New Classes Vs Change

[Sencha]

Yay another thread turned into a Teriz echo chamber...

[Teriz]

Yay another thread turned into a Teriz echo chamber...

You're always free to create a "no new class" thread instead of waddling into these types of threads and complaining about "balance".

- - - Updated - - -

You can't morph a class into tinkers but you can copy/paste engineering to make a tinker.

Actually you wouldn't, because the Tinker's key abilities or identity from WC3 or HotS doesn't exist within the engineering profession.

[Lindon]

Actually you wouldn't, because the Tinker's key abilities or identity from WC3 or HotS doesn't exist within the engineering profession.

Actually you can. Because every ability they have is a derivation of something you can create from the engineering profession.

[Teriz]

Actually you can. Because every ability they have is a derivation of something you can create from the engineering profession.

Pocket Factory?
Grav-O-bomb 3000?
Engineering Upgrade?
Robo-Goblin?
Robo Goblin Shield (HotS)?
Salvager?
Deth Lazor?
Clockwerk Steam Fists?
Ark Reaktor?
Engine Gunk?
Rock-It-Turret XL?
Firin' Mah Lazors?

[Futhark]

If we use Unholy as an example, without the Necromancy theme, it is simply a MDPS spec that spreads Damage over Time effects, and summons pets and minions. If we apply a Dragon theme to this MDPS spec, we could have it spread Draconic Fire DoTs and summon various types of Dragonspawn and Whelp minions. Now we have a basis for a Dragonsworn hero that uses existing gameplay.

The purpose is to prevent 'Spec bloat' and having to rebalance. The benefit of this is since we are using existing gameplay, this is a non-intrusive way of adding multiple classes to the game at the same time.

This is the exact way I would expect an "Allied Classes" concept to be implemented. Ion has shot down 4th specs because of "too many specs to learn", so the only way to add more specs is to duplicate existing ones with new themes.

- - - Updated - - -

Some examples of interesting specs that could be added but dont warrant a full class:
Shadow hunter (Shaman school archer spec), Dark ranger (Death school archer spec), Zealot (Light school agile fighter spec), Cultist (light fighter version of death knights) Battle Mage (Arcane School heavy armored warrior)

all of these warrant a single spec but NOT a class and its a shame they arent faithfully represented since each one fills a strong thematic niche.

I would also endorse an approach where 3 new specs are shared across the existing classes according to the specs they lack. This would be the same dev effort as a new class, but greater depth to the class you already love.

Tank: Shaman, Warlock, Rogue, Priest
Ranged DPS: Paladin, Warrior, Monk, DK, DH
Healing: Mage, Hunter

These three roles can be based on any theme the expansion requires: Timewalkers, Shadowlands, Tinkers, Void, Light. Much more flexible than a single class that needs to represent a singular archetype. Also more fun and interesting to integrate what the new spec brings to the base abilities of the class.

[Unholyground]

Nope, if they want new class then make a new class instead of changing an existing one.

People that have leveled a class/spec they like shouldn't have the rug pulled out from under them. There was a big enough uproar when they reworked Survival to be melee.

Ya, but I actually love Survival now, it made me want to play a hunter. I am also someone who loved the old style of survival too.

- - - Updated - - -

If anyone should get a tank option it should be shamans. Earth magic for the win.

If they ever introduce the Earthwarden tank spec for shaman (they exist in game already as NPC's and in lore) it will become my main forever.

[Northy]

As long as Lava Burst actually bursts again, I'll play.

Get rid of Lava Surge, and its multiple charges talent, and just make it a chunky spell on a cooldown.

That's the only change I need.

[Triceron]

What they did or did not do for Searing totem is truly irrelevant to this topic.



Uh, but they do change the Imp's rate of fire by allowing you to produce a lot of Imps at a time. In addition, Warlocks have quite a bit of Micromanagement when it comes to their demons, and Demonology would be the most obvious example of this situation. The difference here is that Warlocks have to juggle multiple types of demons while a Tinker would only have to manage one type of turret. When done right, there are plenty of players that LOVE that level of complex interaction and gameplay with their summons/pets.

