare you to re-read that post you linked. Teriz gave four abilities. Out of those four, I recognized three there were adapted and brought to WoW, with only one of them being a 100% new creation for WoW.
Elusive Brawler was created from scratch for Monks. None of its effects reflect any of the Pandaren Brewmaster's abilities. Meanwhile the Landshark does. ranged AoE damage, just like you asked.

So does Elusive Brawler represent the Drunken Brawler ability from WC3?

Also I distinctly remember you arguing that Mage's teleport ability isn't the same ability as the Archmage's teleport ability. Even though both are called teleport, and both teleports parties to friendly locations. Care to talk about that one?

[Ielenia]

AoE matters because it differentiates the ability from a single target ability. Surely you understand this don't you?
That's not even getting into the other problems of your "argument";

G1 Landshark:
-Ground Based mine
-Item
-Single target that does splash damage
-1 minute CD

Cluster Rocket:
-Air Based rocket(s)
-Ability
-Radius AoE attack
-15 second CD

What's the matter? Both are AoE damage.

Wouldn't Cluster Rocket represent Cluster Rocket in WoW?

I don't think so? According to your own rules, it needs to also AoE stun the mobs, and the WoW ability does not do so, therefore, again, by your own rules, why should it represent the ability?

So does Elusive Brawler represent the Drunken Brawler ability from WC3?

How did you get such a wrongful reading of what I wrote? Elusive Brawler doesn't have the same name, or even remotely similar effects. How can you possibly argue that while claiming abilities that do basically the same thing aren't the same? You either have to be a troll for that, or be Teriz. Probably going to get infracted for that, but your roundabout type of logic is astounding.

Also I distinctly remember you arguing that Mage's teleport ability isn't the same ability as the Archmage's teleport ability. Even though both are called teleport, and both teleports parties to friendly locations. Care to talk about that one?

Oh, that. I was just applying your logic to those.

[Teriz]

What's the matter? Both are AoE damage.

That's about the only thing they have in common.

I don't think so? According to your own rules, it needs to also AoE stun the mobs, and the WoW ability does not do so, therefore, again, by your own rules, why should it represent the ability?

Where did I say that the ability needs to be EXACTLY like the WC3 ability? Clearly when it has the same name, same function, and same purpose, its pretty much the same thing.

For example, Feral Spirit doesn't work EXACTLY like the WC3 ability. However, Feral Spirit clearly represents the WC3 ability in WoW.

How did you get such a wrongful reading of what I wrote? Elusive Brawler doesn't have the same name, or even remotely similar effects. How can you possibly argue that while claiming abilities that do basically the same thing aren't the same? You either have to be a troll for that, or be Teriz. Probably going to get infracted for that, but your roundabout type of logic is astounding.

It doesn't have the same name because Blizzard changed it in beta due to rating reasons. It doesn't have the same effect because of balance reasons. However, Blizzard clearly took inspiration from the Drunken Brawler ability from WC3, and Elusive Brawler clearly represents Drunken Brawler from WC3.

Oh, that. I was just applying your logic to those.

So you now admit that the Mage took more than just the Frost abilities from the Archemage?

[Sukhoi]

That's about the only thing they have in common.



Where did I say that the ability needs to be EXACTLY like the WC3 ability? Clearly when it has the same function, and same purpose?

So it's settled then. You agree the tinker rockets are in engineering. Same function and purpose.

[Teriz]

So it's settled then. You agree the tinker rockets are in engineering. Same function and purpose.

Nope. The function of the Tinker rockets is ability-based AoE damage, AoE stun.

The function of the Engineering item is armor enchant, single target damage.

Did I forget to mention that the names are different?

As for the rest;

Same effect as clockwerk goblin.
http://www.wowhead.com/spell=3955
http://www.wowhead.com/item=77530

Clockwerk Goblin:

Effect: Instantly constructs a factory that produces small robots that attack a target, and after a brief cd, explode doing splash damage.


Exploding Sheep: Summons an Explosive Sheep which will charge at a nearby enemy and explode for 135 to 165 damage. Lasts for 3 min or until it explodes. (1 Min Cooldown)


-No factory (main theme of ability)
-No constant stream of minions
-Sheep doesn't attack, just explodes
-AoE vs. Single target
-1 minute cooldown vs Factory constantly producing robotic minions
-Is an item that can be traded to others.
-Different name

Ghost Iron Dragonling: Your attacks have a chance to summon a Ghost Iron Dragonling to fight with you for 20 sec.

