Page 10 of 16 FirstFirst ...
8
9
10
11
12
... LastLast
  1. #181
    The Unstoppable Force Ielenia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    21,868
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Other than him appearing throughout WC media and merchandise, and his race being one of the most requested race long before MoP.
    Obscure media and merchandise. Chen and the pandaren only got popular after MoP.

    Where's your evidence to the contrary?
    I ask you the same thing. Where's the evidence that an obscure character that got mentioned in WoW only five times or so in eight years was somehow popular with the player base before MoP was even announced?

    Also, the huge outcry after MoP's announcement, of people going "Kung Fu Panda ripoff" and "Panda for kidz" surely shows how the character was popular, huh?

    It's hilarious that you ask for evidence, and when that evidence is brought forward, you say that "it means nothing".
    Because it is meaningless. Because it proves nothing. Again, I'll repeat:
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    Which, again, means nothing. Blizzard is free to bring to prominence any character in their franchise they want, regardless of popularity (or lack thereof) or obscurity.

    Considering that you believe that Chen was an obscure or unpopular character before MoP, I'm not surprised that you think that way of Deathwing.
    It's not that "I believe". It's a fact. Chen was obscure. He was only mentioned less than five times in eight years in the game. And Deathwing was mentioned even less in six years.

    Again, the Runemaster being considered is irrelevant, because the DK is what was implemented.
    No, it's not irrelevant, because "must have necromancy" was anywhere near a requirement, the runemaster concept would never even be considered, much less one of the top three picks! Can't you understand this? A requirement is a qualifier. If one lacks the requirement, they are disqualified. The runemaster was not disqualified, since it was in the top 3, so your claim that "must have necromancy" being a requirement is bogus.

    Which we're not talking about. We're talking about a mythical creature in a fantasy world that is completely defined by the creators of said fantasy world.
    A fantasy world that is defined by real life words because the writers are using the english language to describe such world. If Blizzard wants to make up a new word, or use an existing word in a different way, Blizzard must define the new meaning of those words in an unambiguous way.

    They consider Dracthyr dragons. Dracthyr are hybrids, thus they have stated as such.
    No, they haven't.

    And here you are again avoiding the point yet again.
    I'm not avoiding the point. I'm addressing it. Because those are two separate conversations that you're trying to conflate to try to weasel out of the fact you were wrong and refuse to admit you were wrong.

    Interesting that a character that was never popular was seemingly able to popularize the Pandaren race, and headline an expansion.
    Chen popularized the pandaren race and headline an expansion because Blizzard chose to make the expansion about pandaren. You got it backwards.

    If only you could provide some evidence outside of your personal opinion.
    Says the guy who only got personal opinions so far.
    "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...

  2. #182
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Mana Burn led to other spells in the Shadow spec. Heal, Dispel, and Inner Fire had influence in the Holy and Discipline specs.
    I wouldn't agree with this at all. Gameplay mechanics are not equivalent of the conceptual source of a class. Druid's Thorns conceptually comes from the Keeper of the Grove, which is itself a concept that came from Diablo 2's Paladin aura.

    I don't consider the Druid being a concept rooted in Diablo 2 just because we can play 6 degrees of Kevin Bacon with gameplay mechanics origins.

  3. #183
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    It's not that "I believe". It's a fact. Chen was obscure. He was only mentioned less than five times in eight years in the game. And Deathwing was mentioned even less in six years.
    I dont think my opinion on this is particularly important, as im not a "lore guy", but i did play a LOT of all 3 WC games, and played wow since vanilla. Although I was aware of Chen, i had no idea they were part of a big race of panda people - i thought he was just a cute side character put in for comedic value. Again, i knew OF him, but had to think back to who/what he was after the expansion was announced and a forum post reminded me he existed. No one i knew at the time had any clue at all, although I dont think any/many of them played WC. Deathwing was the same - quite a few friends were pissed off they just "created" this "new" character to be the bad guy.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kyanion View Post
    In no way are you entitled to the 'complete' game when you buy it, because DLC/cosmetics and so on are there for companies to make more money
    Quote Originally Posted by rhorle View Post
    Others, including myself, are saying that they only exist because Blizzard needed to create things so they could monetize it.