Part of the demand for a Necromancer class also comes from that desire for that very type of gameplay.

Because the fantasy of bombarding the enemy with minions is sustainable in WoW as a feasible game mechanic. Static Turrets are proven not to be good, especially in raids. That is the big reason searing totem is removed.

Asking for a broken game mechanic to be a feature of a new class is as laughable as making a new class that has tank/dps built into one spec like the DK originally was. If it was feasible it wouldnt have been removed, it would have been a feature.

You are asking for all the Hunters clunky pet happiness mechanics and the Shamans least fun ability to come back as a selling point? Good luck with that!

[Teriz]

Because the fantasy of bombarding the enemy with minions is sustainable in WoW as a feasible game mechanic. Static Turrets are proven not to be good, especially in raids. That is the big reason searing totem is removed.

Again, you can't compare a caster or melee spec that had a single turret that was largely put in as an afterthought, to a physical ranged spec that can drop multiple turrets at once and have multiple abilities, talents, and cooldowns that support it.

Asking for a broken game mechanic to be a feature of a new class is as laughable as making a new class that has tank/dps built into one spec like the DK originally was. If it was feasible it wouldnt have been removed, it would have been a feature.

See above. The totem system and the proposed turret system are different from each other almost by default.

You are asking for all the Hunters clunky pet happiness mechanics and the Shamans least fun ability to come back as a selling point? Good luck with that!

LoL! Yeah not even close.

[Triceron]

Again, you can't compare a caster or melee spec that had a single turret that was largely put in as an afterthought, to a physical ranged spec that can drop multiple turrets at once and have multiple abilities, talents, and cooldowns that support it.

I don't have to compare it. You are suggesting a clunkier version of an ability that already doesn't work well in raids.

Think of it this way - If turrets become a significant portion of your DPS (because of talents, abilities, attention and focus) then your class is tied to those Turrets.

In WoW, gameplay skill is defined by your adherence to a proper rotation. Aside from AoE abilities, almost every other ability in the game comes in the form of targetted, auto-target or fire-and-forget abilities. Turrets will auto-attack, but they also require positional consideration. This means any encounter that requires a position change is an automatic DPS loss for this class. If Turrets are insignificant damage, then all your customization goes to waste. There's no middle ground unless the turrets follow you like pets; and that point you're just flavoring the Demonology Warlock with a Mech theme.

Imps work because you don't tend to the Imps. They are in effect visual DoTs. Turrets don't work because they're generally static objects, and that's why they're left to the open world content where competitive DPS and situational positioning isn't a requirement in fights.

Turrets are not easy to balance because there is a significant skill gap between someone who places turrets right and someone who doesn't know what a turret is. They've been stomping out this kind of discrepancy over 12 years now and that's why all classes are so homogenized. Even class buffs have effectively been removed for the sake of making things streamline and lowering the skill gap caused by min-maxing stats. There is a huge difference between a player using Turrets effectively and a player who doesn't plop 5 turrets in the right position or timing. This is why making Turrets a central feature is a bad idea.

If Turrets get implemented, they will likely be rendered supplementary damage, like a cooldown ability like DK Gargoyles. Any focus on making these a part of your rotation is a bad idea. It'd be better to have a Mech form and plop a turret on the mech instead of any stationary or pickup mechanics.

I mean you even use the example of Gazlowe, and he's a bitch to balance even for MOBA. He's rarely used in competitive games for anything outside of his stun bomb and grav bomb. The Turrets are powerful, but they're so situational and hardly a reliable PVP ability. There's a huge skill gap between good and bad Gazlowes, and even at the top they underperform due to the unreliable source of positional damage. Honestly, the only reason he's still used is for his stuns.

[Teriz]

I don't have to compare it. You are suggesting a clunkier version of an ability that already doesn't work well in raids.

