Rejoice! Demon Hunter is already playable in-game, but not clear enough, apparently.

[Jtree]

Blizzard normalized most of those issues.

They did...two years later. They obviously had the tech for spirit->hit in Wrath, since Agi->dodge had long existed, but they had not hit upon the idea yet.

However, if you look at past implementation, you notice that Blizzard focuses on the large gaps, not the tiny ones. The tiny ones can be fixed by simple stat manipulation. Large gaps are filled by new classes.

I wouldn't say there was a gap at the BC. Armor-to-class distribution was 3-2-2-2. Plate wasn't lacking; cloth stood out. Five years later, 3-3-2-3 looks like a gap, but I don't believe that alone will dictate Blizzard's next class developments. Thus far, each expansion has had made class changes connected with the expansion, and we should fully expect this to continue. If they want to add tinkers, there will be story reason to do so. If they want demon hunters, that will make thematic sense as well.


BTW, I don't think tinkers should wear mail. Messing with machinery and electricity, the last thing you want to do is wrap your body in conductive materials. Although that does sound appropriate for WoW's goblins to do.

[Teriz]

They did...two years laterI wouldn't say there was a gap at the BC. Armor-to-class distribution was 3-2-2-2. Plate wasn't lacking; cloth stood out. Five years later, 3-3-2-3 looks like a gap, but I don't believe that alone will dictate Blizzard's next class developments. Thus far, each expansion has had made class changes connected with the expansion, and we should fully expect this to continue. If they want to add tinkers, there will be story reason to do so. If they want demon hunters, that will make thematic sense as well.

Well its not just the armor. Its the class type, and the remaining WC3 heroes and units. However, yeah, the expansion definitely comes into the play as well. However, despite that, you can look at what's missing in the class line-up, and what's available in terms of archetypes, and draw a pretty good conclusion.

BTW, I don't think tinkers should wear mail. Messing with machinery and electricity, the last thing you want to do is wrap your body in conductive materials. Although that does sound appropriate for WoW's goblins to do.

Shaman wear mail and they deal with lightning all the time. No biggie. Also all mail wearers begin with leather armor anyway.

Tinkers certainly have a better argument for wearing mail than Demon Hunters do.

[kensim]

Well its not just the armor. Its the class type, and the remaining WC3 heroes and units. However, yeah, the expansion definitely comes into the play as well. However, despite that, you can look at what's missing in the class line-up, and what's available in terms of archetypes, and draw a pretty good conclusion.




Shaman wear mail and they deal with lightning all the time. No biggie. Also all mail wearers begin with leather armor anyway.

Tinkers certainly have a better argument for wearing mail than Demon Hunters do.

Give me one realistic scenario how Monk is not the class added in MoP? Same with DK in WotLK.

If tomorrow it is leaked that the expansion is centered around Ashazara and the Naga as they prepare to bring something evil to Azeroth with the additions of Kul Tiras and Undermine, and the liberation of Gnomergan (Revamped much like the Troll islands) then I would easily say tinkerer is the most likely class.

[Aleksej89]

They did...two years later. They obviously had the tech for spirit->hit in Wrath, since Agi->dodge had long existed, but they had not hit upon the idea yet.
I wouldn't say there was a gap at the BC. Armor-to-class distribution was 3-2-2-2. Plate wasn't lacking; cloth stood out. Five years later, 3-3-2-3 looks like a gap, but I don't believe that alone will dictate Blizzard's next class developments. Thus far, each expansion has had made class changes connected with the expansion, and we should fully expect this to continue. If they want to add tinkers, there will be story reason to do so. If they want demon hunters, that will make thematic sense as well.
BTW, I don't think tinkers should wear mail. Messing with machinery and electricity, the last thing you want to do is wrap your body in conductive materials. Although that does sound appropriate for WoW's goblins to do.

If i recall the tinker hero: http://xlclan.page4.me/holy-tinker-t..._c1000_800.jpg

Or this screen shot: link

That is either mail or plate - ofc it is just a warcraft 3 tinker model, but it is definitely not cloth or leather.

Also, just look at all that machinery on top of the tinker, plus the cool abilities and the ultra siege tank mode - nothing like that exists in WoW's engineering, or anywhere else in WoW.

