Are Evokers getting a new spec?

[Salmonface]

Oh, is that why you can't use Fel Devastation as a DH tank? TIL.

This really has nothing to do with anything. Let defensives be cast during casts? Make those casts uninterruptible? This is not a private server, Blizzard can make it work if they want to.

That said, a ranged tank makes no sense whatsoever (because it wouldn't be ranged outside of pulling or VERY niche situations), a "caster" tank would just be a normal tank but their shit has the "spell" flavor rather than the "attack" flavor.

- - - Updated - - -



You seem to be arguing about this "completely arbitrary bullshit" just as much as anyone else. If you're not interested in the topic you're literally just here to bring other people down. That's more than a little sad.

Nah I'm here because the initial discussion was interesting. Now it's just fanboys grasping desperately and I find that funny. Doesn't make me sad, I'm just bored on the train lol

- - - Updated - - -

Says the guy who is wasting their time on discussion forums instead of 'playing the game' :P

I'm on the train, just having fun trolling sweaty neckbeards lol

[Segus1992]

Nah I'm here because the initial discussion was interesting. Now it's just fanboys grasping desperately and I find that funny. Doesn't make me sad, I'm just bored on the train lol

- - - Updated - - -



I'm on the train, just having fun trolling sweaty neckbeards lol

It's ok mate, we're all sad and have to lash out sometimes.

[Salmonface]

It's ok mate, we're all sad and have to lash out sometimes.

I ain't sad dickhead I'm just laughing at you lot for being such dorks lol

[Yakut]

I do agree and disagree, people should temper their expectations, but I also think that blizz should be more careful about releasing public test servers that have “supporting evidence” for things people have been asking about since before release. Accidents happen but I think blizz should step in and strike down the rumor so that people don’t don’t get too excited, small disappointment now or large disappointment later.

Blizzard isn't responsible for third parties datamining their content and releasing what they find. That's on MMO-C and Wowhead. If there were some huge change like this, it would be announced. Blizzard has at least learned the hard lesson of the past of gifting players with a surprise only to be absolutely slammed for said change, so they don't do surprise class changes like this without a lot of notice. Since we haven't gotten that yet, I am not inclined to expect significant changes.

Wishing for something doesn't make it happen. What could conceivably cause said change (in the mid-to-longterm future) is a well crafted and well received message to Blizzard. Or perhaps somehow baiting your favorite streamer that Blizzard watches. But, years later, we haven't seen a tinker class/spec, a tanking enhacement shaman, or whatever crazy thing people dream up (currently tank evoker because of some awkwardly phrased quest text).

It's not wrong to wish. It is, however, wrong to think that wish is actually coming true when literally nothing in Blizzard's recent history suggests they would ever even approach that idea.

[Teriz]

It's not wrong to wish. It is, however, wrong to think that wish is actually coming true when literally nothing in Blizzard's recent history suggests they would ever even approach that idea.

It’s not about wishing, it’s about following the loads of evidence to reach a logical conclusion. Thus far, all signs point to a new specialization for Evokers. Maybe it comes in 10.1, maybe it comes in 10.1.5, maybe it comes in 11.0, but the lore is rather clear. The only thing working against this is precedent, and that’s a rather weak argument.

[Triceron]

I ain't sad dickhead I'm just laughing at you lot for being such dorks lol

That's what he means by sad

[Yakut]

It’s not about wishing, it’s about following the loads of evidence to reach a logical conclusion. Thus far, all signs point to a new specialization for Evokers. Maybe it comes in 10.1, maybe it comes in 10.1.5, maybe it comes in 11.0, but the lore is rather clear. The only thing working against this is precedent, and that’s a rather weak argument.

There's "loads" of evidence in what, awkwardly worded quest text, and an NPC? Okay. That's skating on thin ice and wondering why it won't support the weight of the hopes and dreams piled onto it. Dig deep enough and you'll find anything you want - including justification for Highborne elves and Tinkers. Those didn't happen either with an equivalent amount (some advocates say more, but ... eh) of evidence behind it.

