View Poll Results: Which class should be brought in next?

Voters
615. This poll is closed
  • Tinker

    430 69.92%
  • Necromancer

    185 30.08%
Page 34 of 56 FirstFirst ...
24
32
33
34
35
36
44
... LastLast
  1. #661
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Well I have good news; All signs are pointing towards Survival being a spec based around explosives in the next expansion.

    The point is this; If your basis for the Bard class are hymns, you might as well advocate for a holy Priest spec based around hymns. It simply makes more sense.
    My bard design would be:

    Mail Class, using instruments, 2 specs like DH, Int as primary stat

    1. Healing spec: Using Harmony as resource - build up harmony with different elements (either melodies for casts or accords for instants), and release harmony with finishers (however you might call them) - singing and playing a melodic instrument like harp or a lute. Base elements have some kind of healing effect on the target (or group) - either normal heal or HoT - and have either a cast time or a CD.
    All finishers would have some kind of a special positive effect on your group - depending on the finisher. Duration of the effect would depend on how much harmony you blow on it (similar to rogue combo points)
    Examples (all AoE either on your party or on all targets in the range of your target): simple healing, HoT effect, damage reduction effect, haste buff, crit buff etc.

    2. ranged DPS spec: Using Discord as resource - similar mechanic as with harmony - shouting and possibly percussion instruments. Discord spells deal either normal damage or DoTs and have either cast time or are instants with CDs.
    All finishers would have some debuff effects on enemies in range of your target, depending on the finisher. Again, duration would depend on the amount of discord used (again similar to rogue).
    Examples: increased damage taken, DoT effect, disorient / stun, silence, root, fear etc.

    If you want to reduce the amount of weapons / instruments needed for one class, then I would fall back to the bagpipe as an allrounder, which was used by the Scots, a very combat-oriented culture.

    Background: Armies always have musicians to accompany them. Why not have some bards / skalds then?

    (Yes I know, the ministrel in LotRO works somehow similar to this concept. Was my favorite class in that game, and there kinda are no ministrel characters in the book, so....)

    Beside that: I would rather have Tinkers than Necromancers, because an overlap with one or two professions is not as bad as butchering a Hero Class (DK).

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by drongo44 View Post
    Tinkers would make a pretty excellent hero class. A spec that customizes mechs, a spec that has a Gazlowe-like backpack, a spec that throws around healing or support devices. Give them to goblins and gnomes so people actually roll them.
    I'd support that. I play a Goblin Shaman with engineering profession because it's one of the two possible combinations to somehow get to the Goblin mechanics in RTS games (the other would have been Hunter, but I already had some when creating the Goblin character, and no Shaman at that time). Shaman because elemental lightning damage and mechanical totems.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    [SNIP] Not really. Classes tend to be themed around expansions and the cover of that expansion showcases a representative from the class . Without a connection to WoW that's not happening.
    See above - musicians of all kinds accompany armies like forever. Army music bands are a big thing. We will have a big clash of two factions in the next expansion. This could be the perfect time to introduce a bard.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by The Man in Room V View Post
    To be honest, all of the new class ideas should really be new spec ideas. After Legion's "tech-nifying" of the hunter class, Tinkers should be a new spec for hunters. Necromancers should be warlocks or priests. Bards feel like a type of rogue and Blademasters fit the monk perfectly.

    They should just stop adding new classes and start adding new specs. And no, they don't need to make one for every class at once. Feature like 3 per expansion.
    Would not mind that either, though I am not sure how a spec concentrating on making noise fits to a stealthy class.
    Last edited by mmoceb1073a651; 2018-01-29 at 12:33 PM.

  2. #662
    Necromancer is too close to DK and warlock, so my vote goes for tinker.

  3. #663
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,821
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    It's almost as if classes are built around concepts and not abilities... but that can't be the case, can it, Teriz? Because if they are, arguing against specific abilities become a meaningless endeavor...
    Again, you're talking about a concept with a long history in WoW and full of prominent lore figures. Additionally you have the traditional Paladin character class which typically has healing abilities, and you have the WC3 hero unit which also had healing abilities. Place that in a 3-spec based class system and you're guaranteed to have a healing spec that will be Holy-based.