  4. #184
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,805
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    I wouldn't agree with this at all. Gameplay mechanics are not equivalent of the conceptual source of a class. Druid's Thorns conceptually comes from the Keeper of the Grove, which is itself a concept that came from Diablo 2's Paladin aura.
    Blizzard obviously pulled abilities and concepts from D2 when creating WC3. That’s not really the point. The point is that when we head into WoW, Blizzard took a small set of abilities and expanded them conceptually into other abilities within their new classes. Again, see Rejuvenation and Tranquility leading to other hot spells in the Druid class, or how a handful of wards grew into the totem system.

    The Evoker should be no different.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by arkanon View Post
    I dont think my opinion on this is particularly important, as im not a "lore guy", but i did play a LOT of all 3 WC games, and played wow since vanilla. Although I was aware of Chen, i had no idea they were part of a big race of panda people - i thought he was just a cute side character put in for comedic value. Again, i knew OF him, but had to think back to who/what he was after the expansion was announced and a forum post reminded me he existed. No one i knew at the time had any clue at all, although I dont think any/many of them played WC. Deathwing was the same - quite a few friends were pissed off they just "created" this "new" character to be the bad guy.
    If you look at the articles and posts at the time of the discovery of the MoP trademark, it’s quite clear that people knew exactly what a Pandarian expansion would entail. This indicates that players were aware of what Pandaria was, and that Chen Stormstout would play a role in such an expansion.

    We also have Blizzard’s statements which showed that the Pandaren were a heavily requested playable race leading up to MoP. That demand came from Chen Stormstout’s popularity as the only playable Pandaren character in WC.

    Again, it’s facts vs opinions. I have no desire to argue with certain posters over their opinions.

  5. #185
    I am Murloc! Asrialol's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    5,862
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Blizzard obviously pulled abilities and concepts from D2 when creating WC3. That’s not really the point. The point is that when we head into WoW, Blizzard took a small set of abilities and expanded them conceptually into other abilities within their new classes. Again, see Rejuvenation and Tranquility leading to other hot spells in the Druid class, or how a handful of wards grew into the totem system.

    The Evoker should be no different.

    - - - Updated - - -



    If you look at the articles and posts at the time of the discovery of the MoP trademark, it’s quite clear that people knew exactly what a Pandarian expansion would entail. This indicates that players were aware of what Pandaria was, and that Chen Stormstout would play a role in such an expansion.

    We also have Blizzard’s statements which showed that the Pandaren were a heavily requested playable race leading up to MoP. That demand came from Chen Stormstout’s popularity as the only playable Pandaren character in WC.

    Again, it’s facts vs opinions. I have no desire to argue with certain posters over their opinions.
    Are you implying that MMOC users are a representative selection of the playerbase and thus it's safe to say that that thread =/= evidence of player awareness?

    Oh my.
    Hi

  6. #186
    Quote Originally Posted by Asrialol View Post
    Are you implying that MMOC users are a representative selection of the playerbase and thus it's safe to say that that thread =/= evidence of player awareness?

    Oh my.
    What do you expect? This same person you quoted stated a clear obvious path for classes and makes a forum post like it’s news. Insert meme about water being wet here.

  7. #187
    I am Murloc! Asrialol's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    5,862
    Quote Originally Posted by Soikona View Post
    What do you expect? This same person you quoted stated a clear obvious path for classes and makes a forum post like it’s news. Insert meme about water being wet here.
    I must admit I read through the first pages and the last pages of that thread - I actually remember it being posted. Pretty fun read, the users here are posting in a quite different manner these days.

    Also "Woot" was still a thing in 2011 it seems.

    But yeah, if anything this whole thread is just speculation. There's no evidence, there's no facts. One might try to claim its facts because they found some patterns, but that's still just speculation.
    Hi

  8. #188
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,805
    Quote Originally Posted by Asrialol View Post
    Are you implying that MMOC users are a representative selection of the playerbase and thus it's safe to say that that thread =/= evidence of player awareness?