It's a hope and a dream. It is not a reality. And, yes, Blizzard is very big on following precedence even if the players don't like that from time to time. There's a reason they do it and it's not to anger you or shatter your dreams: It's so you can set realistic expectations of their actions. But, okay, ignore that and keep dreaming the lie.

[Triceron]

It's not wrong to wish. It is, however, wrong to think that wish is actually coming true when literally nothing in Blizzard's recent history suggests they would ever even approach that idea.

Er, everything Blizzard has done in recent history suggests they would approach the idea.

Allied Races being rolled out over the course of an expansion, rather than just at the start
Dark Ranger transmogs and customizations literally being added through a questline near the end of an expansion
New Race/Class combos propping up mid-expansion, like the Goblin/Worgen/Lightforged Monks we'll be getting real soon.

There's plenty of precedent for Blizzard adding major features during expansions, and not just frontloading everything at the start. And just because they never did something as big as add a new specialization doesn't really mean much; it just means they may have planned to with-hold a 3rd spec (for whatever reason), and release it when they feel they're ready.

[Teriz]

There's "loads" of evidence in what, awkwardly worded quest text, and an NPC?

No, the "loads of evidence" is the patch itself. It's entitled The Embers of Neltharion, and its going to explore his history and legacy. Part of that history and legacy are the Dracthyr Evokers who he created.

Okay. That's skating on thin ice and wondering why it won't support the weight of the hopes and dreams piled onto it. Dig deep enough and you'll find anything you want - including justification for Highborne elves and Tinkers. Those didn't happen either with an equivalent amount (some advocates say more, but ... eh) of evidence behind it.

Uh, who's digging? We know that in 10.07 that the Dracthyr were drained of the black dragon essence by Neltharion. The datamined Evoker-only quest indicates that we get that essence back in 10.1 or later. The implications of this are simple; If Dracthyr are getting their black dragon essence back, that means more black dragon abilities for the Evoker class and more than likely a new specialization, since the other dragon essences constitute specs in the class. Guess what? The datamined quest entitled "New Specialization Remembered" supports that completely.

It's a hope and a dream. It is not a reality.

No, it's called speculation. Hope and dreams aren't based on evidence, this is.

[Yakut]

Er, everything Blizzard has done in recent history suggests they would approach the idea.

Allied Races being rolled out over the course of an expansion, rather than just at the start
Dark Ranger transmogs and customizations literally being added through a questline near the end of an expansion
New Race/Class combos propping up mid-expansion, like the Goblin/Worgen/Lightforged Monks we'll be getting real soon.

There's plenty of precedent for Blizzard adding major features during expansions, and not just frontloading everything at the start. And just because they never did something as big as add a new specialization doesn't really mean much; it just means they may have planned to with-hold a 3rd spec (for whatever reason), and release it when they feel they're ready.

Well, there's a vast gulf between appearances (transmogs and racial cosmetic features) unlocked in a questline and a brand new spec. One is 100% appearance and vanity with no game play changes at all. The other is a significant change to a class when they have repeatedly said in 2022 that they're not going to add a third spec.

I think there's a lot of false equivalence given here. Vanity changes are not the same thing as mechanics changes. They do not equate. Nor has Blizzard ever treated them like they did. The people that did treat them like that are the players.

Speculation is not proof. Wishes are not reality. There's a reason I am rarely disappointed and it's not due to being jaded or even a fan of Blizzard (neither fits me): I treat everything on forums with a healthy dose of skepticism.

[Teriz]

Well, there's a vast gulf between appearances (transmogs and racial cosmetic features) unlocked in a questline and a brand new spec. One is 100% appearance and vanity with no game play changes at all. The other is a significant change to a class when they have repeatedly said in 2022 that they're not going to add a third spec.

