Originally Posted by
arkanon
Maybe, just maybe, the conversation got "old" because you regurgitate the same tired arguments over and over and over again, without acknowledging any of the damning criticism your idea is receiving. You are extremely hypocritical, using the same logic to defend your tinker concept that you then use against any other ideas.
You say that proof of concept exists in 4 other classes - warlocks, hunters, druids, and shamans. Thats overlap with FOUR other classes, something you openly acknowledge. But whenever someone says they would like another concept over yours, you use "class overlap" as a reason NOT to introduce those classes.
People pointed out these are just totems with a skin, and that they tried a class with a heavy reliance on static totems, and the players didnt enjoy it, so they changed it. You responded to this by suddenly making them mobile.
People pointed out that they are now just hunter pets, and you defend this by saying "no, they attack from range"
People pointed out they are now just wild imps, and you take the conversation full circle back to the beginning.
There is absolutely nothing unique at all about your concept - it is simply a bunch of reskinned abilities other classes already have, all mashed together with a mechanical skin on it.