    Oh my.
    Would you prefer articles from major gaming media at the time? I mentioned them as well;

    The Pandaria name may be familiar to Warcraft fans. It is the island home of the panda-like Pandaren race, first teased as an April Fools' Day joke by Blizzard. However, the Pandaren have found a following among the Warcraft fan base, such that references to the race have found their way into the games proper, most notably with a Pandaren Monk pet available for World of Warcraft players for $10.
    https://www.gamespot.com/articles/bl.../1100-6326987/

    In Warcraft lore, Pandaria is the island home of the mysterious race the Pandaren, warrior monks who just happen to be humanoid pandas. Although they make few appearances in-game (most famously as playable Brewmasters champions in Warcraft III expansions), Pandaren have a vocal fan base and a rich lore.

    Rumours of Pandarens as a playable race in World of Warcraft have accompanied each expansion announcement, and this trademark is, quite naturally, setting off speculation that fans may soon have their wishes granted. We'll see what Blizzard can tell us about it.
    https://www.vg247.com/blizzard-files...aria-trademark

    Adding Pandarens to World of Warcraft would be a spectacular move from Blizzard given that the race was initially created as an April Fool' joke for WarCraft 3 . Since then they've become more and more popular, and have worked their way into many different aspects of WarCraft lore.
    https://www.pcgamer.com/blizzard-reg...d-of-warcraft/

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Soikona View Post
    What do you expect? This same person you quoted stated a clear obvious path for classes and makes a forum post like it’s news. Insert meme about water being wet here.
    I have multiple posters disagreeing with it, so obviously the path isn’t as obvious for some people.

  9. #189
    I am Murloc! Asrialol's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    5,862
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    No, I'd prefer evidence with statistics perhaps, showing the response the majority of the playerbase Since that was the claim you made, after all.

    I get that you feel passionate about this, for some absurd reason, but you gotta know the difference between facts and speculation. Come on. People who frequent forums, social media, news articles and whatnot are not part of the playerbase that makes up for the majority of the playerbase. Thus I am very, very interested to see where you get your facts. Or was it speculation?
    Hi

  10. #190
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,805
    Quote Originally Posted by Asrialol View Post
    No, I'd prefer evidence with statistics perhaps, showing the response the majority of the playerbase Since that was the claim you made, after all.

    I get that you feel passionate about this, for some absurd reason, but you gotta know the difference between facts and speculation. Come on. People who frequent forums, social media, news articles and whatnot are not part of the playerbase that makes up for the majority of the playerbase. Thus I am very, very interested to see where you get your facts. Or was it speculation?
    I recommend you take your own advice. Articles and posts from that time are called evidence, which are facts to back up a claim. It may not be the facts you prefer, but they are facts nonetheless.

    Where is your counter evidence? Until you provide some, you are the one that is speculating.

  11. #191
    1. A major lore figure to tie into.
    Yes for the hero classes, that was part of what made them a hero class (that and starting at a higher level).
    No for monks and evokers (or at least not more so than any other class). Monks are literally just dnd/pathfinder monks with warcraft smeared on them and evokers are tied to all the dragonflights not just alexstrasza

    EDIT: building on this (because there is a major lore figure for every class because they're all ripped from DnD archetypes or fantasy more broadly) The hero classes exist because of and are directly tied to their lore figure, normal classes (to which both evoker and monk fall into) merely have lore figures that are that class. DKs are DKs because they were raised by Arthas, monks are not monks because they were trained by chen.

    2. A playable version in MOBA/RTS format. Blizzard seems to favor players getting a preview of future class mechanics via their MOBA/RTS games. When the new class releases, the pull abilities and mechanics from those games.
    I mean what? DKs, DHs and monks predate WoW of course when they ported them over they were going to build off the archetype established beforehand that just stands on its face. I don't think you could show there is real evidence for blizzard pulling mechanics from HotS or SCII for DH/Evoker or monk though.

