Why so much hate for Tinkerer?

[lukkoth]

I really don't understand a community that hates variety so much. A technical based class with steampunk vibes is usually a staple in many fantasy games and its a clear missing component in WoW despite the myriad of technologies the world offers. Yet anytime someone suggests a desire for the class or even comes up with creative ways to implement it half the community it seems nearly has a stroke with the amount of rage they bring.
I mean in reality it doesn't have to be called tinkerer, but i do think the game would benefit from a class that embodies a mechanical steam punk type vibe.

I hate the idea because I think it's stupid. I'm probably not alone. Suffice to say, if a lot of people think it's stupid, that's where the hates coming from. People don't want to see Dev hours used implementing something that they think is stupid.

/thread.

[Teriz]

I hate the idea because I think it's stupid. I'm probably not alone. Suffice to say, if a lot of people think it's stupid, that's where the hates coming from. People don't want to see Dev hours used implementing something that they think is stupid.

/thread.

The Tinker tends to win every class poll against other class options. So obviously a good portion of people don’t view it as stupid.

[arkanon]

Another factor as to the supposed "hate" is that as many have mentioned, a new range class is WAY overdue. I understand why they included more melee - for quite a while, the bulk of raids preferred range - not saying that for every raid you stacked range, but for a LONG time they were preferred by "average" groups. IMO, those days are long gone, partly because of having far more avenues for progression with bgs, arena, m+, and raids all being solid gearing paths.

But I also add that the very suggestion that anyone who doesnt like the idea of the tinker "hates" it or is a "hater" is quite unfair - many like the idea of a tinker but dont think it can or would be implemented well, or simply have a more preferred class they would like to see introduced. Additionally, many of the polls are extremely biased, with one even excluding the necromancer, but including over a dozen other obscure options, with the only mainstream alternative being the bard.

[cocomen2]

After 40 pages i feel like it clear most of people dont hate Tinker class-concept , but rather dislike tinker-fans as they tend to burst in any thread about possible future class and cry all loud that ONLY Tinker has a rights to be next class implemented in future expansion.

[Katchii]

Gooot it. Just saw the announcement.

After all that garbage we saw, I'd argue that exchanges like that are why many people on this forum hate the idea of Tinker: because of some of the advocates it has.

Apparently, other folks feel the same way about this particular advocate....

OT:I don't necessarily care one way or the other on whether it gets implemented, but I do think the idea of a class with the central theme of building and applying technology in battle would be cool and does make sense within the lore of the game. And I hope they call it an Engineer, just to fuck with this guy, lol.

[Ielenia]

Another factor as to the supposed "hate" is that as many have mentioned, a new range class is WAY overdue. I understand why they included more melee - for quite a while, the bulk of raids preferred range - not saying that for every raid you stacked range, but for a LONG time they were preferred by "average" groups. IMO, those days are long gone, partly because of having far more avenues for progression with bgs, arena, m+, and raids all being solid gearing paths.

But I also add that the very suggestion that anyone who doesnt like the idea of the tinker "hates" it or is a "hater" is quite unfair - many like the idea of a tinker but dont think it can or would be implemented well, or simply have a more preferred class they would like to see introduced. Additionally, many of the polls are extremely biased, with one even excluding the necromancer, but including over a dozen other obscure options, with the only mainstream alternative being the bard.

Truth be told, I fall into both those categories. I would much prefer one of my preferred class concepts were implemented. And I think one of the biggest hurdles a tech class has is not in its gameplay, or which abilities it'd have... but its very concept in the lore.

[arkanon]

After 40 pages i feel like it clear most of people dont hate Tinker class-concept , but rather dislike tinker-fans as they tend to burst in any thread about possible future class and cry all loud that ONLY Tinker has a rights to be next class implemented in future expansion.

After all that garbage we saw, I'd argue that exchanges like that are why many people on this forum hate the idea of Tinker: because of some of the advocates it has.

Apparently, other folks feel the same way about this particular advocate....

OT:I don't necessarily care one way or the other on whether it gets implemented, but I do think the idea of a class with the central theme of building and applying technology in battle would be cool and does make sense within the lore of the game. And I hope they call it an Engineer, just to fuck with this guy, lol.

