Page 14 of 52 FirstFirst ...
4
12
13
14
15
16
24
... LastLast
  1. #261
    The Insane Thage's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Δ Hidden Forbidden Holy Ground
    Posts
    19,105
    I just don't really see what niche they can fill that Engineering doesn't really already have covered. I'm not against it conceptually, but there's a lot of legwork to put in to sell me on the idea if they intend to have Tinker feel distinct from a tank, melee DPS, or ranged DPS with Engineering.
    Be seeing you guys on Bloodsail Buccaneers NA!



  2. #262
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,804
    Quote Originally Posted by Shiza View Post
    Can you also explain that if the Mech is simply a visual which basically applies what on other classes is their tank passive, how their actual gameplay and active mitigation would work out? You constantly argue about how unique your fantasy of a Tinker would be while shutting down differenciating ideas of how a tinker could be, so you should have an idea about how they would work as a Tank. I mean, what I've seen so far for example your idea of giving them a rocket jump was just ripping off mechanics from other classes.
    Feel free to look at my class write up. I explain all of that there.

    Also Skyfall isn't "Rocket Jump". It's a mech ability from WoW;

    https://www.wowhead.com/spell=189634/skyfall

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Thage View Post
    I just don't really see what niche they can fill that Engineering doesn't really already have covered. I'm not against it conceptually, but there's a lot of legwork to put in to sell me on the idea if they intend to have Tinker feel distinct from a tank, melee DPS, or ranged DPS with Engineering.
    Vehicle combat, physical ranged different from Hunter, technology theme, maneless Science-based healing

  3. #263
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Please link me to the Hunter and Tinker ability called "Rockets".
    https://www.wowhead.com/spell=145661/explosive-shot

    The animation is shooting a rocket. So this mechanic is already part of the Hunter and you would need to take it away from them to include it in Tinkers.

    If you have no interest in the class, why do you care if its played or not? If the class is fun to play as, why should anyone care if its "popular"?
    I have no interest in your concept of a Tinker which is kinda shit, but I kinda liked machinists in FF14 and certainly would play one if it is available to races I play. The problem is still though that you are advocating for an idea which is not likely to be played often as an entire expansion feature, when looking at demographics other ideas may be in theory less popular but may end up being more played. Not to forget that this was not the argument you were making. You were making the argument that Blizzard has to creat Tinkers as the next playable class because according to your polls they were the most popular. So were are argueing about popularity and I showed you how concepts which are popular in theory will lose against concepts nobody asks for or actually wants.

    The flaw in your argument is your assumption that people who like Gnomes/Goblins are the same people who PLAY Gnomes/Goblins. For example, I like Gnomes/Goblins, but I don't play as one in WoW.
    You mean you like their lore but you hate their entire visual design. This was your argument of why you don't play one. Also, no, the polls actually stated that people are actually playing Gnomes/Goblins.

  4. #264
    Over 9000! Kithelle's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Somewhere where canon still exists
    Posts
    9,476
    Quote Originally Posted by Bwonsamdi the Dead View Post
    Because WoW is a high fantasy game, and technology doesn't really fit? Plus, look at the Engineer class in GW2. It's kind of weird that it only uses guns by default
    Technology has been around since the RTS...the game has airships and submarines...tanks and fighter planes...robots and mechs...

    If they don't want technology in their fantasy they should have quit long ago and went to LOTRO.

  5. #265
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Feel free to look at my class write up. I explain all of that there.

    Also Skyfall isn't "Rocket Jump". It's a mech ability from WoW;

    https://www.wowhead.com/spell=189634/skyfall
    That is basically charge with a slow, so no new mechanic. And I'm not interested in your fanfiction, I'm interested in what their active mitigation and playstyle would be. So far everything you showed us was ripped off from other classes with no unique mechanics.


    Vehicle combat, physical ranged different from Hunter, technology theme, maneless Science-based healing
    Your ideas sound like just slapping together hunters and shamans in terms of gameplay though.