    3. A landmass that thematically connects to the new class. DKs had Northrend, Monks had Pandaria, Demon Hunters had Broken Isles, Evokers have Dragon Isles. The next class will likely also have a landmass that matches its theme.
    I mean that's just good business, releasing DKs in MoP would have just been stupid. Also arguing something like mages are only in the game because of dalaran would fit the rubric here but that's obviously not the case.

    4. Abilities that don't fit in existing classes.
    I mean locks literally had both Coil and meta before DKs/DHs were added so that's just factually incorrect?
    Last edited by Saltysquidoon; 2022-06-07 at 01:35 PM.
    Tonight for me is a special day. I want to go outside of the house of the girl I like with a gasoline barrel and write her name on the road and set it on fire and tell her to get out too see it (is this illegal)?

  12. #192
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,805
    Quote Originally Posted by Saltysquidoon View Post
    1. A major lore figure to tie into.
    Yes for the hero classes, that was part of what made them a hero class (that and starting at a higher level).
    No for monks and evokers (or at least not more so than any other class). Monks are literally just dnd/pathfinder monks with warcraft smeared on them and evokers are tied to all the dragonflights not just alexstrasza
    DnD/Pathfinder Monks hail from a continent of Panda people, and smash kegs of beer on their target's heads, and brew a wide variety of drinks to empower themselves?

    EDIT: building on this (because there is a major lore figure for every class because they're all ripped from DnD archetypes or fantasy more broadly) The hero classes exist because of and are directly tied to their lore figure, normal classes (to which both evoker and monk fall into) merely have lore figures that are that class. DKs are DKs because they were raised by Arthas, monks are not monks because they were trained by chen.
    Except Evokers are a hero class, and they're directly tied to Deathwing and the dragonflights.

    2. A playable version in MOBA/RTS format. Blizzard seems to favor players getting a preview of future class mechanics via their MOBA/RTS games. When the new class releases, the pull abilities and mechanics from those games.
    I mean what? DKs, DHs and monks predate WoW of course when they ported them over they were going to build off the archetype established beforehand that just stands on its face. I don't think you could show there is real evidence for blizzard pulling mechanics from HotS or SCII for DH/Evoker or monk though.
    The DH class version of Metamorphosis comes from HotS. In addition abilities like The Hunt, Sunder, Wailing Arrow, Frostwyrm's Fury, etc. come directly from HotS. Evokers already have Alexstraza HotS' Abundance, Wing Buffet, and Chromie HotS' Blessing of the Bronze lined up for inclusion from HotS.

    3. A landmass that thematically connects to the new class. DKs had Northrend, Monks had Pandaria, Demon Hunters had Broken Isles, Evokers have Dragon Isles. The next class will likely also have a landmass that matches its theme.
    I mean that's just good business, releasing DKs in MoP would have just been stupid. Also arguing something like mages are only in the game because of dalaran would fit the rubric here but that's obviously not the case.
    This formula only applies to expansion classes.

    4. Abilities that don't fit in existing classes.
    I mean locks literally had both Coil and meta before DKs/DHs were added so that's just factually incorrect?
    Read the tooltip. Warlock Death Coil was not the same ability as DK/WC3 Death Coil. So you would be the one that is factually incorrect.

  13. #193
    The Unstoppable Force Ielenia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    21,868
    Quote Originally Posted by arkanon View Post
    I dont think my opinion on this is particularly important, as im not a "lore guy", but i did play a LOT of all 3 WC games, and played wow since vanilla. Although I was aware of Chen, i had no idea they were part of a big race of panda people - i thought he was just a cute side character put in for comedic value. Again, i knew OF him, but had to think back to who/what he was after the expansion was announced and a forum post reminded me he existed. No one i knew at the time had any clue at all, although I dont think any/many of them played WC. Deathwing was the same - quite a few friends were pissed off they just "created" this "new" character to be the bad guy.
    Your opinion is just anecdotal, true, but it matches my own experience with everyone in my guild back in Wrath, and my two guilds during early Cataclysm. Nobody knew of Chen Stormstout that didn't need an almost thorough reminder of who he is, and most scoffed at the idea of "panda for kids" becoming part of WoW.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Again, it’s facts vs opinions.
    You mean "actual facts vs Teriz' opinions".