Actually they’ve been steadfastly against a tank spec. In regards to a third spec in general, their answers have been more vague. Here’s one such example;

Dracthyr Tank spec is unlikely. This is a spellcaster class at its core. The class is initially only going to have two specializations, but if they do have a third, ranged dps and healer is where they're focused.

https://www.wowhead.com/news/dragonf...danuser-326869

[Triceron]

Well, there's a vast gulf between appearances (transmogs and racial cosmetic features) unlocked in a questline and a brand new spec.

Of course there is, but only if you believe that they just started development right before these leaks. We wouldn't know how long in development any potential new spec would have gone through, and why they would decide to implement it mid-expansion rather than at the start.

If we break down the potential reasons for this, then it may be because they had gameplay they felt was strong but not enough time to polish it to the level they wanted to present it at, and chose to hold off on presenting it all together early on. Just focus on the 2 specs that makes this class work, and after when they have time, revisit the cut spec and find a way to insert it back in as 'new content'. That would make sense considering how many Expansion features have been released in rolling waves; some in complete secret (Dark Ranger customizations, late announcement of Vulpera and Mechagnomes). They staggered Allied Race releases, they staggered HD Race options over a course of years, they staggered Heritage armor over a course of multiple years.

And considering new classes are being introduced with only 2 specs as a norm, this might be more of an indication of how they plan to roll out designs moving forward; modularly with new specs potentially being added/changed over time. This might even be how they could potentially introduce 4th specs to certain classes in the future. They wouldn't have to front-load content at the start of expansions, just roll out in major content patches.

Speculation is not proof. Wishes are not reality. There's a reason I am rarely disappointed and it's not due to being jaded or even a fan of Blizzard (neither fits me): I treat everything on forums with a healthy dose of skepticism.

No one said it was proof, I said it was precedent.

Even if we're talking about gameplay being changed within an expansion, we've had plenty of examples of that with active class reworks that were incorporated through major content patches. Perhaps not in recent history, but that's mostly because recent design was heavily based on parasitic design rather than major gameplay content additions, with most major changes being planned as expansion-release features.

I'm fine if you're being skeptical, but I think "literally nothing in Blizzard's recent history suggests they would ever even approach that idea" is a presumptuous statement . They have shown precedent for mid/late-expansion major content, even if you don't think it's on the scale of a new spec.

[Yakut]

Actually they’ve been steadfastly against a tank spec. In regards to a third spec in general, their answers have been more vague. Here’s one such example;



https://www.wowhead.com/news/dragonf...danuser-326869

Yeah, I'm familiar with the article. I remember reading it at the time and thinking much as I do now: "vague is vague." Let's approach this from the point of view Blizzard has espoused in the past (whether or not it is liked):

If there is a major change like this coming, they announce it in advance. They know players don't like to be surprised. (To be fair, some do. Most, however, do not.) They've announced major changes already for talent changes, tier set art, raid bosses, etc.

Is it theoretically possible they could sneak in a surprise announcement now? Sure. Is it likely? Almost certainly not. But, why?

Logistics. I'm boiling all of what comes down after this into the one word: logistics. It is not feasible for them to get a brand new spec up to par in the short period they have available before 10.1 launches. Yes, 10.0.7 is coming out next week. They're already working on 10.1. They're not done with what they have already announced: Both talent reworks and tier set bonuses.

It also doesn't count the time necessary to QA/debug known or unexpected and game breaking bugs. Given the graphic of their launches and releases this year in the Bnet app, that puts 10.1 roughly in the late spring/early summer timeframe. Which, as it happens is in the next month and a half or 2. (June 22/23rd being the start of summer) Which also must occur before their late summer (August most likely) release.



Again, logistics. Could it happen in 10.2? Maybe. Maybe 10.3? Maybe. 11.0? Maybe. Likely? Eh... I'd have better odds in Vegas.

[paxen]

If there is a third spec, this has been planned all along to coincide with the new dracthyr story. That means that an unknown amount of work has already been done on it, and they will have a couple of months of public testing on the PTR, in addition to whatever private testing they may already have done.