This is a pretty common theme throughout this thread, and most of the recent Tinker threads. I dont condone hating on forum users; my concern is that individuals who claim to be huge fans of the concept and would love to see them implemented are sadly alienating some of the community and causing them to dislike the Tinker by proxy.

If you love something, set it free.

[sam86]

Blizz gave only 2 specs to DH, and u trust they can add another new class? really?
I love tinker and i wish he was in-game, but blizz give me zero reason to trust they will actually be able to do it

[arkanon]

Blizz gave only 2 specs to DH, and u trust they can add another new class? really?
I love tinker and i wish he was in-game, but blizz give me zero reason to trust they will actually be able to do it

Personally, im pleased they kept DH to 2 specs. Im in the camp that does not believe a range or healing spec would make any sense at all thematically, and considering many have a pretty negative opinion concerning the....simplicity....of havoc, i doubt they could have made a second melee spec that differentiated itself enough.

But i dont entirely disagree with your sentiment, and would HATE to see something as potentially interesting as a Tinker or Necromancer introduced just to appease a vocal minority, without well fleshed out and unique concepts.

[qwerty123456]

Personally, im pleased they kept DH to 2 specs. Im in the camp that does not believe a range or healing spec would make any sense at all thematically, and considering many have a pretty negative opinion concerning the....simplicity....of havoc, i doubt they could have made a second melee spec that differentiated itself enough.

But i dont entirely disagree with your sentiment, and would HATE to see something as potentially interesting as a Tinker or Necromancer introduced just to appease a vocal minority, without well fleshed out and unique concepts.

I think they could have pulled off a ranged or healing spec pretty well when the specs are taught to them from the Tome of Fel Secrets. Seems silly that there would only be 2 pages in the book.

[Swnem]

After 40 pages i feel like it clear most of people dont hate Tinker class-concept , but rather dislike tinker-fans as they tend to burst in any thread about possible future class and cry all loud that ONLY Tinker has a rights to be next class implemented in future expansion.

That is a terrible generalization. There is excitement around it, so it is natural that it generates buzz and is brought up when discussing new classes. Just as High elf popped up on all sort of new race threads for years. Is there anything else you would like to forbid people from bringing up when sharing their opinion? The problem here is that then an argument ensues and people don't know when to quit.
I get that you find one particular fan is very steadfast in his beliefs. I ask that you don't generalize every Tinker fan. Each of us is only responsible for our own words.
It would also help if people didn't take things personally as well. It's not like you NEED to agree with others. The problem we have here is a bunch of people on both sides unable to walk away from what is a difference of opinion. All this remorse is honestly unnecessary.
Leaving an argument doesn't mean you lost it. I think a lot of people don't understand that.

[arkanon]

That is a terrible generalization. There is excitement around it, so it is natural that it generates buzz and is brought up when discussing new classes. Just as High elf popped up on all sort of new race threads for years. Is there anything else you would like to forbid people from bringing up when sharing their opinion?
I get that you find one particular fan is very steadfast in his beliefs. I ask that you don't generalize every Tinker fan. Each of us is only responsible for our own words.

You say not to generalize, and yet make statements like "There is excitement around it, so it is natural that it generates buzz". I have seen ZERO excitement or buzz around the tinker - its a handful of fans spamming any thread that mentions classes with the same asinine ramblings and derailing any meaningful discussions. Basically, the same couple of people come charging into the room screaming and shouting everyone down, forcing their fan fiction down everyones throats until they either get banned, or everyone else gives up and leaves the room.

And then a few days later the exact same scenario plays out, and as you can see from the comments in here, some people have had enough of it.