    Contrast that with the Bard who has no such grounding within the Warcraft universe, traditionally takes a role that doesn't exist in the game, and has no major lore figures to speak of, and there you have a problem.

    And a purpose would be created for the bard, if Blizzard decides to implement the class.
    Again, the Bard's unique niche doesn't exist in WoW, so what would be the reason to introduce them into the game?`

    Spells cast through singing.
    How is that any different than a standard spell? Monks have Song of Chi-Ji, Priests have Divine Hymn, and DKs have Horn of Winter. There's nothing particularly different or unique about any of
    those abilities.


    Assuming, for the sake of argument, that what you say is true, what's the problem? Wouldn't that technically give the developers greater freedom to create the class?
    See above.

    Adapting a class concept to the game's lore sounds like a very good reason to do it.
    Adapting a class that adds little to the game? Okay.

    Except it wouldn't change them that much, if at all?
    Based on current lore they're not adventurers or fighters, they're just storytellers and librarians. Changing them into adventurers or fighters would be a massive change to their character (and wouldn't make much sense).

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by scubistacy View Post
    My bard design would be:

    Mail Class, using instruments, 2 specs like DH, Int as primary stat

    1. Healing spec: Using Harmony as resource - build up harmony with different elements (either melodies for casts or accords for instants), and release harmony with finishers (however you might call them) - singing and playing a melodic instrument like harp or a lute. Base elements have some kind of healing effect on the target (or group) - either normal heal or HoT - and have either a cast time or a CD.
    All finishers would have some kind of a special positive effect on your group - depending on the finisher. Duration of the effect would depend on how much harmony you blow on it (similar to rogue combo points)
    Examples (all AoE either on your party or on all targets in the range of your target): simple healing, HoT effect, damage reduction effect, haste buff, crit buff etc.

    2. ranged DPS spec: Using Discord as resource - similar mechanic as with harmony - shouting and possibly percussion instruments. Discord spells deal either normal damage or DoTs and have either cast time or are instants with CDs.
    All finishers would have some debuff effects on enemies in range of your target, depending on the finisher. Again, duration would depend on the amount of discord used (again similar to rogue).
    Examples: increased damage taken, DoT effect, disorient / stun, silence, root, fear etc.

    If you want to reduce the amount of weapons / instruments needed for one class, then I would fall back to the bagpipe as an allrounder, which was used by the Scots, a very combat-oriented culture.

    Background: Armies always have musicians to accompany them. Why not have some bards / skalds then?

    (Yes I know, the ministrel in LotRO works somehow similar to this concept. Was my favorite class in that game, and there kinda are no ministrel characters in the book, so....)
    Sounds like a good 4th spec for Rogues.

  4. #664
    The Unstoppable Force Ielenia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    21,877
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Again, you're talking about a concept with a long history in WoW and full of prominent lore figures.
    Monks did not have "a long history in WoW" and weren't "full of prominent lore figures".

    Additionally you have the traditional Paladin character class which typically has healing abilities,
    And we have the traditional bard character who can heal, cast spells, fight with bows and arrows, and swords.

    and you have the WC3 hero unit which also had healing abilities.
    No direct 1:1 unit in WC3, true, but that isn't really a deterrent for the idea of a class based off the bard character.

    Place that in a 3-spec based class system and you're guaranteed to have a healing spec that will be Holy-based.
    We already had priests who are holy healers. Didn't stop paladins. We already had warlocks with meta. Didn't stop demon hunters.

    Contrast that with the Bard who has no such grounding within the Warcraft universe(1), traditionally takes a role that doesn't exist in the game (2), and has no major lore figures to speak of (3), and there you have a problem.
    1. I don't see why that would be a deterrent;
    2. That's because you are pigeonholing them into being a support class, despite numerous times being shown that they don't have to be 'purely support' class, at least no more than current classes are (and will be in BfA);
    3. Monks had no major lore figure to speak of. One had to be adapted into it.

