Were there actually people who didn't like spec identity?

[kail]

Specs have always held an identity, it was the spec specific abilities (Mortal Strike, Unstable Affliction, Holy Shock, etc). Losing class identity like pally auras was quite painful to witness.

[arkanon]

Prime fucking example.

Prime example of what?

[DotEleven]

YET another strawman. Please, i BEG you, quote the part where i said ONLY the tinker was rejected. If your argument is at all true, you will be able to provide the quote. Go on, link it. Ill chill out here for a bit while i wait for the quote.

Then what's you're argument. Because you're arguing that Tinker was rejected because it wasn't in Shadowlands. That's the only thing making it rejected. Why wouldn't the other ones, with your logic that not being in Shadowlands means its rejected, means that others aren't?

Where, where did they reject it?

In the Shadowlands announcement.

They didn't announce any other class in the Shadowlands announcement either. If Tinker was rejected because it wasn't in the Shadowlands announcement logic dictates all the other classes would fall in that same category as rejected. Or once again, why is it specific to Tinker?

[arkanon]

Then what's you're argument. Because you're arguing that Tinker was rejected because it wasn't in Shadowlands. That's the only thing making it rejected. Why wouldn't the other ones, with your logic that not being in Shadowlands means its rejected, means that others aren't?





They didn't announce any other class in the Shadowlands announcement either. If Tinker was rejected because it wasn't in the Shadowlands announcement logic dictates all the other classes would fall in that same category as rejected. Or once again, why is it specific to Tinker?

I dont see a quote where i said ONLY the tinker class was rejected? We were specifically discussing the tinker class, so why on earth would i start talking about every single other fan concept? Context is everything, and in this context, the point i raised is sound and fair.

Again, you fail to provide anything to back up your attempt at insulting me and undermining my argument, and yet again you rely on a straw man argument.

You claim is that when discussing a game between two teams on the weekend, if someone says "yeah, i notice TEAM A lost their game" that is unacceptable, and instead they need to list every single team that lost in their games as well, otherwise its not fair? The discussion at hand is in relation to blizzard not introducing the Tinker class, not about blizzard not adding a new class in general.

[Ragedaug]

What we need is focused spec design, that makes it fun to play regardless if you're questing or raiding, tanking or healing, doing dungeons or arenas, and anything in between. There is a reason why people in black desert online can do a quest that requires you to kill 50k mobs, or just grind mobs for 10 hours, while wow players start cursing if you can't complete a quest in under 40 seconds. It's because each class is really fun to play in it's own way. Well that, and Stockholm syndrome for all the money they've wasted on macrotransactions.

I think that is a key feature Blizzard has forgotten. If it's not fun to play, playing/grinding for rewards will only last so long before the player gets bored and quits. Make them fun to play and they finish quests and achievements naturally as their goal when they log in is to play.

I'll get a lot of flack for this, I'm sure, but rushing into an area, pulling several mobs and killing them within several seconds is substantially more satisfying and fun than pulling one mob, walking it back to a safe place, then killing it in those same several seconds. The quest requirements can be modified to make it take the same amount of time, but I just find that more fun pulling a bunch of mobs, AOEing them all down, than when they make every quest mob a solo mini-boss.

There's a reason I could grind dungeons for hours most days of the week during Wrath. I got to go in and blow a bunch of stuff up, which is fun for me. Then when the guild schedules a raid, I get my challenge, or when I join a battleground I get my challenge. But everything doesn't always have to be a challenge. Sometimes, I just want to blow stuff up (and a lot of at the same time).

[Reinaerd]

I preferred combat rogue over the atrocity we gotten in it's place, hell at this point id be satisfied with poisons being available again.
Also i would dropkick baby jezus in the noise hole for access to single minded fury on my warrior.

[Niwes]

Have faith in the Blizzard developers - they know what they are doing and have been doing it for a long time now.

is this really dry sarcasm ?

[DotEleven]

I dont see a quote where i said ONLY the tinker class was rejected? We were specifically discussing the tinker class, so why on earth would i start talking about every single other fan concept? Context is everything, and in this context, the point i raised is sound and fair.

Again, you fail to provide anything to back up your attempt at insulting me and undermining my argument, and yet again you rely on a straw man argument.

You claim is that when discussing a game between two teams on the weekend, if someone says "yeah, i notice TEAM A lost their game" that is unacceptable, and instead they need to list every single team that lost in their games as well, otherwise its not fair? The discussion at hand is in relation to blizzard not introducing the Tinker class, not about blizzard not adding a new class in general.

Great. Let's see if we can break down your logic because you obvious aren't understanding your own logic.

You say that Tinker was rejected because it wasn't in the Shadowlands announcement. That is the ONLY reason you gave to it being "rejected".

Now, you are claiming that there are somehow some that weren't in the announcement but weren't rejected. How then? Who gets to decide which ones were specifically rejected from not being in the Shadowlands announcement. Come, give me a list of the Classes that were "Rejected" from not being in the Shadowlands announcement and the ones that "weren't rejected" despite also not being in the Shadowlands announcement. Do this and then maybe you can see your hypocrisy.

