Sadly looking like Tinkers could become a reality.

[Kaver]

then you kinda are doing a poor observation around the game... + after darnassus night elf dark ranger can easy becom and thing aswell as we got
another solution making void ranger but dark ranger works completely fine with lore aswell
nathanos hint hint oh y i know it is almost elf looked class and i dont think there is a problem to ad 1 spec based class with it while we get another but with the lich king thing maby a new option opens up lich king is the one that made dark ranger possible

Based on the current lore, it would make no sense for a Dark Ranger to go against Sylvanas.

[Dragtox]

Based on the current lore, it would make no sense for a Dark Ranger to go against Sylvanas.

think you are still not doing observation the lore is still evolving and you dont need to be loyal to sylvanas to be a dark ranger that is a flawed logic on it own

[DotEleven]

think you are still doing observation the lore is still evolving and you dont need to be loyal to sylvanas to be a dark ranger that is a flawed logic on it own

I mean, the current Dark Rangers were her elite force and personal guards. It's not hard to think they'd be her most loyal. Especially with the newest ones being trained by Nathanos who is another person extremely loyal to Sylvanas.

[Kaver]

think you are still not doing observation the lore is still evolving and you dont need to be loyal to sylvanas to be a dark ranger that is a flawed logic on it own

It’s not about logic. Based on the current lore, all Dark Rangers are loyal to Sylvanas. That’s a fact.

[stivered]

I absolutely agree with you.

- - - Updated - - -



Hello, Welcome to mmo-c.

- - - Updated - - -



This isnt really true as she abandoned most of her forces in Org after saying they were all nothing, I mean I only saw 1 poof of smoke flying off not all her forces if anything the horde and her forces there welcomed peace between the Alliance and Horde.

Thank you so much.

[Kaver]

I absolutely agree with you.

- - - Updated - - -



Hello, Welcome to mmo-c.

- - - Updated - - -



This isnt really true as she abandoned most of her forces in Org after saying they were all nothing, I mean I only saw 1 poof of smoke flying off not all her forces if anything the horde and her forces there welcomed peace between the Alliance and Horde.

Sylvanas abandoned the Horde and not her followers. The Dark Rangers were only a part of the horde as an extension of Sylvanas.

[Dragtox]

I mean, the current Dark Rangers were her elite force and personal guards. It's not hard to think they'd be her most loyal. Especially with the newest ones being trained by Nathanos who is another person extremely loyal to Sylvanas.

are we still ignoring lich king lore and new lore dark ranger is not center around sylvanas lore alone
yes lich king is not a dark ranger but he made sylvanas what she is today + pretty sure not every dark ranger was made by sylvanas
it just happens to show more dark ranger around sylvanas
+ death knights seems to be able to make new death knights so lore can also go simlair direction to that they can make dark rangers aswell like lich king did plenty of stuff here that can give us dark ranger
it wuld be a big plot hole if only sylvanas can make dark ranger

[Kaver]

Going by your logic the Tinker was in fact a joke class before it was introduced as a neutral goblin hero in WC3.

Again, this is not about logic. Currently in the game all Dark Rangers are loyal to Sylvanas. That has nothing to do with logic.

- - - Updated - - -

are we still ignoring lich king lore and new lore dark ranger is not center around sylvanas lore alone
yes lich king is not a dark ranger but he made sylvanas what she is today + pretty sure not every dark ranger was made by sylvanas
it just happens to show more dark ranger around sylvanas
+ death knights seems to be able to make new death knights so lore can also go simlair direction to that they can make dark rangers aswell like lich king did plenty of stuff here that can give us dark ranger
it wuld be a big plot hole if only sylvanas can make dark ranger

Based on the current lore, all Dark Rangers are loyal to Sylvanas.

[Kaver]

.

^^ Not everyone is loyal read above, Spoiler tagged as they are 8.3 spoilers.

Those are not Dark Rangers.

[Teriz]

In short, Hunter class in wow is the only way to design a bow class. Got it.
It's not like introducing new elements from Dark Ranger can lead to new gameplay choices and design. Nope, absolutely not.