I'm not saying that a third spec will happen, not at all. I'm just saying that there's no real argument that it can't happen because of timelines. DF Beta was 2.5 months, 10.1 PTR with new spec will have about 2 months at least, if they need it.

I'd say that the datamined quest is kinda ridiculous, but on the other hand, we knew about the underground zone in 10.1 because some dev left in a note that said outright ""Dragon Isles Underground [Warning: MUST be kept flagged "DEVELOPMENT MAP" until 10.1]". That's about the same level of stupid as leaving in a quest with placeholder text that says "Evokers only. Upon login you are toasted with NEW SPECIALIZATION REMEMBERED toast."

You know, at this point I suspect blizzard of leaving these nuggets in there to drive speculation and engagement as promotion. Do these things look like real dev notes of the sort people would forget to take out?

[Yakut]

You know, at this point I suspect blizzard of leaving these nuggets in there to drive speculation and engagement as promotion. Do these things look like real dev notes of the sort people would forget to take out?

Yes. I have worked with developers for nearly 20 years now at various companies. This is 100% within the realm of plausible they forgot. I could tell you stories, but suffice to say, yes, it is the sort of people who would forget to take it out.

[paxen]

Yes. I have worked with developers for nearly 20 years now at various companies. This is 100% within the realm of plausible they forgot. I could tell you stories, but suffice to say, yes, it is the sort of people who would forget to take it out.

Ok, they could forget it, but is that things they'd even write in the first place...?

[Yakut]

Ok, they could forget it, but is that things they'd even write in the first place...?

By definition, yes. There's not a project manager or QA person cackling in the background as they check in things that developers wouldn't know had happened. Now you're going into paranoid tin-foil hat territory.

I'm presently a Security Architect at a cybersecurity company. At this and 2 previous jobs, I've worked with developers on how to setup a secure CI/CD pipeline. I've also done Incident Response Management. Hell, name a cyber security job and I've probably done it in the last 29 years. But, all that builds to a simple truth: Modern development occurs with notes {metadata in this context} which are checked into the source code repositories. You can't sneak it in behind the scenes without a lot of high level security access and even then it leaves a trail.

Suffice to say, yes. It is something they'd write and something they'd forget to remove. Occam's Razor: All things being equal, the simplest explanation tends to be the most correct. The simplest explanation is human error. The conspiracy explanation requires a lot of coordination and nobody leaking it (given the leaks that have happened with Blizzard before, this is the least plausible scenario).

[Triceron]

Ok, they could forget it, but is that things they'd even write in the first place...?

It's placeholder for internal use. And yes, it's absolutely normal to use blatant placeholder wording like 'NEW SPECIALIZATION REMEMBERED'. As blatant as it is, it's much easier to catch than using some secret placeholder codename that sounds legitimate.

[[Apok]]

It's placeholder for internal use. And yes, it's absolutely normal to use blatant placeholder wording like 'NEW SPECIALIZATION REMEMBERED'. As blatant as it is, it's much easier to catch than using some secret placeholder codename that sounds legitimate.

As im parroting it is pretty standard practice especially with staggered iterations like ptr content usually is..

it's for adding context for internal testing when certain features won't be available during that period of testing. If there was no context and the spec was unlocked, because the splash/toast will completed closer to when the patch is RC ready and thus unavailable, this could lead to spurious bug reports as people suddenly have a spec that they have no info on.

Depends on teh type of content you're developing, but it's no different to finding <--- change this to change page heading. when someones been editing reference html without skimming for notes.

[Teriz]

Yeah, I'm familiar with the article. I remember reading it at the time and thinking much as I do now: "vague is vague."

You're moving goalposts. I posted that article because YOU said that Blizzard has said that they will not release a 3rd specialization for the Evoker class. No interview has ever stated that. Again, Blizzard has openly opposed giving them a tank spec, but they have been VERY vague in regards to a 3rd spec.