    You demonstrate a total lack of understanding of the real meaning of the word "popular":
    "Something that is popular is enjoyed or liked by a lot of people."
    liked or approved of by many people
    regarded with favor, approval, or affection by people in general
    frequently encountered or widely accepted

    And Chen Stormstout and the pandaren never fit any of those definitions prior to MoP. Blizzard made them popular with their expansion. But they were obscure as obscurity gets before the expansion's announcement.

    Again, you accuse me of "not supplying evidence" when you are guilty the exact same. You haven't produced a single evidence that Chen was popular with the game's player base. You were the one to claim they're popular with the player base, then you need to provide evidence. But you have shown none.
    "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...

  14. #194
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Blizzard obviously pulled abilities and concepts from D2 when creating WC3. That’s not really the point. The point is that when we head into WoW, Blizzard took a small set of abilities and expanded them conceptually into other abilities within their new classes. Again, see Rejuvenation and Tranquility leading to other hot spells in the Druid class, or how a handful of wards grew into the totem system.

    The Evoker should be no different.
    But you could draw that correlation to anything.

    Even a "Janitor" class could be tied back to MOBA through Janitor Leoric's hero skin, as much of a stretch it would be.



    A Janitor class could have all new Janitor abilities and merely have a 'Soapy Cleave' weapon swing. Your argument is that this new ability would correlate back to the Cleave ability from the Pit Lord of WC3 just to draw a connection to the RTS. So what is the point here overall? That this Janitor is rooted in the Pit Lord?

    -edit-
    Like Beefhammer says below, you could only really assess this well after all the abilities are known and dig through their sources in retrospect. This doesn't really have anything to do with speculating what Blizzard does with new classes, since just having one ability sourced from something familiar in Warcraft would satisfy your bullet point, even if the rest of the 95% of the class is completely new.
    Last edited by Triceron; 2022-06-07 at 03:40 PM.

  15. #195
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    DnD/Pathfinder Monks hail from a continent of Panda people, and smash kegs of beer on their target's heads, and brew a wide variety of drinks to empower themselves?
    You are being pointlessly obtuse, are we to spend the next 12 posts quibbling over the exact ways they are and are not the same? Broad strokes they're clearly aping PnP monks. Which btw is just a loose collection of east Asian mysticism and semi-fictitious characterisations of actual monks, I'm not suggesting DnD owns the idea of monks, there's just no reason to even argue this.
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Except Evokers are a hero class, and they're directly tied to Deathwing and the dragonflights.
    Fair enough, I'll cop that. It would seem blizzard's definition of hero class is now boutique starting experience and starting at a higher level, which again, monks do not have. Also now you're saying Deathwing, in the op you said alexstrasza so perhaps, again, not so directly tied as you first intimated.
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    The DH class version of Metamorphosis comes from HotS. In addition abilities like The Hunt, Sunder, Wailing Arrow, Frostwyrm's Fury, etc. come directly from HotS. Evokers already have Alexstraza HotS' Abundance, Wing Buffet, and Chromie HotS' Blessing of the Bronze lined up for inclusion from HotS.
    No the DH 'version' (whatever that means) meta is based on Illidan in TFT. I'm tempted to say there's a dev interview somewhere saying the RoC/multi-player meta was a result of them running out of time to make the model but I can't be bothered to look it up for internet arguments so I'll leave that unsubstantiated.

    As for the hunt and wailing arrow fair enough I don't really care about shadowlands to know. Cata is an enhancment shaman ability which is to my knowledge not an expansion class, which goes against the core of your point here which is they pick classes that translate easily into mobas or can be tested easily in mobas, which makes absolutely no sense to be talking about hunters and shamans. But I'm willing to concede I was wrong taking a completely absolute position.