[arkanon]

I preferred combat rogue over the atrocity we gotten in it's place, hell at this point id be satisfied with poisons being available again.
Also i would dropkick baby jezus in the noise hole for access to single minded fury on my warrior.

I preferred the 'fantasy' of the Berserker wielding two 1h weapons at a furious speed with occasional huge attacks using both weapons. Im not convinced that the current fury doesnt still kind of cover that, but i also prefer the aesthetics of 2 x 1h weapons over 2 x 2h - i ALSO think it has impacted their design decisions with 2h weapons.

[docterfreeze]

If spec identity means dumbing down classes then fuck spec identity.

[froschhure]

its important that you understand whatr you read. they never said they will delete the concept of specc.

to restore class deptht, you need to replenish all calss abilites and then do specc abilites. ez gg wp

[arkanon]

Great. Let's see if we can break down your logic because you obvious aren't understanding your own logic.

You say that Tinker was rejected because it wasn't in the Shadowlands announcement. That is the ONLY reason you gave to it being "rejected".

Now, you are claiming that there are somehow some that weren't in the announcement but weren't rejected. How then? Who gets to decide which ones were specifically rejected from not being in the Shadowlands announcement. Come, give me a list of the Classes that were "Rejected" from not being in the Shadowlands announcement and the ones that "weren't rejected" despite also not being in the Shadowlands announcement. Do this and then maybe you can see your hypocrisy.

Please quote the part where i made a claim that there were other classes that were not in shadowlands trailer, but were not rejected, without disingenuously claiming you think they are seriously considering a bubble fairy class (this would make you look VERY foolish). What is this, your 5th strawman?

Also, no, you are completely wrong - i provided other reasons that i believe the tinker class has not been added, and if you like, you can scroll back and read them, since you obviously missed them.

[Reinaerd]

I preferred the 'fantasy' of the Berserker wielding two 1h weapons at a furious speed with occasional huge attacks using both weapons. Im not convinced that the current fury doesnt still kind of cover that, but i also prefer the aesthetics of 2 x 1h weapons over 2 x 2h - i ALSO think it has impacted their design decisions with 2h weapons.

I fully agree. 1handers and the return of flurry. and i'd be one happy camper.

[DotEleven]

Please quote the part where i made a claim that there were other classes that were not in shadowlands trailer, but were not rejected, without disingenuously claiming you think they are seriously considering a bubble fairy class (this would make you look VERY foolish). What is this, your 5th strawman?

Also, no, you are completely wrong - i provided other reasons that i believe the tinker class has not been added, and if you like, you can scroll back and read them, since you obviously missed them.

YET another strawman. Please, i BEG you, quote the part where i said ONLY the tinker was rejected. If your argument is at all true, you will be able to provide the quote. Go on, link it. Ill chill out here for a bit while i wait for the quote.

So, once again now you're specifying Tinker as somehow being the ONLY CLASS that is "rejected by Blizzard" purely on the basis that they aren't in the Shadowlands Trailer? So which is it. Does not being in the Shadowlands trailer mean the class has been rejected or not?

Who gets to determine which class/classes were/were not rejected by the Shadowlands trailer purely by not being featured on it?

Also, no one's said anything about your other reasons. This discussion here was because you claimed Blizzard had "Rejected the idea of Tinkers already" on the basis that "It wasn't in the Shadowlands announcement"

[arkanon]

So, once again now you're specifying Tinker as somehow being the ONLY CLASS that is "rejected by Blizzard" purely on the basis that they aren't in the Shadowlands Trailer? So which is it. Does not being in the Shadowlands trailer mean the class has been rejected or not?

Who gets to determine which class/classes were/were not rejected by the Shadowlands trailer purely by not being featured on it?

Also, no one's said anything about your other reasons. This discussion here was because you claimed Blizzard had "Rejected the idea of Tinkers already"

What on earth are you talking about? Are you struggling with English? because i am literally saying the exact opposite of what you are claiming in both quotes. Like, literally the exact opposite. If you cant realize that, then you are beyond help - i am saying that ALL class concepts were rejected by blizzard, and we have proof of that - THEY HAVE NOT BEEN ADDED. Until we have ANY evidence to even remotely suggest anything different, you have a completely baseless argument.

- - - Updated - - -

Also, no one's said anything about your other reasons. This discussion here was because you claimed Blizzard had "Rejected the idea of Tinkers already" on the basis that "It wasn't in the Shadowlands announcement"

No, i made very specific comments based on the reasons some people claim they SHOULD be added - an example being turrets. Its all right there, scroll back through and have a read.

[DotEleven]

What on earth are you talking about? Are you struggling with English? because i am literally saying the exact opposite of what you are claiming in both quotes. Like, literally the exact opposite. If you cant realize that, then you are beyond help - i am saying that ALL class concepts were rejected by blizzard, and we have proof of that - THEY HAVE NOT BEEN ADDED. Until we have ANY evidence to even remotely suggest anything different, you have a completely baseless argument.