[Short]

cause everyone is an armchair developer that only has rose tinted glasses for their own creation and can't or won't take any criticism from anyone else when flaws get called out.
i'm not saying that a tinkerer class is a straight up nope, but most of the times when any form of discussion shows up about class design for non existing classes. the vast majority of arguments for how the class would actually work or integrate consists of carbon copying other class mechanics. basically turning it into a druid 2.0 with shaman totems and a hunter pet. this isn't to say there aren't any good idea's out there. it's that most "tinkerer fans" just regurgitate whatever amazing insight has been shouted loudest in the last thread.

we get it, you want a tinkerer class. stop trying to make every "what kind of classes could be added to the game" or even at times "how could X class/spec be fixed" thread into a tinkerer thread.

[Triceron]

cause everyone is an armchair developer that only has rose tinted glasses for their own creation and can't or won't take any criticism from anyone else when flaws get called out.
i'm not saying that a tinkerer class is a straight up nope, but most of the times when any form of discussion shows up about class design for non existing classes. the vast majority of arguments for how the class would actually work or integrate consists of carbon copying other class mechanics. basically turning it into a druid 2.0 with shaman totems and a hunter pet. this isn't to say there aren't any good idea's out there. it's that most "tinkerer fans" just regurgitate whatever amazing insight has been shouted loudest in the last thread.

we get it, you want a tinkerer class. stop trying to make every "what kind of classes could be added to the game" or even at times "how could X class/spec be fixed" thread into a tinkerer thread.

The problem with any future class is that it's ultimately bound to the niche that Blizzard has created for itself through rigid system designs and a 'Bring the Player' balance approach.

Everything has to fit their Spec-centric mold. After seeing Demon Hunters, I can only imagine what they'd do for any other class.

I actually wish WoW could be more like Heroes of the Storm, where every character feels unique and fresh and has very unique mechanics in play.

[Swnem]

You say not to generalize, and yet make statements like "There is excitement around it, so it is natural that it generates buzz". I have seen ZERO excitement or buzz around the tinker - its a handful of fans spamming any thread that mentions classes with the same asinine ramblings and derailing any meaningful discussions. Basically, the same couple of people come charging into the room screaming and shouting everyone down, forcing their fan fiction down everyones throats until they either get banned, or everyone else gives up and leaves the room.

And then a few days later the exact same scenario plays out, and as you can see from the comments in here, some people have had enough of it.

Ok, at this point i am gonna do as i preach and say we disagree on this. There is ample evidence for what i said from polls here on this same website to reddit pages to youtube videos with over 300k views with an overwhelming rate of likes to dislike, but you know... if you want to deny that, that is you opinion, and you can have it. Even if i disagree with it.

[Ielenia]

Personally, im pleased they kept DH to 2 specs. Im in the camp that does not believe a range or healing spec would make any sense at all thematically, and considering many have a pretty negative opinion concerning the....simplicity....of havoc, i doubt they could have made a second melee spec that differentiated itself enough.

Eh, I believe it was a missed opportunity for Blizzard to think a little outside the box. I mean, they put one demon hunter wielding a scythe, so I imagine they could've gone with something similar to the third spec. Healer? No, it doesn't fit the thematic of the class' concept, in my opinion, but I think they could've squeezed in a spellcaster spec, considering some demon hunters were.

However, Blizzard decided to make a lore that the fel in the demon hunters' bodies interfere with spellcasting, for no apparent reason...

[javierdsv]

Mechagon and all around it was the best place in time to introduce a Tinker class.

Now that all the buzz about gnomes and the hated introduction of mechangnomes is gone, it no longer makes sense to add them, ever.

So let's start collectively getting over it.

[Triceron]

Mechagon and all around it was the best place in time to introduce a Tinker class.

Now that all the buzz about gnomes and the hated introduction of mechangnomes is gone, it no longer makes sense to add them, ever.

So let's start collectively getting over it.

I wouldn't say there's no sense to add them.

There's still plenty of potential to introduce a new class. We still haven't visited Undermine, and that could be a prime time to tie in a Tinker class.

[arkanon]

Ok, at this point i am gonna do as i preach and say we disagree on this. There is ample evidence for what i said from polls here on this same website to reddit pages to youtube videos with over 300k views with an overwhelming rate of likes to dislike, but you know... if you want to deny that, that is you opinion, and you can have it. Even if i disagree with it.

You talking about the video with the clickbait title?