  6. #266
    Over 9000! Kithelle's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Somewhere where canon still exists
    Posts
    9,476
    Quote Originally Posted by Thage View Post
    I just don't really see what niche they can fill that Engineering doesn't really already have covered. I'm not against it conceptually, but there's a lot of legwork to put in to sell me on the idea if they intend to have Tinker feel distinct from a tank, melee DPS, or ranged DPS with Engineering.
    So once again I ask, do you think Tinker combat would involve crafting guns and goggles? So you throw the items at the boss to do damage?

  7. #267
    The Insane Thage's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Δ Hidden Forbidden Holy Ground
    Posts
    19,105
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Vehicle combat, physical ranged different from Hunter, technology theme, maneless Science-based healing
    I can almost guarantee you Blizzard won't make vehicle combat a key focus for an entire class given how badly it's generally received when it's made a quest mechanic (and how badly it was received as a major dungeon mechanic in Occulus and a raid mechanic in Maly). 'Physical ranged different from Hunter' explains nothing, especially because Marksman is almost completely a physical ranged spec after the Legion rework. 'Manaless science-based healing,' again, provides no explanation on how it would actually function from a gameplay perspective. Also, a healer not confined by mana sounds like it would be a Sisyphean nightmare to balance.

    The technology theme doesn't mean anything. A marksman hunter with Lone Wolf and Engineering has a strong technology theme. A warrior with the ToC vibrosword and Engineering has a technology theme. If you want Tinker to happen, it needs to feel distinct from a character with a high investment in Engineering and you have to be able to explain how it's different. Three-word phrases do not explain how they would be different any more than if someone defending Monk in the day would have explained 'They're different from Rogue because they have a kung fu theme.'

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Kithelle View Post
    So once again I ask, do you think Tinker combat would involve crafting guns and goggles? So you throw the items at the boss to do damage?
    I don't fuckin' know, man, that's why I'm saying people who actively want it are going to have to do a good job explaining what makes it different from Engineering. I'm just saying it if happens and it manages to feel different from Engineering, I wouldn't be opposed to it--ball's in their court to sell me on the idea.
    Be seeing you guys on Bloodsail Buccaneers NA!



  8. #268
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,804
    Quote Originally Posted by Shiza View Post
    https://www.wowhead.com/spell=145661/explosive-shot

    The animation is shooting a rocket. So this mechanic is already part of the Hunter and you would need to take it away from them to include it in Tinkers.
    Yeah, there is no Tinker ability called Explosive Shot. Sorry.


    I have no interest in your concept of a Tinker which is kinda shit...
    Really? I thought you wanted to know how I conceptualize Tinker tanking in a mech. Please make up your mind.

    You mean you like their lore but you hate their entire visual design. This was your argument of why you don't play one. Also, no, the polls actually stated that people are actually playing Gnomes/Goblins.
    That singular poll with under 300 respondents. I was talking about the poll with over 600 respondents.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Shiza View Post
    Your ideas sound like just slapping together hunters and shamans in terms of gameplay though.
    I wasn't aware that Hunters and Shaman piloted vehicles and were technology-based.

  9. #269
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Feel free to look at my class write up. I explain all of that there.

    Also Skyfall isn't "Rocket Jump". It's a mech ability from WoW;

    https://www.wowhead.com/spell=189634/skyfall
    So I made the mistake of looking up your concept and so far, your class has no active mitigation. The arm canon sounds plain unfair towards other tanks and so far there is not a single unique concept. You rip off the leap from Demon Hunters or Warriors, depending on cd and two abilites are basically ripping off Gorefriends grasp (one of the Blood DKs most important supportive and crowd control abilities on a long cooldown) while doing damage, being absolutely overpowered. The slow when being hit by auto attacks is overpowered for kiting. And the Turret taunt is basically ripping off the Ox Statue from Brewmasters while applying a slow, stealing an iconic and unique ability from another class instead of creating anything unique.

    And again, you have no real concept and no active mitigation which is the core of any tank. What you do is stealing off the strongest concepts from other Tank classes which sounds like you want your fanfiction wish fulfillment class to be absolutely op. I can clearly see just on the concept that you probably have no experience in any content above normal dungeons.

  10. #270
    The word "Tinkerer" makes me shiver. A kind of similar reaction to some people's reaction to glass scratching. The word should not exist. Also, does it not mean something offensive in some slang language? Call it something more decent and neutral and at least half of those who are cringy about the idea would disappear. Personally, I would rather play a class called "Princess" than the one called "Tinkerer".