    Again, the Bard's unique niche doesn't exist in WoW
    Only because you're erroneously forcing the idea that they're a "support-only" type of class. They easily fit into WoW's current class system.

    How is that any different than a standard spell? Monks have Song of Chi-Ji, Priests have Divine Hymn, and DKs have Horn of Winter. There's nothing particularly different or unique about any of those abilities.
    What is different between a priest's holy healing and a paladin's holy healing? Both are restoring friendly targets' HPs using holy-based spells. 'Spellsinging' could be used to introduce a new mechanic. Off the top of my head, it could be something similar to the 'combo' system WW monks have, where if you chain different abilities without repeating you get bonus damage.

    See above.
    Does not answer the question.

    Adapting a class that adds little to the game? Okay.
    Funny. The same could be said about tinkers. The technology theme is already widely available to the players through engineering.

    Based on current lore they're not adventurers or fighters, they're just storytellers and librarians. Changing them into adventurers or fighters would be a massive change to their character (and wouldn't make much sense).
    I guess you forgot Cho was coming along with us for raids and such? He's still adventuring. And becoming adventurers is not a massive change to their character.
    "Torturing someone is not an evil thing to do if it is done for good reasons" by Varodoc
    "You sit in OG/SW waiting on a Mythic+ queue" by Altmer <- Oh, the pearls in this forum...
    "They sort of did this Dragonriding, which ushered in the Dracthyr race." by Teriz <- the BS some people reach for their narratives...

  5. #665
    High Overlord drongo44's Avatar
    5+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Dunedoo, AUS
    Posts
    198
    Quote Originally Posted by BedlamBros View Post
    Wow, over 500 votes in and the Tinker has a pretty dominating lead over the Necromancer. Didn't think it would be this lopsided.

    I wonder why the Tinker is so much more popular on this forum than the Necromancer. Any answers?
    We have a necromancer class already. It carries around a runeblade and a voice modifier.

  6. #666
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    The last time we had thematic overlap Warlocks lost a spec. The DKs entire class is a thematic overlap with the Necromancer. You think Blizzard is going to change the entire DK class in order to simply bring in a caster version of what we already have?

    I don't.
    Then you're talking about what you want. Sorry you feel like a special snowflake but DK's aren't Necromancers.

    The Warlock was unfortunate that they happened to take the most iconic ability from the Demon Hunters. Necromancers only iconic ability in Warcraft other than 'Raise Dead', and aside from that their class theme can be anything. Zandalari Blood Trolls seem to be using Necromancy and we have a Lich model datamined right now. Same seems to be happening with some baddies on Kul'Tiras, if you've seen the new Hag model. Cultures capable of Necromancy extends beyond the Scourge, while the DK encapsulated as a sole representative of the Scourge within the playable factions.

    We even have new lore and examples to spell out the differences. Chronicles 3 hits in a couple months and will expand on Lich lore. BFA has Zandalari Blood Troll Liches and undead Hags that aren't tied to the Lich King. DK's entire theme is built on powers drawn from the Scourge specifically, and all races ressed by them are attuned to the Necropolis that houses them all. Necromancers as a class are mortals that use the power of undeath to elevate their personal status and need not be bound by any singular organization. That's a massive difference in theme.

    Thus the theme for DK's is Scourge, and the Necromancer is cultural Undeath Magic (ie Voodoo for Trolls, Death-Priests for Draenei, Dark Shamans for Orcs)
    Last edited by Thimagryn; 2018-01-29 at 08:09 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    "Real" Demon Hunters don't work as a class in modern WoW
    Quote Originally Posted by Talen View Post
    Please point out to me the player Demon Hunter who has Meta.

  7. #667
    Quote Originally Posted by Thimagryn View Post
    Then you're talking about what you want. Sorry you feel like a special snowflake but DK's aren't Necromancers.