The New Tinker Class Is Already In The Game! Revealing The Clues That Lead Us To The Tinker In 9.0

Do you think its at all interesting that they have just under 300,000 subscribers, and 300,000 views on the video, but only 9k likes? See this is EXACTLY what im talking about - its cherry picking "data" that fits your narrative, without looking at the bigger picture. For example, the overwhelming majority of their videos have an almost identical like/dislike ratio, regardless of the content. They also have a VERY similar number of likes overall.

Its almost like the same individuals watch each of their videos - the same individuals hit like, the same individuals hit dislike.....its ALMOST like the content of their videos really doesnt matter because it is EXTREMELY vanilla, bland, and intentionally avoids any controversy at all.

Its almost like clickbait titles bring in views.....

If you think a poll with 100 participants on some tiny, and i do mean TINY fan site FORUM is an acceptable sample......well it just further proves my point i guess. But it continues to ignore the the point being raised - that multiple people here have had enough of the same few people just shouting everyone down and putting their fingers in their ears screaming "LALALALAL EVERYONE LOVES TINKERS YOU ARE ALL WRONG LALALALALALA"..

- - - Updated - - -

Mechagon and all around it was the best place in time to introduce a Tinker class.

Now that all the buzz about gnomes and the hated introduction of mechangnomes is gone, it no longer makes sense to add them, ever.

So let's start collectively getting over it.

This has been raised countless times - BfA had the absolute PERFECT opportunity to add the tinker in, and it wasnt added - from memory it wasnt even spoken about at all.

[Swnem]

You talking about the video with the clickbait title?

The New Tinker Class Is Already In The Game! Revealing The Clues That Lead Us To The Tinker In 9.0

Do you think its at all interesting that they have just under 300,000 subscribers, and 300,000 views on the video, but only 9k likes? See this is EXACTLY what im talking about - its cherry picking "data" that fits your narrative, without looking at the bigger picture. For example, the overwhelming majority of their videos have an almost identical like/dislike ratio, regardless of the content. They also have a VERY similar number of likes overall.

Its almost like the same individuals watch each of their videos - the same individuals hit like, the same individuals hit dislike.....its ALMOST like the content of their videos really doesnt matter because it is EXTREMELY vanilla, bland, and intentionally avoids any controversy at all.

Its almost like clickbait titles bring in views.....

If you think a poll with 100 participants on some tiny, and i do mean TINY fan site FORUM is an acceptable sample......well it just further proves my point i guess. But it continues to ignore the the point being raised - that multiple people here have had enough of the same few people just shouting everyone down and putting their fingers in their ears screaming "LALALALAL EVERYONE LOVES TINKERS YOU ARE ALL WRONG LALALALALALA"..

- - - Updated - - -



This has been raised countless times - BfA had the absolute PERFECT opportunity to add the tinker in, and it wasnt added - from memory it wasnt even spoken about at all.

Sigh... yes, 100 people is tiny, if you want to use the tiniest sample, but it's also the most voted.
So, what is your point? Is 100 people the "few" posters that keep bringing it up constantly? Cause we both know it wasn't what you implied.
I don't consider that a few, especially as you point out that mmo champ is only a tiny portion of the WoW population and tbh that poll wasnt even serious.

Honestly, i don't need to convince you of anything because you reserve the right to determine what "a few" and "popular" are. That is your opinion.
I am excited for it, the people i know are all excited for it in-game and i see people excited here, on reddit, on the official forums and on youtube. It's not an official census like you would like, but it is the best we have cause a census will never exist. For me, that is enough to call it popular.
On that note, so is bard, necromancer and dark ranger for the same reasons. They are the most talked about.

No matter what you determine, i see excitement. If you choose to ignore it, it's your deal. If you want to debate the definitions and pretend it's only a few hardcore posters, well, i couldn't disagree more. You don't get to deny other people their excitement just cause you are not excited by it.

100 is more than a few forum posters. At least we should be able to agree on that, if theres any reason to be had. Popularity is a more subjective concept and it's not possible to clearly determine.
If you say it's the same people on all sites, well you gotta prove that, cause i'm not gonna believe it at face value.