[kensim]

If i recall the tinker hero: http://xlclan.page4.me/holy-tinker-t..._c1000_800.jpg

Or this screen shot: link

That is either mail or plate - ofc it is just a warcraft 3 tinker model, but it is definitely not cloth or leather.

Also, just look at all that machinery on top of the tinker, plus the cool abilities and the ultra siege tank mode - nothing like that exists in WoW's engineering, or anywhere else in WoW.

You are right it doesn't. Is that because it hasn't made sense to add yet or that Blizzard doesn't think it would be successful or hyper popular? We don't know, however it can be evidence of either.

[Teriz]

Give me one realistic scenario how Monk is not the class added in MoP? Same with DK in WotLK.

If tomorrow it is leaked that the expansion is centered around Ashazara and the Naga as they prepare to bring something evil to Azeroth with the additions of Kul Tiras and Undermine, and the liberation of Gnomergan (Revamped much like the Troll islands) then I would easily say tinkerer is the most likely class.

You don't need to know what the expansion is. Just look at what's left, and what possible class could be added at this point. What archetype would be completely different than anything else in WoW, yet have roots in the game? What remaining class has a massive archetype behind it that allows Blizzard to create 3 diverse specs?

Once you figure that out, the class type becomes easy to predict.

[Jtree]

Shaman wear mail and they deal with lightning all the time. No biggie.

True. Then again, I think a shaman's personality is much more...

( •_•)
( •_•)>⌐■-■
(⌐■_■)

...grounded.

[TheDangerZone]

I do agree that Warlocks have absorbed most of the Demon Hunter signature abilities, but not as far to actually say "Yeah, warlocks are demon hunters"

To be so, a new spec is needed, to really make the Warlock in wow the representation of what a Demon Hunter is in lore. They don't need a new class for that, but we do need them from the lore perspective. The Demon Hunter Warlock spec could bring an exciting new way of playing a Warlock as a melee DPS, and maybe diverging the efforts to make Demonology a somewhat viable tank in case of need back to the Demon Hunter spec.

[kensim]

You don't need to know what the expansion is. Just look at what's left, and what possible class could be added at this point. What archetype would be completely different than anything else in WoW, yet have roots in the game? What remaining class has a massive archetype behind it that allows Blizzard to create 3 diverse specs?

Once you figure that out, the class type becomes easy to predict.

Except that no class appears to have been implemented that way before. Again deal in facts, based on your own assessment Tinkerer should have been implemented in WotLK because we already had two plate tank classes and two plate dps classes that used both single and two handed weapons in melee combat. Yet we still got DKs.

Also we should have gotten Tinkerers in MoP since we already had AGI dual wielding melee types (rogue and enhancement shaman), a leather wearing healer (Druid), a "damage to heal" spec (Disc. Priest), and a leather tank (druid). Yet here we are with a Monk that just so happens to fit the theme of the expansion perfectly.

But yeah I am sure the content and theme of the expansion means nothing, even though it has meant quite a bit to the two previously added classes.

[Aleksej89]

I would like to point out that the most TECHNO oriented expansion, by far, has been The Burning Crusade (DEMONZ).

Never have i seen so many new goblin tech cities and rocket launcher stations & gnome gizmos, teleporters and devices - not to mention the ethereal's ultra advanced plasma,phase and biosphere technology, PLUS all the demonic tech the Burning Legion has been using... also the nagas were using steam pumps and other similar things, plus illidan and his orcs have been making their own machines of destruction... AND A SPACE SHIP FOR SPACE GOATS!

By zones in TBC:
- Hellfire had a ton of burning legion technology, ranging from way gates to cannons to huge walking golems to explosives and mines.
- Zangarmarsh had nagas who were completely steampunk, whacked with draining pumps and pressure valves and what not.
- Nagrand had the ethereal ethereals (pun intended) who are the most sci-fi race ever to join us in WoW.
- Blade's edge mountains had a TON of gnome technology quests, plus i recall using some explosives and rockets on my horde chars as well.
- Terokkar forest has the shattrath city with it's use of various crystals, scryer golems and what ever else the Naaru have installed to protect the city. Plus all the crazy bombs that the blood elves tossed on that druid settlement.
- Netherstorm/Area 52 - do i need to mention the bad ass goblin rocket station city, the massive bio spheres made by ethereals and the entire frikkin flying space ship that Kael'thas stole from the naaru, plus the gigantic mana pump thingies?
- Shadowmoon valley has all the technology that the blood elves were employing (golems and powering crystals, protoss style), all the tech Illidan was making (in and outside of black temple) and the burning legion who, again, made some of the biggest and most badass robots to ever be counted as raid bosses.
- Sunwell with its numerous mechanical golems and all those pylons and even those demon-energy sucking devices that fed the fel-blood elves.