    The Warlock was unfortunate that they happened to take the most iconic ability from the Demon Hunters. Necromancers only iconic ability in Warcraft other than 'Raise Dead', and aside from that their class theme can be anything. Zandalari Blood Trolls seem to be using Necromancy and we have a Lich model datamined right now. Same seems to be happening with some baddies on Kul'Tiras, if you've seen the new Hag model. Cultures capable of Necromancy extends beyond the Scourge, while the DK encapsulated as a sole representative of the Scourge within the playable factions.

    We even have new lore and examples to spell out the differences. Chronicles 3 hits in a couple months and will expand on Lich lore. BFA has Zandalari Blood Troll Liches and undead Hags that aren't tied to the Lich King. DK's entire theme is built on powers drawn from the Scourge specifically, and all races ressed by them are attuned to the Necropolis that houses them all. Necromancers as a class are mortals that use the power of undeath to elevate their personal status and need not be bound by any singular organization. That's a massive difference in theme.

    Thus the theme for DK's is Scourge, and the Necromancer is cultural Undeath Magic (ie Voodoo for Trolls, Death-Priests for Draenei, Dark Shamans for Orcs)
    To be honest I sort of thought up some way they could implement Necromancers without changing any of the existing specs, one spec focusing on swarming with undead combined with empowering a specific minion(think demo loc + bm hunter), another for a dark counterpart to frost mage(like how destruction loc is one to fire), and one focusing on straight up diseases, with all three having minions more aligned with the way hunters do it, by enslaving undead they find around the place

  8. #668
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,821
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    Monks did not have "a long history in WoW" and weren't "full of prominent lore figures".
    Chen Stormstout was in WC3, and there's been Monk characters in WoW since vanilla.


    And we have the traditional bard character who can heal, cast spells, fight with bows and arrows, and swords.
    And there's no prominent WoW character who does any of that. Lorewalker Cho certainly doesn't.


    No direct 1:1 unit in WC3, true, but that isn't really a deterrent for the idea of a class based off the bard character.
    Based on the previous class additions to WoW it very well could be.


    We already had priests who are holy healers. Didn't stop paladins. We already had warlocks with meta. Didn't stop demon hunters.
    But the fact that there is no spot for a support class that buffs, and the fact that Bards exist nowhere in lore outside of a few unrelated NPCs will stop Bards.

    1. I don't see why that would be a deterrent;
    2. That's because you are pigeonholing them into being a support class, despite numerous times being shown that they don't have to be 'purely support' class, at least no more than current classes are (and will be in BfA);
    3. Monks had no major lore figure to speak of. One had to be adapted into it.
    1. Because that's what makes the class unique; Their songs are channeled auras that buff other players.
    2. If a Bard isn't a support class then its nothing more than a glorified Rogue.
    3. And it was pretty easy to place the Brewmaster hero within the Monk class. Good luck finding a WC3 hero unit that can be that way for Bards.

    Only because you're erroneously forcing the idea that they're a "support-only" type of class. They easily fit into WoW's current class system.
    Again, without their buffing niche, they're nothing special. Their ability to buff makes them interesting to play. Unfortunately that won't work in the WoW party system.

    What is different between a priest's holy healing and a paladin's holy healing? Both are restoring friendly targets' HPs using holy-based spells. 'Spellsinging' could be used to introduce a new mechanic. Off the top of my head, it could be something similar to the 'combo' system WW monks have, where if you chain different abilities without repeating you get bonus damage.
    Again, you're comparing two Warcraft mainstays to a concept that almost doesn't exist in the game. The term "Spellsong" isn't even a term in the game, you just made it up.

    Funny. The same could be said about tinkers. The technology theme is already widely available to the players through engineering.
    The difference is that we see Goblin and Gnome heroes using technology far beyond what the profession allows players to do. Utilizing the technology seen by Gelbin, Gazlowe, Blackfuse and other prominent Goblin and Gnome characters is completely absent from the class lineup. On the other hand, we currently have multiple classes in WoW that use "sonic" abilities, and there's no "Bard" heroes in WoW or WC3 to consider anything beyond that.