  11. #271
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Yeah, there is no Tinker ability called Explosive Shot. Sorry.
    It is still the animation of a rocket being launched, so that can't be included on Tinkers without stealing off from Hunters.

    Really? I thought you wanted to know how I conceptualize Tinker tanking in a mech. Please make up your mind.
    I bothered to do so and I came to the conclusion why normal dungeon and lfr heroes with no grasp on how this game actually operates shouldn't write classes. It is horrible bullshit

    That singular poll with under 300 respondents. I was talking about the poll with over 600 respondents.
    You still keep ignoring my arguments which weaken yours on the basis of polls.

    I wasn't aware that Hunters and Shaman piloted vehicles and were technology-based.
    This is all just aesthetics. I am talking about mechanics. And mechanically, the Tinker is even less unique than the Demon Hunter was.

  12. #272
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,804
    Quote Originally Posted by Thage View Post
    I can almost guarantee you Blizzard won't make vehicle combat a key focus for an entire class given how badly it's generally received when it's made a quest mechanic (and how badly it was received as a major dungeon mechanic in Occulus and a raid mechanic in Maly). 'Physical ranged different from Hunter' explains nothing, especially because Marksman is almost completely a physical ranged spec after the Legion rework. 'Manaless science-based healing,' again, provides no explanation on how it would actually function from a gameplay perspective. Also, a healer not confined by mana sounds like it would be a Sisyphean nightmare to balance.
    Except you don't base class-based vehicle combat on quest gameplay, you base it around toggle forms similar to Druid shapeshifting. Through that, you get the same effect as piloting a vehicle (i.e. The Pilot enters the mech and they get an entirely new set of abilities specific to the mech). Further, through that mechanic you can add abilities specific to mechs like Eject, Turbocharged, Transforming, etc.

    Physical ranged different than Hunter simply means that the Tinker would be the second physical ranged class and wouldn't be anything like the Hunter class.

    Finally resources doesn't dictate balance. You can make a healing spec that doesn't require mana if that's the theme of the spec. No different than the multiple types of resources that DPS and Tanks use. Science isn't magic, so obviously a science-based healer wouldn't require magic.

    The technology theme doesn't mean anything. A marksman hunter with Lone Wolf and Engineering has a strong technology theme. A warrior with the ToC vibrosword and Engineering has a technology theme. If you want Tinker to happen, it needs to feel distinct from a character with a high investment in Engineering and you have to be able to explain how it's different. Three-word phrases do not explain how they would be different any more than if someone defending Monk in the day would have explained 'They're different from Rogue because they have a kung fu theme.'
    Sorry, but shooting Serpent Sting and Arcane shot or swinging a broad sword while throwing a underpowered bomb every 30 minutes is not remotely similar to a class with a technology theme.

  13. #273
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Well it's rather difficult to yell when you're typing....

    If your argument is that Tinker mech piloting mechanics would be broken, how is stating that Blizzard could use Druid mechanics not a counter argument? Also you never asked me to explain it, you immediately went into defense mode about how much Druids suck.
    Its the annoyance of someone with vast knowledge on how the game systems work together talking to someone who is a pie in the sky dreamer.

    I know how awful your ideas are fundamentally so its hard for me to see any benefits to adding them at all.

    A tinker could work as a raw dps class. Just lose the mechs,and automation and make them more of a gunslinger mid ranged class.

  14. #274
    The Insane Thage's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Δ Hidden Forbidden Holy Ground
    Posts
    19,105
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Except you don't base class-based vehicle combat on quest gameplay, you base it around toggle forms similar to Druid shapeshifting. Through that, you get the same effect as piloting a vehicle (i.e. The Pilot enters the mech and they get an entirely new set of abilities specific to the mech). Further, through that mechanic you can add abilities specific to mechs like Eject, Turbocharged, Transforming, etc.
    Now explain to me why cribbing the druid class's defining mechanic would be something Blizzard would feel compelled to do? This isn't like DH Meta where one spec's ability was removed and the spec itself redefined to better fit what the devs' original intent for it was, when the removed ability was intended to fulfill the DH class fantasy at a time when DHs weren't considered for development, this is 'Okay we're going to steal the whole concept of shapeshifting from Druids and copy it over with a fresh coat of paint.' That is the single least-inspired concept I've heard for Tinkers yet, and if I were to read this in an announcement my first response would be, "Okay, I already have a druid at 120, what makes this feel distinct enough to warrant leveling up a new alt?"

