Sadly looking like Tinkers could become a reality.

[Teriz]

Well, yeah. Technically, everything is possible but what I meant by complex is that class should please most playerbase because I am sure everyone who plays WoW longer than a year thinks about leveling alts. I am not sure Tinker class is going to do that if its executed badly and it has chance to do so.

I rather see Mechagon as a allied race, which is what we are getting. Not as a viable class. I mean, where do you put a line what should Tinker able to do and to not have other players going "That is crap, why not this instead?"?

I am not saying they are impossible. I am saying they don't make sense for World of WarCraft but they do for RTS/HoTS and similar.

Again, look at the WC3 and HotS Tinker heroes. That is the guideline for the Tinker class, just like it was a guideline for DKs, Monks, and DHs before they entered WoW as classes. Honestly, most WoW classes have their foundation in WC3.

[Polybius]

You know teleporters are a thing right?

Don't you know? It's not "serious." Meanwhile we have Ethereals and other "serious" races pushing SeRiOuS void, arcane, and light technology.

[Pebrocks The Warlock]

https://wow.gamepedia.com/Tinker_(Warcraft_III)

It's not a mech thats a backpack.

From that link:

[Katchii]

I intend to follow wow till the last expansion. Unless tinkers are introduced. It would change the feel of the game too much. Mechagon and all that crap was hard to swallow, having freakin tinkers running around would be way too much.

I honestly can't understand this mentality. The game already HAS Tinkers and mechs and technology and lasers and gears and stuff...how would adding a legit class based on the HUGE amount of tech already in this game somehow taint it beyond the point where you'd abandon it?

[Buliwyf the Omen]

And also geez the hate, I should shut up I suppose and let you echo chamber.

No one is hating. But when 10000 people bring up the same silly argument when there is Blacksmithing available for Mages, when there is Enchanting available even though we have Mages, dont you think that the Profession Argument is worth exactly 0?

[Teriz]

https://wow.gamepedia.com/Tinker_(Warcraft_III)

It's not a mech thats a backpack.

The Tinker's ultimate ability, Robo-Goblin, the backpack transforms into a mech that the Tinker can ride:




And it's a toggle, just like the WC3 Druid forms.

[ReD-EyeD]

In order to make a tinker work though you'd have to fully gutt engineering

Except no, you don't?

[Buliwyf the Omen]

In order to make a tinker work though you'd have to fully gutt engineering as a profession and it's already a shit profession with barely any uses.

Exactly. Perfect time to revamp Engineering or completly remove it.

But hey, judging by your profile picture, I guess Dark Rangers overlapping with MM Hunters is completly a non issue, huh?

[Teriz]

In order to make a tinker work though you'd have to fully gutt engineering as a profession and it's already a shit profession with barely any uses.

Please explain how a Tinker tanking a dungeon has any effect whatsoever on an engineer putting together materials to craft a pair of goggles.

[Polybius]

In order to make a tinker work though you'd have to fully gutt engineering as a profession and it's already a shit profession with barely any uses.

Engineering never replaced rotations, and its tools always had a long CD. It's a shit profession because it doesn't have many uses outside utility and it's staying that way.

[Katchii]

Ok fine answer me this how would you define male and female Tinkers? How would they mount already obtainable mounts ingame? like the Sky Golem a mech inside a sky Golem it would look stupid and weird.

You mean just like how stupid and weird it would be for a bear, cat or moonkin to drive one of those? Which is why they don't allow shapeshifted druids to mount?

The battle suit would be like a Druid form and they couldn't mount while in it.

Easy.

[Buliwyf the Omen]

You mean just like how stupid and weird it would be for a bear, cat or moonkin to drive one of those? Which is why they don't allow shapeshifted druids to mount?

The battle suit would be like a Druid form and they couldn't mount while in it.

Easy.

Or they make the Mech both a mount and their combat suit.

Just give it a neat little animation where it gets its wheels out or activates nitro or gets a pair of spinning copterblades and youre good to go.

[Pebrocks The Warlock]

The WC3 Reforge Tinker model is pretty great.

[ReD-EyeD]

It doesn't even have to be a mech as a primary weapon for a class. It can literally be anything from heavy armor plated melee "suit", ranged mail wearing gunner or a cloth wearing gadgets using tech-mage.
And everyone is fixated only on mechs (which already exists for decades in a warcraft lore unlike monks).

[Buliwyf the Omen]

Also judging me by my profile pic and constantly telling me I'm wrong is bang out of order, I will not bother you anymore but when you were complaining about other's wanting a different class fantasy remember YOU are totally guilty of it too.

Your name is Riversong and you have a high elf as your profile picture. It aint hard to guess that you for sure would like a Dark Ranger class.

Plus, I am not telling you "You are wrong.", you are proving that yourself with silly argumentation in this topic.

[Teriz]

The WC3 Reforge Tinker model is pretty great.

Hmm, they're combining elements of the original with HotS version. That's interesting.

[Sharby]

Can someone tldr me why people are against tinkers?

Gnome/Goblin aesthetic isn't appealing.

[Ielenia]

The issue is that some players don't want to see existing classes lose abilities to "new" classes.

There is no "except" anything, here.

Saying "existing class A" would lose "X ability" to "new class B" is a fallacy and nothing more than your wishful thinking. The sole example you have of this is warlocks and metamorphosis, and that, in itself, is a unique occurrence since it was a class-defining feature of the demon hunter.

Hunters would lose nothing if dark rangers came to be, since Black Arrow is no longer part of their repertoire. They can't "lose" something they already no longer possess. And that's assuming the dark ranger needs Black Arrow to begin with.

Especially when the "new" classes share themes with existing class concepts

Even the vanilla classes had loads of overlaps with themes within their concepts. Paladins and priests, warlocks and mages, warlocks and shadow priests, etc, etc.

and aren't really offering anything new.

That's solely because you adamantly refuse to apply even a modicum of imagination into the concept. And we know you're capable of doing so, since you have two class concepts linked in your sig. And I'm not the first one to point that to you.

That's probably why the Tinker tends to dominate polls over more rehashed concepts like the Necromancer and Dark Ranger.

If "popularity" had any influence over Blizzard's decisions on which class to implement, tinkers and demon hunters would have been the first two classes added. But that is not what happened, was it?

[VinceVega]

I see players running around in the giant mech suit mounts ALL THE TIME...there is no difference, thematically, between those and a battle suit.

Tbh i do not see mounts as relevant for anything. Hell we get Deathwing as a mount soon... That is just cosmetic stuff that has no consequenze for ingame events lore or anything else.

Excluded maybe the Class Mounts from classic and Legion.

[Pebrocks The Warlock]

Hmm, they're combining elements of the original with HotS version. That's interesting.