    I guess you forgot Cho was coming along with us for raids and such? He's still adventuring. And becoming adventurers is not a massive change to their character.
    Did Cho do any actual fighting, or was he just a glorified tour guide? I definitely don't recall Cho using a bow or sword or healing the group with "spellsongs".

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Thimagryn View Post
    Then you're talking about what you want. Sorry you feel like a special snowflake but DK's aren't Necromancers.
    ::Looks at the poll::

    If you say so.

    The Warlock was unfortunate that they happened to take the most iconic ability from the Demon Hunters. Necromancers only iconic ability in Warcraft other than 'Raise Dead', and aside from that their class theme can be anything. Zandalari Blood Trolls seem to be using Necromancy and we have a Lich model datamined right now. Same seems to be happening with some baddies on Kul'Tiras, if you've seen the new Hag model. Cultures capable of Necromancy extends beyond the Scourge, while the DK encapsulated as a sole representative of the Scourge within the playable factions.
    DKs also have Unholy Frenzy which originated in the Necromancer WC3 unit. Also yes there are multiple varieties of Necromancers, but they're all doing essentially the same thing. It's like saying we should have another Monk class since WoW clearly shows other types of Monks beyond the Pandaren variety which we play as. Adding another Monk class to the game sounds absurd, and so does adding another Necromancer class to the game.

  9. #669
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    ::Looks at the poll::

    If you say so.
    *scratches head* So more people like Tinkers means DK's and Necromancers are the same thing? Sorry, I don't get what you're looking at there.

    DKs also have Unholy Frenzy which originated in the Necromancer WC3 unit. Also yes there are multiple varieties of Necromancers, but they're all doing essentially the same thing. It's like saying we should have another Monk class since WoW clearly shows other types of Monks beyond the Pandaren variety which we play as. Adding another Monk class to the game sounds absurd, and so does adding another Necromancer class to the game.
    And Necromancers aren't defined by Unholy Frenzy. Easy answer right there.

    Monks didn't even have Storm Earth and Fire until after they were added. It wasn't even missed.

    And no, we didn't get another Monk class, but we did get another Fel magic user.
    Last edited by Thimagryn; 2018-01-29 at 10:28 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    "Real" Demon Hunters don't work as a class in modern WoW
    Quote Originally Posted by Talen View Post
    Please point out to me the player Demon Hunter who has Meta.

  10. #670
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,821
    Quote Originally Posted by Thimagryn View Post
    *scratches head* So more people like Tinkers means DK's and Necromancers are the same thing? Sorry, I don't get what you're looking at there.
    The reason people prefer Tinkers over Necromancers is because many view DKs and Necromancers as the same thing.


    And Necromancers aren't defined by Unholy Frenzy. Easy answer right there.
    No, but they are defined by raising skeletons and the undead, something DKs already do.

    Monks didn't even have Storm Earth and Fire until after they were added. It wasn't even missed.

    And no, we didn't get another Monk class, but we did get another Fel magic user.
    SEF wasn't missed because Blizzard stated pretty early on that it was in development for the class.

    You could make an argument for a DH class, because they are fundamentally different than Warlocks (once you remove metamorphosis). The differences between Necros and DKs is superficial at best.

  11. #671
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    You could make an argument for a DH class, because they are fundamentally different than Warlocks (once you remove metamorphosis). The differences between Necros and DKs is superficial at best.
    Most arguments against DH, including yours, pointed out the thematic overlap. There are fundamental differences between Death Knights and Necromancers, but you seem to be calling this superficial when we can easily see the Blood Troll Liches look nothing like a Troll Death Knight.