    Also, I have no idea where you're getting the evoker abilities from but wing buffet has been in WoW since Vanilla. Further, to that point Frost wyrms fury is arguably from hots but the spell in itself is a reference to the wrath cinematic (to the extent Arthas plunges frostmourne into the ground when you cast it). When we're at the point where inspiration and design are so incestuous it's not really able to support your original point, it seems more the case blizzard is jsut happy to copy from itself.
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    This formula only applies to expansion classes.
    My point was you can easily apply it to the base classes, ergo your point can be applied so loosely it loses worth as a tool for catagorisation.
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Read the tooltip. Warlock Death Coil was not the same ability as DK/WC3 Death Coil. So you would be the one that is factually incorrect.
    1. I accept your concession on the meta point
    2. It was called death coil (which btw is also knick from old PnP rulesets), it uses the WCIII DC icon. Unless you wish to contend these were accidental or coincidental on blizzard's behalf (or explain why the name was changed) you don't have a leg to stand on to argue they're different spells.

    But I know you will and I know how you will, you'll say but it's a fear effect, to which I'll rehtort they both do damage and healing, to which you will argue it damages the caster and heals the target at the same time, to which that the DC spell in WCII does that or with the glyphs and artifact traits and so it goes.
    This just highlight a broader issue, that your arguments, to my eye, hyper-focus on technical minutia to the exclusion of practical reality.
    Last edited by Saltysquidoon; 2022-06-07 at 03:21 PM.
    Tonight for me is a special day. I want to go outside of the house of the girl I like with a gasoline barrel and write her name on the road and set it on fire and tell her to get out too see it (is this illegal)?

  16. #196
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Mana Burn led to other spells in the Shadow spec. Heal, Dispel, and Inner Fire had influence in the Holy and Discipline specs.

    - - - Updated - - -



    Except that prediction was made long before the expansion announcement.
    And no one could figure out most of this shit until the reveal then had to go back and go, yeah, maybe this was it. With quality predictions, you know exactly what the outcome will be and can prepare for it.

  17. #197
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,805
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    Again, you accuse me of "not supplying evidence" when you are guilty the exact same. You haven't produced a single evidence that Chen was popular with the game's player base. You were the one to claim they're popular with the player base, then you need to provide evidence. But you have shown none.
    So articles from popular gaming mags, and forum posts from the time aren’t evidence?

  18. #198
    The Unstoppable Force Ielenia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    21,868
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    So articles from popular gaming mags, and forum posts from the time aren’t evidence?
    Which article? I don't recall you presenting a single article.

    And one forum thread? In all of eight years? that's not evidence. If something is popular, then said something is liked and often discussed by others. And people simply did not talk about Chen Stormstout prior to MoP's announcement.
    "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...

  19. #199
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,805
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    But you could draw that correlation to anything.

    Even a "Janitor" class could be tied back to MOBA through Janitor Leoric's hero skin, as much of a stretch it would be.



    A Janitor class could have all new Janitor abilities and merely have a 'Soapy Cleave' weapon swing. Your argument is that this new ability would correlate back to the Cleave ability from the Pit Lord of WC3 just to draw a connection to the RTS. So what is the point here overall? That this Janitor is rooted in the Pit Lord?
    Yeah, I have no idea what you’re talking about here. My argument was simply that 20+ totems came from the 4 WC3 ward abilities, and multiple Druid HoT abilities came from Rejuvenation and Tranquility. Thus, you’re going to get several abilities from about a dozen draconic HotS abilities.

    It’s simple.

  20. #200
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Yeah, I have no idea what you’re talking about here. My argument was simply that 20+ totems came from the 4 WC3 ward abilities, and multiple Druid HoT abilities came from Rejuvenation and Tranquility. Thus, you’re going to get several abilities from about a dozen draconic HotS abilities.

    It’s simple.
    So what Draconic abilities from the RTS and MOBA are Pyre, Soar and the Arcane abilities coming from? Where is the Empower mechanic coming from?

    You mentioned them pulling game mechanics from the RTS and MOBA, but I don't see any examples of these abilities in the RTS or MOBA. They look pretty new to me.
    Last edited by Triceron; 2022-06-07 at 05:53 PM.

Posting Permissions

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