Think of it this way - If turrets become a significant portion of your DPS (because of talents, abilities, attention and focus) then your class is tied to those Turrets.

Spec. Not the entire class.

In WoW, gameplay skill is defined by your adherence to a proper rotation. Aside from AoE abilities, almost every other ability in the game comes in the form of targetted, auto-target or fire-and-forget abilities. Turrets will auto-attack, but they also require positional consideration. This means any encounter that requires a position change is an automatic DPS loss for this class. If Turrets are insignificant damage, then all your customization goes to waste. There's no middle ground unless the turrets follow you like pets; and that point you're just flavoring the Demonology Warlock with a Mech theme.

Or there is an ability that automatically places all of your turrets in a pre-determined configuration with an AoE-style recticle. That solves any issues with movement.

Turrets are not easy to balance because there is a significant skill gap between someone who places turrets right and someone who doesn't know what a turret is. They've been stomping out this kind of discrepancy over 12 years now and that's why all classes are so homogenized. Even class buffs have effectively been removed for the sake of making things streamline and lowering the skill gap caused by min-maxing stats. There is a huge difference between a player using Turrets effectively and a player who doesn't plop 5 turrets in the right position or timing. This is why making Turrets a central feature is a bad idea.

See above. Also I doubt we're talking about 5 turrets. More than likely you're looking at 3-4.

[Triceron]

Spec. Not the entire class.

Then you still have a bad spec idea.

Or there is an ability that automatically places all of your turrets in a pre-determined configuration with an AoE-style recticle. That solves any issues with movement.

It doesn't solve anything. It actually increases the min-max value between good Turret placement and bad Turret placement, even moreso if said ability was on cooldown. Also, if your turrets are plopped in such a way and provide high-value damage (since you're speccing into it) then it can work the other way - being too effective in certain situations, causing easy exploit value out of it. It's not something that's easy to balance out.

I mean it's like suggesting a pet-based Tank class. It's not feasible because that's not how the mechanics of the game work. Something like a Hunter/Warlock tank spec could be great for World content or out-geared Dungeon content, but it's not gonna fly in Raid (and to an extent PVP) for obvious reasons. The flaws are obvious, and you can't just patch the holes with new abilities and consider it viable.

See above. Also I doubt we're talking about 5 turrets. More than likely you're looking at 3-4.

Higher skill gap between good and bad gameplay is bad. Homogenization has pushed the game away from this type of gameplay. In any sense of a rotation, a player is meant to focus on timing and managing procs. Positioning gameplay in WoW is based on situational awareness with the team - not standing in fire, standing in buffs and not training meteors to drop on the healers/tanks. There's no reason why any class should require positional awareness as a part of their Rotation. As a utility, cooldown or support ability sure, but it has no place in a standard DPS Rotation.

A Ranged DPS being dependant on any type of static Turret is going to be at a high advantage (good positioning, ability to continue DPS while being highly mobile) or end up performing terribly (bad Turret placement, boss phase/encounter that has no room for turrets). There is no middle ground here unless you drop Turrets down to the role of Cooldown Ability.

[Josmo]

There are not nearly enough archetypes yet. We still miss A LOT of fantasy.

Also, as a main shaman, I would love if they got a earthwarden spec. Also, elemental and enhancement should be "redone" to fit a theme of each element has it's own spec.
- Elemental would be a fire/lava ranged type of shaman.
- Enhancement would be wind/storm/lightning close type.

It would actually just be reskin to already existing spells, or tweaking a bit so it would make sense. The core mechanics still the same, with different flavor and name.

[Florena]

It really doesn't, it's been proven. All it does is shift around people who area already tanking.

It's not a BAD thing to add more tanks, but it doesn't create more people WANTING to tank.

Same thing in FFXIV. When they added Dark Knight, the game's third tanking job, in the long term it didn't lead to more people maining tanks, just another option for people that like to tank. Which is fine, tanks and healers need new toys too not just dps, and maybe a few new people would be coaxed into it, but you can't expect a big shift.