    Physical ranged different than Hunter simply means that the Tinker would be the second physical ranged class and wouldn't be anything like the Hunter class.
    Congratulations. You have still provided fuck-all by way of explaining how it would be different.

    Finally resources doesn't dictate balance. You can make a healing spec that doesn't require mana if that's the theme of the spec. No different than the multiple types of resources that DPS and Tanks use. Science isn't magic, so obviously a science-based healer wouldn't require magic.
    Okay, I'm going to need you to follow with me for a moment, because apparently this is high-concept stuff.

    You remember Mistweavers? You know the reason why they use a mana bar instead of Energy/Chi like the other two Monk specs? You know why paladins still mainly operate off mana for their heals despite using Holy Power as a mechanic? You know why Resto druids still use mana? You know why literally every healer spec in the game currently uses mana? Because balancing a healer without mana as its primary resource has always, with a 100% track record, resulted in a resounding failure, causing them to go back to mana for that spec mid-development.

    Sorry, but shooting Serpent Sting and Arcane shot or swinging a broad sword while throwing a underpowered bomb every 30 minutes is not remotely similar to a class with a technology theme.
    You have so far failed to convince me otherwise beyond offering a whole-cloth stolen concept that makes up the core of an existing class's most notable and unique mechanic, as well as a clear indicator you have no understanding why every healer in the game uses mana as their primary resource.
    Be seeing you guys on Bloodsail Buccaneers NA!



  15. #275
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,804
    Quote Originally Posted by goldlock View Post
    Its the annoyance of someone with vast knowledge on how the game systems work together talking to someone who is a pie in the sky dreamer.
    If you have vast knowledge of the game systems, you're not showing it.


    A tinker could work as a raw dps class. Just lose the mechs,and automation and make them more of a gunslinger mid ranged class.
    Except that wouldn't be a Tinker as shown by Blizzard on multiple occasions.

  16. #276
    Quote Originally Posted by goldlock View Post
    Its the annoyance of someone with vast knowledge on how the game systems work together talking to someone who is a pie in the sky dreamer.

    I know how awful your ideas are fundamentally so its hard for me to see any benefits to adding them at all.

    A tinker could work as a raw dps class. Just lose the mechs,and automation and make them more of a gunslinger mid ranged class.
    Thank you. I mean, I wouldn't call myself a pro-gamer, though I think I have some understanding of how classes work, especially Tanks as I spend the last few months trying multiple tanks out to decide which appeals to me most in terms of mechanics, visuals and active mitigation. And reading that Tank concept was just so painful. There is NO idea of active mitigation and he is stealing the most unique abilities from Monks, DKs and Demon Hunters.

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Except you don't base class-based vehicle combat on quest gameplay, you base it around toggle forms similar to Druid shapeshifting. Through that, you get the same effect as piloting a vehicle (i.e. The Pilot enters the mech and they get an entirely new set of abilities specific to the mech). Further, through that mechanic you can add abilities specific to mechs like Eject, Turbocharged, Transforming, etc.

    Physical ranged different than Hunter simply means that the Tinker would be the second physical ranged class and wouldn't be anything like the Hunter class.

    Finally resources doesn't dictate balance. You can make a healing spec that doesn't require mana if that's the theme of the spec. No different than the multiple types of resources that DPS and Tanks use. Science isn't magic, so obviously a science-based healer wouldn't require magic.
    So far, all I saw you doing while conceptionalizing a Tinker Tank was stealing Ox Statue and Gorefriends Grasp, the later one even twice.