    BTW seen the new skeleton models for existing races? They're pretty cool. I wonder if the Death Knight is going to use them as a part of new abilities. It's a part of their theme, right?
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    "Real" Demon Hunters don't work as a class in modern WoW
    Quote Originally Posted by Talen View Post
    Please point out to me the player Demon Hunter who has Meta.

  12. #672
    Quote Originally Posted by Thimagryn View Post
    Most arguments against DH, including yours, pointed out the thematic overlap. There are fundamental differences between Death Knights and Necromancers, but you seem to be calling this superficial when we can easily see the Blood Troll Liches look nothing like a Troll Death Knight.

    BTW seen the new skeleton models for existing races? They're pretty cool. I wonder if the Death Knight is going to use them as a part of new abilities. It's a part of their theme, right?
    I went to the threads of your signature and its hilarious.

    Its the same arguments but instead of Meta is Unholy Frenzy, instea of Dh = Warlock is Necros=Dks and the list goes on.

    How was the sensation when the Dh were announced and proving the all knowing and right Teriz wrong?
    Mage Tower Final Result:
    Dk:3/3 Mage:3/3 Mage:3/3 Mage:1/3 Dh:2/2 Warlock:3/3 Hunter: 3/3 Priest:3/3 Paladin:3/3 Warrior: 3/3 Rogue:3/3 Shaman:3/3 Monk:3/3 Druid: 4/4

  13. #673
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,821
    Quote Originally Posted by Thimagryn View Post
    Most arguments against DH, including yours, pointed out the thematic overlap. There are fundamental differences between Death Knights and Necromancers, but you seem to be calling this superficial when we can easily see the Blood Troll Liches look nothing like a Troll Death Knight.
    Again I disagree with the belief that there is a fundamental difference between Necros and DKs. The majority of forum posters also appear to agree with that assessment. If you remember, it wasn't that way with DHs.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Darktbs View Post
    I went to the threads of your signature and its hilarious.

    Its the same arguments but instead of Meta is Unholy Frenzy, instea of Dh = Warlock is Necros=Dks and the list goes on.

    How was the sensation when the Dh were announced and proving the all knowing and right Teriz wrong?
    I was wrong in that I didn't believe Blizzard would nuke a spec to shoehorn a limited, shallow class. I was mistaken in that regard, but I was certainly correct in the damage that DHs did to the class lineup. I think part of the reason you have the poll results here is because no one wants a repeat of what happened with DHs and Warlocks.

  14. #674
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Again I disagree with the belief that there is a fundamental difference between Necros and DKs. The majority of forum posters also appear to agree with that assessment. If you remember, it wasn't that way with DHs.
    The majority of players agree that Tinkers 'better for the game' than Necromancers, which is why I voted for Tinkers. It didn't ask 'which would you prefer to see?' which is why I didn't vote for Necromancer. For the betterment of the game, the Tinker is a better valued addition.

    That doesn't mean people think DK's are the same as Necromancers, because it's not one-or-the-other thread. The OP ask which would be better, which would hold things back. Tinker does both because it's both better for the game for filling a gaping niche, but at the same time hold it back because Goblins and Gnomes aren't as appealing to the wide audience. They're popular amongst the niche in our community, the same ones who asked for them to become official heroes in Warcraft 3.
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    "Real" Demon Hunters don't work as a class in modern WoW
    Quote Originally Posted by Talen View Post
    Please point out to me the player Demon Hunter who has Meta.

  15. #675
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post


    I was wrong in that I didn't believe Blizzard would nuke a spec to shoehorn a limited, shallow class. I was mistaken in that regard, but I was certainly correct in the damage that DHs did to the class lineup. I think part of the reason you have the poll results here is because no one wants a repeat of what happened with DHs and Warlocks.
    Not only if the class/spec is good or not is subjective, but one does not relate to the other.

    If a spec ends up bad is fault of the developers for not coming up with a good design for the spec.

    If they decided to do the same thing but without adding Dh people would still complain because they didn't like the new design.