[Onikaroshi]

Same thing in FFXIV. When they added Dark Knight, the game's third tanking job, in the long term it didn't lead to more people maining tanks, just another option for people that like to tank. Which is fine, tanks and healers need new toys too not just dps, and maybe a few new people would be coaxed into it, but you can't expect a big shift.

That's actually where a lot of the info comes from, because no other game talks about numbers of people playing roles. In XIV 22% of people tank and 21% heal.

Their healer % is likely lower than wow because content generally requires less healers in XIV.

[UnluckyAmateur]

Still think we should just progressively add new specs to already existing classes

[Florena]

That's actually where a lot of the info comes from, because no other game talks about numbers of people playing roles. In XIV 22% of people tank and 21% heal.

Their healer % is likely lower than wow because content generally requires less healers in XIV.

I'm not sure where things fall for tanks/healers in raids in WoW these days, but in FFXIV there's more people playing healers than tanks, but not by a huge margin. DPS dwarf the other roles of course, but queue times as tanks are shorter than for healers, except specifically for Alliance Raids because those are three tanks to six healers.

There may be times here or there where healers are in more demand than tanks but it's mostly tanks, with most content having a 1 1 2 ration for tank/healer/dps, again aside from alliance raids.

[Teriz]

It doesn't solve anything. It actually increases the min-max value between good Turret placement and bad Turret placement, even moreso if said ability was on cooldown.

It solves the movement issue, since all you have to do to reset your turret position at a new location is to use the configuration ability, and all of your turrets are in position again.

Also, if your turrets are plopped in such a way and provide high-value damage (since you're speccing into it) then it can work the other way - being too effective in certain situations, causing easy exploit value out of it. It's not something that's easy to balance out.

So now that the movement issue has been solved, now we're moving on to it being possibly TOO effective and being difficult to balance? Nice.

Damage tweaks and applying cooldowns can all be utilized to balance things out just fine.

I mean it's like suggesting a pet-based Tank class. It's not feasible because that's not how the mechanics of the game work. Something like a Hunter/Warlock tank spec could be great for World content or out-geared Dungeon content, but it's not gonna fly in Raid (and to an extent PVP) for obvious reasons. The flaws are obvious, and you can't just patch the holes with new abilities and consider it viable.

Where did I advocate for this turret spec to be a tank spec? We have multiple pet-based DPS specs that are all functional in their respective ways. This would be another one that would utilize their "pets" in a different manner than existing pet-based DPS specs.

Higher skill gap between good and bad gameplay is bad. Homogenization has pushed the game away from this type of gameplay.

A Ranged DPS being dependant on any type of static Turret is going to be at a high advantage (good positioning, ability to continue DPS while being highly mobile) or perform terribly (bad Turret placement, boss phase/encounter that has no room for turrets). There is no middle ground here unless you drop Turrets down to the role of Cooldown Ability.

You act as if we don't have specs in the game currently that aren't high skill/high reward. Brewmaster Monk and Subt. Rogue are prime examples of specs where your skill level can make or break your performance.

[Triceron]

Where did I advocate for this turret spec to be a tank spec? We have multiple pet-based DPS specs that are all functional in their respective ways. This would be another one that would utilize their "pets" in a different manner than existing pet-based DPS specs.

I'm saying the conceptual basis is as flawed as suggesting a Pet-based Tank spec. It doesn't work on a fundamental level of how WoW specs are designed today.

I'm sure it could fly in a place like Vanilla where we had the 'Wild West' of competant specs, and it was okay to have a DPS Spec that was good for world-leveling but not in Raids. Those days are long gone, and Turrets have no place in rotations. Even Hunter Traps and Wild Mushrooms have been scaled back in effect.

You act as if we don't have specs in the game currently that aren't high skill/high reward. Brewmaster Monk and Subt. Rogue are prime examples of specs where your skill level can make or break your performance.