If there is a 2nd Burning Legion expansion, based on TBC, i think it would be more than fitting to implement a technology/alchemy based class.
Perhaps even more fitting than the generic DH who, honestly, bring nothing new to the class roster.

[Thimagryn]

Technology of past expansions is neither here nor there as proof for anything related to playable Tinkers.

[Aleksej89]

Technology of past expansions is neither here nor there as proof for anything related to playable Tinkers.

The expansion where the demons were the primary villains is also the expansion where the vast majority of the sci-fi technology has been implemented.

I consider TBC's huge increase in technology quite an argument that a technology class can greatly go along with a demon-themed expansion.

[Thimagryn]

Then I think your logic is very skewed. You're pretty much linking two unrelated aspects of a previous expansion. You might as well say Naga are going to be a playable race too because Naga had their own raid in TBC.

[Teriz]

Except that no class appears to have been implemented that way before. Again deal in facts, based on your own assessment Tinkerer should have been implemented in WotLK because we already had two plate tank classes and two plate dps classes that used both single and two handed weapons in melee combat. Yet we still got DKs.

Tinkers more than likely wouldn't be wearing plate armor due to their ranged abilities (pocket factory and cluster rockets), along with their ability to turn mechanical. DKs definitely wore plate, fit as the dark counterparts to Paladins, and would be two-role hybrids since they couldn't heal.

Also we should have gotten Tinkerers in MoP since we already had AGI dual wielding melee types (rogue and enhancement shaman), a leather wearing healer (Druid), a "damage to heal" spec (Disc. Priest), and a leather tank (druid). Yet here we are with a Monk that just so happens to fit the theme of the expansion perfectly.

We didn't have a bare handed martial arts class, we had a leather slot open, and we were missing another full hybrid class.

But yeah I am sure the content and theme of the expansion means nothing, even though it has meant quite a bit to the two previously added classes.

Where did I say the content of the expansion means nothing? I'm saying that if you study the archetypes, you can get a good idea of what class is coming next. That's how I predicted the upcoming Monk class before I knew what the expansion theme was.

[Jessicka]

Looks like this discussion has turned into "We can't have a Demon Hunter class because I want a Tinker class more". It's quite clear that there's room for both, and a couple more classes besides.

In terms of what's "open", it is more down to actual populations than representation by class; this is why Conqueror's tokens still have only 3 classes and Vanquisher's were the first to get 4. With that in mind, Monks and Rogues are the two least represented classes which makes it pretty easy to argue for more leather wearers, whereas Shaman and Hunters are actually both very popular (Hunters are second most popular according to wow census last I looked) so it's not difficult to say from that that maybe we don't need more Mail wearers.

In terms of need for Tanks/Healers, GC has already gone on record to say that adding new classes with those roles didn't do much, if anything to the populations of players filling those roles, suggesting it's an inclination of players whether they fill those roles more than it is ability of a class to fill it. That makes it difficult to argue a 'need' for more classes to fill either role, or for a class to fill both roles in terms of balancing out what's available.

[Teriz]

Looks like this discussion has turned into "We can't have a Demon Hunter class because I want a Tinker class more". It's quite clear that there's room for both, and a couple more classes besides.

The discussion was always that the Demon Hunter class is already in the game as a Warlock and a Rogue. The Tinker discussion popped up because of a banned poster who brought the discussion from another thread into this one. Its not about wanting one class over another. Its about which class makes the most logical sense given the current set up of classes. While there may be room for both Tinkers and Demon Hunters, there isn't room for Demon Hunters and Warlocks/Monks/Rogues/Warriors/Enhancement Shaman/Death Knights/Hunters.

In terms of what's "open", it is more down to actual populations than representation by class; this is why Conqueror's tokens still have only 3 classes and Vanquisher's were the first to get 4. With that in mind, Monks and Rogues are the two least represented classes which makes it pretty easy to argue for more leather wearers, whereas Shaman and Hunters are actually both very popular (Hunters are second most popular according to wow census last I looked) so it's not difficult to say from that that maybe we don't need more Mail wearers.