-No factory (main theme of ability)
-No constant stream of minions
-GID attacks, doesn't explode
-GID is a proc, not an ability
-GID is attached to a trinket
-AoE vs Single Target
-Is an item that can be traded to others.
-different name

And robo goblin.
http://www.wowhead.com/item=95416

Robo-Goblin

Effect: Transforms the Goblin mechanical, increases armor and strength.

Sky Golem: Teaches you how to ride the Sky Golem. This is a flying mount.

-Sky Golem is a mount. Robo Goblin is an ability
-Sky Golem has no combat abilities
-You are knocked out of the mount if you are attacked or dazed. Not the case in Robo Goblin.
-Remain organic, aren't granted mechanical properties
-Not even the same vehicle or name
-Sky Golem can't be used indoors.
-Sky Golem can be sold to other players

Sorry you guys ignore the evidence.

Evidence has to have some truth attached to it.

[Rhamses]

You said
When I pointed out that the 'cluster rocket' Teriz pointed out is actually just a single entity that does damage. One rocket miss, all do. If doing 'AoE' is all that matters, I gave you something that does exactly that, that comes from engineering. That is what having a hole in your argument means.

Of course doing AoE isn't the only thing that matters. However, AoE is an important difference.

[Deleted]

Voted 0% for the simple fact that everything mentioned here so far (especially the top two reasons to add tinkers) are too close to engineering.

This has probably been linked already but I'll link it anyway just to be sure.

http://www.wowhead.com/search?q=tinker%27s+gear

Look at the names and where they come from...

[Teriz]

Voted 0% for the simple fact that everything mentioned here so far (especially the top two reasons to add tinkers) are too close to engineering.

This has probably been linked already but I'll link it anyway just to be sure.

http://www.wowhead.com/search?q=tinker%27s+gear

Look at the names and where they come from...

Yes, because a bunch of cogwheels resemble the Tinker hero unit, and allows me to use the Tinker's abilities.

[Deleted]

They're items called Tinker's gear, made by an engineer, for an engineer... which basically says Blizzard thinks engineer and tinkers are the same which is also the complete opposite from everything you've been trying to say?

[Ielenia]

Where did I say that the ability needs to be EXACTLY like the WC3 ability?

Well, in a post, I asked, and I repeat: "Seriously, are you looking for exact mentions of name and functionality of the WC3 Tinker hero?" To which you responded:

That's what we got with DKs and Monks.

And another post:

However, we can easily have a class perform an AoE attack that stuns (Cluster Rocket).

So there you go. Two instances where you asked for the exact WC3 ability.

It doesn't have the same name because Blizzard changed it in beta due to rating reasons. It doesn't have the same effect because of balance reasons. However, Blizzard clearly took inspiration from the Drunken Brawler ability from WC3, and Elusive Brawler clearly represents Drunken Brawler from WC3.

Your opinion. I say they renamed it because the ability has nothing to do with the Pandaren Brewmaster's Drunken Brawler since it doesn't give dodge or critical strike rating. Your 'ratings' argument would have more foundation if the same happened back with WC3, back during a time the world was less forgiving.

UPDATE: Oh by the way, here's an example of your hypocrisy: you said that 'Elusive Brawler' is the Pandaren Monk's 'Drunken Brawler' ability just because they, briefly, at one time, shared a name, and nothing else, yet you also said this:

WC3: Cluster Rockets:
"Bombards an area with rockets, stunning enemy units for 1 second and damaging them."
WoW: Cluster Rockets:
Cluster Rocket
40 yd range
Instant 15 sec cooldown
Requires level 1
Fires a rocket into the air that will split into many small rockets and hit all targets in a radius.
http://www.wowhead.com/spell=136297
Not the same ability.

[Teriz]

They're items called Tinker's gear, made by an engineer, for an engineer... which basically says Blizzard thinks engineer and tinkers are the same which is also the complete opposite from everything you've been trying to say?

Um, you don't need to be an engineer to use the cogwheels. Anyone can use them, and many Engineers sell them to make money.

I guess you think wearing the Bard armor makes you into a bard....

[Deleted]

Um, you don't need to be an engineer to use the cogwheels. Anyone can use them, and many Engineers sell them to make money.

I guess you think wearing the Bard armor makes you into a bard....

So you're only going to comment on a detail I forgot and ignore everything else, good job *slow clap*

Keep thinking they'll add a Tinker, keep dreaming... it won't happen