MDPS is on a different balance level from Ranged DPS. MDPS has to have high risk-reward and higher damage output in general because in Raids, they are required to get in-and-out of position all the time. Melee DPS rotations can get screwed up quickly by bad positioning or having to run away from a boss because you have a raid debuff on you. That DPS loss is factored into their balance and gameplay.

Ranged DPS functions differently, and if you tack on positional gameplay on top then they will

A) Overperform- character is positioned well, allowing them to DPS fully while benefitting from higher-than-normal damage output to compensate for 'bad turret positioning'
B) Underperform - Even with the checks and balances put in to make sure turrets get placed well, boss mechanics that divert your focus can cause a massive DPS loss
C) Be Clunky and Unfun - Tunnel vision on turret placement and positioning is more distracting than fun. More chances of standing in the fire, more management in making sure you have good positioning, more work and less reward out of this type of gameplay. What class design needs is simplicity allowing players to focus their skill on timing and rotation.

This is why Turrets work in a game like Guild Wars 2, where all classes are designed to self-sustain and fight battles of attrition rather than mastering rotations and ouputting max DPS to avoid berserk timers or reach a boss phase. This system is for the wrong type of game. It *may* have been a good idea back in Classic when roles aren't rigidly defined, classes weren't yet homogenized and boss encounters weren't designed with competitive berserk timers in mind. It has no place in modern WoW.

[Teriz]

I'm saying the conceptual basis is as flawed as suggesting a Pet-based Tank spec. It doesn't work on a fundamental level of how WoW specs are designed today.

The conceptual basis is essentially a pet based ranged spec. We have three such specs in the game currently, so how does it not work on a fundamental level in WoW?

I'm sure it could fly in a place like Vanilla where we had the 'Wild West' of competant specs, and it was okay to have a DPS Spec that was good for world-leveling but not in Raids. Those days are long gone, and Turrets have no place in rotations. Even Hunter Traps and Wild Mushrooms have been scaled back in effect.

Yet Imps and Water Elementals remain. What's the difference? Movement?

MDPS is on a different balance level from Ranged DPS. MDPS has to have high risk-reward and higher damage output in general because in Raids, they are required to get in-and-out of position all the time. Melee DPS rotations can get screwed up quickly by bad positioning or having to run away from a boss because you have a raid debuff on you. That DPS loss is factored into their balance and gameplay.

Ranged DPS functions differently, and if you tack on positional gameplay on top then they will

A) Overperform- character is positioned well, allowing them to DPS fully while benefitting from higher-than-normal damage output to compensate for 'bad turret positioning'
B) Underperform - Even with the checks and balances put in to make sure turrets get placed well, boss mechanics that divert your focus can cause a massive DPS loss
C) Be Clunky and Unfun - Tunnel vision on turret placement and positioning is more distracting than fun. More chances of standing in the fire, more management in making sure you have good positioning, more work and less reward out of this type of gameplay. What class design needs is simplicity allowing players to focus their skill on timing and rotation.

Doesn't just about every ranged spec in the game have to deal with some level of positional gameplay? Isn't this especially true of casters who have to deal with casting spells in high movement environments?

As for the rest, A and B are again balance situations that can be worked out through play testing or tweaking. C is pure opinion. What is considered "fun" is completely up to the player, and as I've shown multiple times in this discussion, there are a vocal group of players who enjoy the management of pets and summons within their gameplay.

This is why Turrets work in a game like Guild Wars 2, where all classes are designed to self-sustain and fight battles of attrition rather than mastering rotations and ouputting max DPS to avoid berserk timers or reach a boss phase. This system is for the wrong type of game. It *may* have been a good idea back in Classic when roles aren't rigidly defined, classes weren't yet homogenized and boss encounters weren't designed with competitive berserk timers in mind. It has no place in modern WoW.

Yeah, this now seems like nothing more than you applying standards to a turret-based Tinker that doesn't exist for any other class in the game. This is btw why I applied in-game mechanics to spell ideas in my class concept, because individuals like yourself like to try to say that anything suggested is simply "impossible" for the game to handle, completely ignoring the fact that such mechanics are already in the game.