Let's approach this from the point of view Blizzard has espoused in the past (whether or not it is liked):

If there is a major change like this coming, they announce it in advance. They know players don't like to be surprised. (To be fair, some do. Most, however, do not.) They've announced major changes already for talent changes, tier set art, raid bosses, etc.

Is it theoretically possible they could sneak in a surprise announcement now? Sure. Is it likely? Almost certainly not. But, why?

Logistics. I'm boiling all of what comes down after this into the one word: logistics. It is not feasible for them to get a brand new spec up to par in the short period they have available before 10.1 launches. Yes, 10.0.7 is coming out next week. They're already working on 10.1. They're not done with what they have already announced: Both talent reworks and tier set bonuses.

We don't know how long this spec has been in development. Given the fact that Evokers shipped with less black dragon abilities, it is completely feasible that this spec has been undergoing internal testing for months at this point. In other words, Blizzard more than likely has been planning this from the beginning. The lack of Evoker black dragon abilities and their vagueness about being up for a 3rd Evoker spec backs this up.

It also doesn't count the time necessary to QA/debug known or unexpected and game breaking bugs. Given the graphic of their launches and releases this year in the Bnet app, that puts 10.1 roughly in the late spring/early summer timeframe. Which, as it happens is in the next month and a half or 2. (June 22/23rd being the start of summer) Which also must occur before their late summer (August most likely) release.

Again, we don't know how long this could have potentially been in development. You're acting like they just started this new spec last week, when in reality they could have been internally testing this spec for several months.

Again, logistics. Could it happen in 10.2? Maybe. Maybe 10.3? Maybe. 11.0? Maybe. Likely? Eh... I'd have better odds in Vegas.

You're acting like this is some huge balancing nightmare. It's a single specialization in a class whose core abilities have already been set and tested. Blizzard redesigns and rebuilds existing specs in expansion patches all the time. They're currently doing this with Retribution Paladin and they're going to do it to Shadow Priest in 10.1.

Also no one is saying this new spec HAS to be available in 10.1. There's a high possibility that 10.1 is merely the seeding for the new spec, and the actual spec becomes available in a later patch, or even in the following expansion. The POINT is that I don't see a scenario where Evokers get back their lost Black Dragon Essence and don't get a slew of new abilities.

- - - Updated - - -

If there is a third spec, this has been planned all along to coincide with the new dracthyr story. That means that an unknown amount of work has already been done on it, and they will have a couple of months of public testing on the PTR, in addition to whatever private testing they may already have done.

I'm not saying that a third spec will happen, not at all. I'm just saying that there's no real argument that it can't happen because of timelines. DF Beta was 2.5 months, 10.1 PTR with new spec will have about 2 months at least, if they need it.

I'd say that the datamined quest is kinda ridiculous, but on the other hand, we knew about the underground zone in 10.1 because some dev left in a note that said outright ""Dragon Isles Underground [Warning: MUST be kept flagged "DEVELOPMENT MAP" until 10.1]". That's about the same level of stupid as leaving in a quest with placeholder text that says "Evokers only. Upon login you are toasted with NEW SPECIALIZATION REMEMBERED toast."

You know, at this point I suspect blizzard of leaving these nuggets in there to drive speculation and engagement as promotion. Do these things look like real dev notes of the sort people would forget to take out?

Blizzard knows that their stuff is datamined heavily. It is purposefully left in there to drive speculation among the hardcore fanbase. Its no different than when they dropped the Dragon Pack in winter 2021 to tease the theme of the next expansion. Casuals didn't think anything of it, but hardcore fans immediately began speculating that the dragon pack (that contained no real dragons) was a clue for Dragonflight, and it was.

There's zero chance it was simply forgotten by the devs. Everything we know up to this point is what Blizzard wants us to know, and they're leaving just enough breadcrumbs to generate debate. So yeah, Blizzard purposely left that quest there for us to find it and to put the hype train on the track. Mission accomplished. Evoker 3rd spec speculation is popping up in the gaming media, various WoW forums, and among major streamers on twitch and Youtube.