Well that doesn't work because Druids are one of the most popular classes in the game, and they were in the spot before MoP came out.

Additionally, Shaman are almost as low as Monks, and they've been in the game 7 years longer than the Monk class. The Monk class population has been steadily rising the entire expansion, while the Shaman class population has steadily declined. By next expansion, there's a good chance there will be more Monks than Shaman. On the other hand Hunters are a very popular class, probably because of their ability to use ranged weapons.

http://wow.realmpop.com/

Given that information, and the armor gap, it seems pretty obvious that we do need more mail wearers, since there are less of them than any other armor group. The popularity of the Hunter class can't overcome the fact that only two classes can wear mail armor.

In terms of need for Tanks/Healers, GC has already gone on record to say that adding new classes with those roles didn't do much, if anything to the populations of players filling those roles, suggesting it's an inclination of players whether they fill those roles more than it is ability of a class to fill it. That makes it difficult to argue a 'need' for more classes to fill either role, or for a class to fill both roles in terms of balancing out what's available.

Maybe, but we're definitely not going to get another pure DPS class because we have way too many of those as is. So what are they going to do? Do a tank/DPS/DPS hybrid when we're already beginning to see a healer shortage in the game? Obviously, tank/DPS/heal makes the most sense, despite the fact that most players shy away from those roles. It sort of helps that argument when you consider that Druids and Paladins are among the most consistently popular classes in the game.

And we are missing a fourth full hybrid class.

[Belisaurio]

I don't find any problem in creating a DH healer. I mean:
-DH are melee fighters, that use agility and high combat skills to counter other magic users.
-DH have demonic power aborbed or a demon-entity imprisoned, and they will use this force like a battery for their spells, so his new spells are "twisted" in a fel-energy spells (we don't know what spells could have, because only immolation was represented in WC3).
-DH can release all the demonic-entity or the absorbed demon-energys to be a giant demonic-behemoth (we don't know if they turns completely to demons, or just an hybrid between his race and demons, or whatever...)

So, we can imagine a DH spec that will use the fel energy powers to heal or restore death flesh, broken bones, etc... Something that twist again the main function of fel energy (destruction) to accomplish something that can help in destroying demons (main vengeance to accomplish for a demon hunter). I don't know how they can do that, but would be cool to have a rogue-style character that use their points or new resource to maintain in melee combat and healing allys (little close to monk-healers).

[Jessicka]

The discussion was always that the Demon Hunter class is already in the game as a Warlock and a Rogue. The Tinker discussion popped up because of a banned poster who brought the discussion from another thread into this one. Its not about wanting one class over another. Its about which class makes the most logical sense given the current set up of classes. While there may be room for both Tinkers and Demon Hunters, there isn't room for Demon Hunters and Warlocks/Monks/Rogues/Warriors/Enhancement Shaman/Death Knights/Hunters.

But they're not, because Rogues are 'conventional' melee combatants, Warlocks are ranged casters, and Demon Hunters are melee magic users, and arguably more akin to Enhancement Shaman or Frost Death Knights - both of which wear heavier armour.

Well that doesn't work because Druids are one of the most popular classes in the game, and they were in the spot before MoP came out.

Additionally, Shaman are almost as low as Monks, and they've been in the game 7 years longer than the Monk class. The Monk class has been steadily rising the entire expansion, while the Shaman class has steadily declined. By next expansion, there's a good chance there will be more Monks than Shaman. On the other hand Hunters are a very popular class, probably because of their ability to use ranged weapons.

http://wow.realmpop.com/

Given that information, and the armor gap, it seems pretty obvious that we do need more mail wearers, since there are less of them than any other armor group. The popularity of the Hunter class can't overcome the fact that only two classes can wear mail armor.

But is that a reason Demon Hunters can't exist? No. It has nothing to do with it. Your argument seems to be fundamentally based on a notion of 'the next class', or even that there can only be one more class in the game, or that class introduction if there are more must come in a specific order. It's not even an argument that has anything to do with anything.