Again, if there were original ways to design a bow class, we would have seen them in the Hunter class. The fact that Hunters had to lose a ranged spec and Blizzard continues to struggle to make MM and BM distinct is evidence of that. Adding shadow abilities to the Hunter frame isn't going to make gameplay any more interesting or distinct. It is interesting that Dark Ranger advocates appear to be asking for an older iteration of the Hunter class with Dual Wielding and Shadow arrows (both of which Hunters had in previous iterations).

Yet you think Tinker will be unique even though we have engineering

Via their WC3 and HotS abilities yes. Everything from Pocket Factory to Turrets to mech suits, the Tinker is offering something different than what is available in the class lineup. Perhaps more importantly, unlike Dark Rangers it potentially offers a form of physical ranged DIFFERENT from what's available in the Hunter class.

Dunno why I keep trying to respond to you, guess I just hope that one day you realise that your lack of imagination and straight refusal of actually thinking about design will change, but alas, here we are.

Feel free to tell me how a Dark Ranger would play any differently than a Hunter. I'm genuinely curious.

- - - Updated - - -

.

^^ Not everyone is loyal read above, Spoiler tagged as they are 8.3 spoilers.

That's because Sylvanas abandoned them and now they have no purpose, not because they decided to leave Sylvanas on their own free will.

It should also be noted that those Night Elves are staying with the Forsaken.

- - - Updated - - -

are we still ignoring lich king lore and new lore dark ranger is not center around sylvanas lore alone
yes lich king is not a dark ranger but he made sylvanas what she is today + pretty sure not every dark ranger was made by sylvanas
it just happens to show more dark ranger around sylvanas
+ death knights seems to be able to make new death knights so lore can also go simlair direction to that they can make dark rangers aswell like lich king did plenty of stuff here that can give us dark ranger
it wuld be a big plot hole if only sylvanas can make dark ranger

The Lich King didn't create Dark Rangers. Arthas ripped Sylvanas' soul from her body and made her a banshee. When Arthas assumed the role of the Lich King, his power over her waned and she broke free and reclaimed her body. From there, Sylvanas formed a group of undead rangers which became known as Dark Rangers. It should be noted that Sylvanas is the ONLY Dark Ranger who has Banshee abilities on top of her Ranger skills.

[Dragtox]

Again, this is not about logic. Currently in the game all Dark Rangers are loyal to Sylvanas. That has nothing to do with logic.

- - - Updated - - -



Based on the current lore, all Dark Rangers are loyal to Sylvanas.

but outside of the lore still supports my claim yes there dark rangers that are loyal to sylvanas but does not meen there cant be more dark rangers in the world..
lich king was the one that made dark ranger in the first place he can do it again he is not dead arthas is not lich king

i still want tinker but fully know that there is more classes to be a thing around the lore we have now

[Teriz]

You will try and debunk anything to try and push your little agenda but if Calia is to be leader of the forsaken, she IS Alliance. Also Teriz I won't be responding to you no more because all you do is try and wind people up by being argumentative.

She isn't alliance. She's the new leader of the Forsaken which is staying Horde.

[Kumorii]

Again, if there were original ways to design a bow class, we would have seen them in the Hunter class. The fact that Hunters had to lose a ranged spec and Blizzard continues to struggle to make MM and BM distinct is evidence of that. Adding shadow abilities to the Hunter frame isn't going to make gameplay any more interesting or distinct. It is interesting that Dark Ranger advocates appear to be asking for an older iteration of the Hunter class with Dual Wielding and Shadow arrows (both of which Hunters had in previous iterations).

That is literally only you saying that and no one else is making that claim. You are literally countering an argument that has never been made. No, they won't play different because they use shadow by default. They will play differently because you DESIGN them differently. Having a shadow/banshee theme makes it even easier to design them differently from Hunters due to the fact it gives more freedom for design choices.