  17. #277
    Legendary! Pony Soldier's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    In my safe space
    Posts
    6,930
    Quote Originally Posted by Pper View Post
    Don't hate the tinkerer - except that I don't think it would fit well with alle the other classes we have at the moment - I just don't like the idea of more classes in the game
    I hope Blizzard never introduces any more classes
    They should give us more variety in the existing classes with additional specs or increase the scopes of existing specs
    Yes, exactly this. This is the kind of stuff I'd rather have.
    - "If you have a problem figuring out whether you're for me or Trump, then you ain't black" - Jo Bodin, BLM supporter
    - "I got hairy legs that turn blonde in the sun. The kids used to come up and reach in the pool & rub my leg down so it was straight & watch the hair come back up again. So I learned about roaches, I learned about kids jumping on my lap, and I love kids jumping on my lap...” - Pedo Joe

  18. #278
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    If you have vast knowledge of the game systems, you're not showing it.




    Except that wouldn't be a Tinker as shown by Blizzard on multiple occasions.
    Ive over a decade clearing all of the hardest difficulties and while not a amazing pvp ive broken 2.2k multiple times. Your concepts really can't be built upon to any successful end...

    Even if they permalocked the class into a mech that goes against blizzards philosophy of player customization they are pushing hard as hell in shadowlands.

  19. #279
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,804
    Quote Originally Posted by Thage View Post
    Now explain to me why cribbing the druid class's defining mechanic would be something Blizzard would feel compelled to do? This isn't like DH Meta where one spec's ability was removed and the spec itself redefined to better fit what the devs' original intent for it was, when the removed ability was intended to fulfill the DH class fantasy at a time when DHs weren't considered for development, this is 'Okay we're going to steal the whole concept of shapeshifting from Druids and copy it over with a fresh coat of paint.' That is the single least-inspired concept I've heard for Tinkers yet, and if I were to read this in an announcement my first response would be, "Okay, I already have a druid at 120, what makes this feel distinct enough to warrant leveling up a new alt?"
    The Druid's defining mechanic is shapeshifting. In other words, a Guardian Druid can shift between bear form, cat form, and Moonkin form with ease. They even have attributes of those forms bleeding into each other. I'm not advocating that for the Tinker. I'm saying to use the base mechanic of toggling between a base form to a mech form to simulate a Tinker piloting a mech.

    Congratulations. You have still provided fuck-all by way of explaining how it would be different.
    You mean other than the fact that a Tinker would be in a mech firing missiles, charges, lasers, and gravity weapons, while a Hunter would be shooting a bow or a gun with their pet? It should be fairly obvious why they're different.

    Okay, I'm going to need you to follow with me for a moment, because apparently this is high-concept stuff.

    You remember Mistweavers? You know the reason why they use a mana bar instead of Energy/Chi like the other two Monk specs? You know why paladins still mainly operate off mana for their heals despite using Holy Power as a mechanic? You know why Resto druids still use mana? You know why literally every healer spec in the game currently uses mana? Because balancing a healer without mana as its primary resource has always, with a 100% track record, resulted in a resounding failure, causing them to go back to mana for that spec mid-development.

    You have so far failed to convince me otherwise beyond offering a whole-cloth stolen concept that makes up the core of an existing class's most notable and unique mechanic, as well as a clear indicator you have no understanding why every healer in the game uses mana as their primary resource.
    Except you failed to mention the real reason why Mistweavers were changed; Blizzard couldn't balance melee (fist weaving) with standard healing (mist weaving). The spec ALWAYS had a mana component to it, and there's no reason a Monk wouldn't use mana to heal, since Mistweaving is using magic. That by the way is why every healing spec uses Mana, because every healing spec is using magic. Obviously, a science-based class wouldn't use mana, and it isn't rocket science to figure out a resource that wouldn't use mana to heal.

    As for failing to convince you, I'm not surprised. You already had your mind made up before we began this conversation.

  20. #280
    Quote Originally Posted by goldlock View Post
    Ive over a decade clearing all of the hardest difficulties and while not a amazing pvp ive broken 2.2k multiple times. Your concepts really can't be built upon to any successful end...

    Even if they permalocked the class into a mech that goes against blizzards philosophy of player customization they are pushing hard as hell in shadowlands.
    So...literally all druid forms...

    I think the ability to have mech customization would be incredible and completely fit within player customization, similar to the amount of druid forms they've added over the years

Posting Permissions

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