    Is the Dh fault for Demo losing meta?Maybe, but its not their fault for the spec or anyother becoming bad in others eye.
    Mage Tower Final Result:
    Dk:3/3 Mage:3/3 Mage:3/3 Mage:1/3 Dh:2/2 Warlock:3/3 Hunter: 3/3 Priest:3/3 Paladin:3/3 Warrior: 3/3 Rogue:3/3 Shaman:3/3 Monk:3/3 Druid: 4/4

  16. #676
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,821
    Quote Originally Posted by Thimagryn View Post
    The majority of players agree that Tinkers 'better for the game' than Necromancers, which is why I voted for Tinkers. It didn't ask 'which would you prefer to see?' which is why I didn't vote for Necromancer. For the betterment of the game, the Tinker is a better valued addition.

    That doesn't mean people think DK's are the same as Necromancers, because it's not one-or-the-other thread. The OP ask which would be better, which would hold things back. Tinker does both because it's both better for the game for filling a gaping niche, but at the same time hold it back because Goblins and Gnomes aren't as appealing to the wide audience. They're popular amongst the niche in our community, the same ones who asked for them to become official heroes in Warcraft 3.
    Really? I've been reading the responses in this thread. Those who oppose the necromancer almost always say "its too much like the DK or Warlocks".

  17. #677
    Accidentally read the title as "Necromancer Tinker," and thought that it was a great unique idea. Why not combine both?
    Quote Originally Posted by kary View Post
    "People won't take the time to help me get geared"
    then
    "I'm too busy to get geared, I don't have the time to spare"

  18. #678
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,821
    Quote Originally Posted by Darktbs View Post
    Not only if the class/spec is good or not is subjective, but one does not relate to the other.

    If a spec ends up bad is fault of the developers for not coming up with a good design for the spec.

    If they decided to do the same thing but without adding Dh people would still complain because they didn't like the new design.

    Is the Dh fault for Demo losing meta?Maybe, but its not their fault for the spec or anyother becoming bad in others eye.
    The spec became bad because there's only so many ways to skin a cat. You already have multiple DW melee specs in the game. Adding 2 more simply became redundant, and there wasn't many places to go gameplay wise. It also didn't help that the class only had two specs, so if you dislike Havoc and weren't into tanking, you had nowhere to go but back to the character select screen.

  19. #679
    I would personnally prefer Necromancer, but Tinker has a lot more to add to the game.

    Both are somewhat in the game, that could be argued, like DH was "in the game" before Legion with a mix of Warlock and Rogue stuff.

    But they're not "in the game" comparably : Necromancer is already comprised of aspects of the Affliction Warlock and, mostly, of the Unholy Death Knight. The Tinker is "in the game", at the most, as the Gnome/Goblin Hunter, only using guns and mechanical pets, and using Engineering gadgets (with the spec of his race).

    So Tinker would bring a lot more fresh ideas, that would be pretty cool.

    Frankly I can see either Tinker or some kind of Naga-only Seawitch as the next race. I don't see Necromancer ever making it in the game.

    The addition of a Fourth Spec (which is also higly unlikely, it's a balancing nightmare) would kill Necromancer for good, as it would likely result in a Range Death Knight spec.

  20. #680
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    The spec became bad because there's only so many ways to skin a cat. You already have multiple DW melee specs in the game. Adding 2 more simply became redundant, and there wasn't many places to go gameplay wise. It also didn't help that the class only had two specs, so if you dislike Havoc and weren't into tanking, you had nowhere to go but back to the character select screen.
    So you just agreed with me that it was the designers fault and not the Dh introduction.

    And again, its subjective, if you don't like any of the Dh specs you have 11 other classes to test and play.Not everything will be fun for everyone.
    Mage Tower Final Result:
    Dk:3/3 Mage:3/3 Mage:3/3 Mage:1/3 Dh:2/2 Warlock:3/3 Hunter: 3/3 Priest:3/3 Paladin:3/3 Warrior: 3/3 Rogue:3/3 Shaman:3/3 Monk:3/3 Druid: 4/4

Posting Permissions

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