Same can be applied to Tinkers, do you think they gonna play differently to Engineering if we just give them engineering gadgets that already apply and put in a class? Ofc fucking not. You will have to design new abilities and new spins to make the class unique and work as a class. Same applies to DR or literally any class there is, including tinkers.
Tinkers won't be unique if they play exactly like a demo lock with robots instead of demons... they would play exactly the same and theme will be different. What makes the gameplay different is the design, not the theme. STOP MAKING THAT RETARDED ARGUMENT.

You repeating your hunter argument doesn't do anything good either since I've already addressed it. So I'm gonna ignore that. If you wanna use it, elaborate or explain how my counter to it doesn't apply.

Feel free to tell me how a Dark Ranger would play any differently than a Hunter. I'm genuinely curious.

You wouldn't design them to play like a hunter. Give them abilities that doesn't exist in the Hunter arsenal. Give them a new resource management just like any other class and spec have. Have abilities play off each other in ways that's not present in the Hunter. You somehow think that just because they are bow abilities they work the same, when in fact the choice of weapon is irrelevant to how it's gonna be designed on a gameplay perspective.

You can make a melee class play exactly the same as a ranged class when it comes to mechanics and gameplay and only difference is distance. But abilities can work exactly the same, play off each other the exact same way, can have the same resource management, can have the same spenders. Two bow users just have to be designed different from each other. Same as casters are designed different from each other, same as melee classes are designed different from each other.

[Teriz]

You wouldn't design them to play like a hunter. Give them abilities that doesn't exist in the Hunter arsenal. Give them a new resource management just like any other class and spec is done. Have abilities play off each other in ways that's not present in the Hunter. You somehow think that just because they are bow abilities they work the same, when in fact the choice of weapon is irrelevant to how it's gonna be designed.

Give me some examples of Dark Ranger abilities that have never existed in the Hunter arsenal. Again I'm genuinely curious.

You can make a melee class play exactly the same as a ranged class when it comes to mechanics and gameplay and only difference is distance. But abilities can work exactly the same, play off each other the exact same way, can have the same resource management, can have the same spenders. Two bow users just have to be designed different from each other. Same as casters are designed different from each other, same as melee classes are designed different from each other.

Which is why Havoc DHs, Frost DKs, Enh Shaman, WW Monks, Rogues, and every other melee in the game is under the generator/spender system right? You press an ability to generate resource, you press another ability to spend the resource. Havoc DHs and Enhancement Shaman are especially bad because it's pretty much the exact same system just differentiated via thematic means.

If you think a Dark Ranger is going to play differently than a Hunter you're fooling yourself.

[Pebrocks The Warlock]

I fixed it for you.

So changing my opinion into your opinion is somehow "fixing" it?

[Kumorii]

Give me some examples of Dark Ranger abilities that have never existed in the Hunter arsenal. Again I'm genuinely curious.

Sorry, I don't care about your arbitrary argument of "never existed" when the point is they don't exist. For obvious reasons that they don't fit hunter. You know, the exact reason why black arrow was removed. Awfully misplaced ability in the hunter class that fits Dark Ranger more. The fact it got removed only supports that argument, not countering it.

Then we can look at Sylvanas from Hots for some more abilities that would fit well in DR class.

Which is why Havoc DHs, Frost DKs, Enh Shaman, WW Monks, Rogues, and every other melee in the game is under the generator/spender system right? You press an ability to generate resource, you press another ability to spend the resource. Havoc DHs and Enhancement Shaman are especially bad because it's pretty much the exact same system just differentiated via thematic means.

And why do you think tinkers won't be played exactly the same as pressing an ability to build of resource and press another ability to spend it? If they are and you still advocate for them it would make you a hypocrite. Unless you ofc you think the only difference between classes in the game are due to themes and not design. Can't say I feel like any of those classes plays the same, similar, not the same. I don't like WW monks, I like DH, I don't like DK, I like rogue etc etc. Reason why I like them is due to gameplay reasons, not theme reasons. Then we have the fact that they are similar, not the same. SO even that is a false equivalency.