Maybe, but we're definitely not going to get another pure DPS spec because we have way too many of those as is. So what are they going to do? Do a tank/DPS/DPS hybrid when we're already beginning to see a healer shortage in the game? Obviously, tank/DPS/heal makes the most sense, despite the fact that most players shy away from those roles. It sort of helps that argument when you consider that Druids and Paladins are among the most consistently popular classes in the game.

And we are missing a fourth full hybrid class.

Again, healer representation has a lot more to do with players' desire to heal than it does class's ability to heal. It's not an argument as to why Demon Hunters can't be, because again you're trapped in the 'next class' or 'only room for one more class' mindset.

[Teriz]

But they're not, because Rogues are 'conventional' melee combatants, Warlocks are ranged casters, and Demon Hunters are melee magic users, and arguably more akin to Enhancement Shaman or Frost Death Knights - both of which wear heavier armour.

They are because the Demon Hunter abilities were spread over those classes. Its the same reason there's little to no chance of a Blasemaster, Shadow Hunter, or Dreadlord class. And yeah, a Demon Hunter would be more akin to Enhancement Shaman, Frost Death Knights and Fury Warriors in terms of how they fight in melee. Yet another reason they have no place in the game as a class.

But is that a reason Demon Hunters can't exist? No. It has nothing to do with it. Your argument seems to be fundamentally based on a notion of 'the next class', or even that there can only be one more class in the game, or that class introduction if there are more must come in a specific order. It's not even an argument that has anything to do with anything.

Well again, look at what's currently missing in the game. We don't have a third mail wearer, we don't have another ranged physical class except for Hunters, and we only have 3 full hybrids while there are 4 classes in two other class types. Additionally, we only have two more WC3 heroes who have no abilities tied to a class, and neither one of them are Demon Hunters. A mail wearing, ranged weapon using, full hybrid doesn't fit the Demon Hunter class, however it would work with a technology-based class like the Tinker.

Again, healer representation has a lot more to do with players' desire to heal than it does class's ability to heal. It's not an argument as to why Demon Hunters can't be, because again you're trapped in the 'next class' or 'only room for one more class' mindset.

I never said anything different. I'm saying that Blizzard is less likely to introduce a class that is pure DPS. That being the case, the next class will be a hybrid. Given that the full hybrid is the least represented class type, it makes sense that Blizzard would put in another full hybrid, given their popularity, as well as their flexibility.

- - - Updated - - -

I don't find any problem in creating a DH healer. I mean:
-DH are melee fighters, that use agility and high combat skills to counter other magic users.
-DH have demonic power aborbed or a demon-entity imprisoned, and they will use this force like a battery for their spells, so his new spells are "twisted" in a fel-energy spells (we don't know what spells could have, because only immolation was represented in WC3).
-DH can release all the demonic-entity or the absorbed demon-energys to be a giant demonic-behemoth (we don't know if they turns completely to demons, or just an hybrid between his race and demons, or whatever...)

So, we can imagine a DH spec that will use the fel energy powers to heal or restore death flesh, broken bones, etc... Something that twist again the main function of fel energy (destruction) to accomplish something that can help in destroying demons (main vengeance to accomplish for a demon hunter). I don't know how they can do that, but would be cool to have a rogue-style character that use their points or new resource to maintain in melee combat and healing allys (little close to monk-healers).

The QQ from a healing DH spec would be massive, and it would be almost entirely coming from DH fans.

Even if you added another melee DPS spec (which is what DH fans want, but not what the class balance needs), you've just created a carbon copy of the Monk class (melee tank, melee DPS, melee healing).

[Pippo89]

Sorry you are wrong.
- Yes Warlocks got some similarities with Demon Hunters. So what? Does that make a Warrior a Mountain King because he has three abilities from that hero? No.
- Demon Hunters don't run around using staffs or wands, or caster swords with no physical strength. They use melee weapons like Glaives. The Glaives only disappear while the Demon Hunters are in their Ultimate Form, Metamorphosis.
- Also, they're agile, have a high chance to dodge and are swift.
That's why Agility is the primary attribute for the Demon Hunter hero in Warcraft 3. Not Intelligence. And what's the main attribute of a Warlock? Hmm...

Blizzard already asked the playerbase about Illidan and the Demon Hunter in the past. Metzen himself would like to give Illidan a redemption story.
One of the Monk trainers does imply he wished he would became a Demon Hunter but he's a Monk now.

One of the worst Demon Hunter threads I have read so far, sorry.