Then we also have the fact of you being disingenuous as usual and ignore rest of the post and focus on one thing, which is the generator / spending part. But completely ignore spell interaction which is the biggest part in what makes a class feel like the class they are. Together with generator and spending.

How about using fleshed out arguments instead of widely generalisations that only undermines your own class, which is ironic.

[Dragtox]

Give me some examples of Dark Ranger abilities that have never existed in the Hunter arsenal. Again I'm genuinely curious.



Which is why Havoc DHs, Frost DKs, Enh Shaman, WW Monks, Rogues, and every other melee in the game is under the generator/spender system right? You press an ability to generate resource, you press another ability to spend the resource. Havoc DHs and Enhancement Shaman are especially bad because it's pretty much the exact same system just differentiated via thematic means.

If you think a Dark Ranger is going to play differently than a Hunter you're fooling yourself.

as i said befor i dont think many spec on dark ranger gona work but 1 spec can easy be made

hunter is a class that evolved really bad where it i seems to be more us the players that knows how this class is evolving makes many horrible choices on 2 spec then made mistake on all of them

warlock used death coil befor death knight was a thing now they renamed it

hunter use machine pet even in beast mastery not alot beast mastery here...

fun thing to add in blade master is a monk

monk was playing relly simlair to marksmann in dps it kinda is doing it still now

survival play so simlair to bear form even with special effect right now but it got a bomb and harpoon

paladin is starting to go into rouge play style we are creative with these changes..

[iosdeveloper]

Give me some examples of Dark Ranger abilities that have never existed in the Hunter arsenal. Again I'm genuinely curious.

raise skeleton, drain life, silence, mind control
all 4 of them, lol

edit: Black Arrow was a hunter ability, but without its main component - summoning skeletons for tanking

no hate

[Teriz]

Sorry, I don't care about your arbitrary argument of "never existed" when the point is they don't exist. For obvious reasons that they don't fit hunter. You know, the exact reason why black arrow was removed. Awfully misplaced ability in the hunter class that fits Dark Ranger more. The fact it got removed only supports that argument, not countering it.

Then we can look at Sylvanas from Hots for some more abilities that would fit well in DR class.

Black Arrow didn't alter the play style of the Hunter class in any way. It is doubtful that a class based around it would be different from the Hunter class.

And why do you think tinkers won't be played exactly the same as pressing an ability to build of resource and press another ability to spend it?

Because the DPS spec would be ranged, not melee.

If they are and you still advocate for them it would make you a hypocrite. Unless you ofc the only difference between classes in the game are due to themes and not design. Can't say I feel like any of those classes plays the same, similar, not the same. I don't like WW monks, I like DH, I don't like DK, I like rogue etc etc. Reason why I like them is due to gameplay reasons, not theme reasons. Then we have the fact that they are similar, not the same. SO even that is a false equivalency.

Then we also have the fact of you being disingenuous as usual and ignore rest of the post and focus on one thing, which is the generator / spending part. But completely ignore spell interaction which is the biggest part in what makes a class feel like the class they are. Together with generator and spending.

The point is that despite the ability differences, the melee DPS specs play very similar to one another. The overall point is that the Hunter class has demonstrated that there's only a few ways to do a bow spec. Adding an old Hunter ability into the equation won't change that.

- - - Updated - - -

raise skeleton, drain life, silence, mind control
all 4 of them, lol

Dark Ranger never had Raise Skeleton. Hunters had Silence Shot, and Hunters can tame Beasts.

I suppose there's Drain Life, but that's a Warlock ability.

[Kaver]

Wrong, there are Dark Rangers in that mix:



It says some yes but some were raised as Dark Wardens.

But it still says “Loyal Dark Rangers”. There is no current version of the lore where any Dark Ranger is not loyal to Sylvanas.

- - - Updated - - -

but outside of the lore still supports my claim yes there dark rangers that are loyal to sylvanas but does not meen there cant be more dark rangers in the world..
lich king was the one that made dark ranger in the first place he can do it again he is not dead arthas is not lich king

i still want tinker but fully know that there is more classes to be a thing around the lore we have now

I’m only addressing what is currently in the lore.