No, you aren't. You claim that Tinker was rejected because they weren't in the Shadowlands announcement. Then you "didn't say Tinker was the only one rejected" implying that others also. When asked which ones you sidestep this question. When saying that following your logic that classes not in the Shadowlands announcement were rejected means everythings rejected you than made the outlandish "Bubble Fairy" claim saying that that could be a class. So you obviously think that not everything is rejected.

So what makes Tinkers so special that they are rejected due to the Shadowlands announcement but that somehow there are other classes out there also not in the Shadowlands announcement which weren't rejected?

In other words WHICH CLASSES DO YOU BELIEVE AREN'T REJECTED DESPITE NOT BEING IN THE SHADOWLANDS ANNOUNCEMENT?

No, i made very specific comments based on the reasons some people claim they SHOULD be added - an example being turrets. Its all right there, scroll back through and have a read.

No. No one claimed they should be added. I know, because I was the one who originally answered the dude asking about the hate for tinkers.

Because somehow being able to play as Tinkers ruins other peoples time despite the fact that tinkers already exist in the lore.

This was the original quote to him. Then we went about ways that Tinkers COULD NOT SHOULD be implemented. Then you went on to claim they were "rejected" by not being in the Shadowlands announcement.

[arkanon]

No, you aren't. You claim that Tinker was rejected because they weren't in the Shadowlands announcement. Then you "didn't say Tinker was the only one rejected" implying that others also. When asked which ones you sidestep this question. When saying that following your logic that classes not in the Shadowlands announcement were rejected means everythings rejected you than made the outlandish "Bubble Fairy" claim saying that that could be a class. So you obviously think that not everything is rejected.

So what makes Tinkers so special that they are rejected due to the Shadowlands announcement but that somehow there are other classes out there also not in the Shadowlands announcement which weren't rejected?

In other words WHICH CLASSES DO YOU BELIEVE AREN'T REJECTED DESPITE NOT BEING IN THE SHADOWLANDS ANNOUNCEMENT?

Sidestepped? seriously stop being so ridiculous - i very clearly said ALL OF THEM. Why are you still flapping on about this? you have been disputed and rejected at every single turn, and have lost every single argument so far, and soundly as well.

If you cant understand context, thats your issue, not mine.


HAHAHAHAHAHAH, you actually went back to the bubble fairy. I knew you would - scroll back, have a read - i called this multiple posts ago - that your argument would be falling apart around you, and your evidence would get so paper thin that you would resort to being entirely disingenuous and claim that i genuinely believe blizzard have produced a bubble fairy concept. So predictable.

[DotEleven]

Sidestepped? seriously stop being so ridiculous - i very clearly said ALL OF THEM. Why are you still flapping on about this? you have been disputed and rejected at every single turn, and have lost every single argument so far, and soundly as well.

If you cant understand context, thats your issue, not mine.

Wait, so now you ARE saying all of them have been rejected? So I was right originally way back. Under your logic, Blizzard has now rejected ALL classes. Never to make any again.

I'm not saying they're adding the class. I'm saying it has the potential to be a class. You literally didn't understand the argument at hand. The fact is since I now know you're completely bullshit, Blizzard has actually made Tinker a class before so they are completely against your belief that it "Couldn't be a class".

And now look who's strawmanning.

Like seriously. Dark Ranger didn't make it either, guess people can't talk about that anymore. Same with Necromancer. Or that Wraith concept people had. Or anything potentially being a class because since Blizzard didn't implement it in Shadowlands they have "Rejected it" WE'RE NEVER GETTING CLASSES AGAIN PEOPLE YOU HEARD IT HERE FROM ARKANON

Congratulations, you've finally found out you don't have a leg to stand on. Especially when, after I put this you made the outlandish "Bubble Fairy and Hondas" claim

[arkanon]

Wait, so now you ARE saying all of them have been rejected? So I was right originally way back. Under your logic, Blizzard has now rejected ALL classes. Never to make any again.

OMG, this is just too funny - where on earth have i said that they are adding no classes ever again? Please start to back up these pathetic arguments with a quote.

[DotEleven]

Sidestepped? seriously stop being so ridiculous - i very clearly said ALL OF THEM. Why are you still flapping on about this? you have been disputed and rejected at every single turn, and have lost every single argument so far, and soundly as well.

If you cant understand context, thats your issue, not mine.


HAHAHAHAHAHAH, you actually went back to the bubble fairy. I knew you would - scroll back, have a read - i called this multiple posts ago - that your argument would be falling apart around you, and your evidence would get so paper thin that you would resort to being entirely disingenuous and claim that i genuinely believe blizzard have produced a bubble fairy concept. So predictable.

I don't believe it. On the opposite, I literally called it outlandish. You literally can't comprehend a single argument can you?

You argue that all classes are rejected. Then when brought up how ridiculous that sounds you try to counter with this stupid Bubble Fairy and Honda claim. You've BEEN EXPOSED for the terrible logic you have. Just admit it and go away.

- - - Updated - - -

OMG, this is just too funny - where on earth have i said that they are adding no classes ever again? Please start to back up these pathetic arguments with a quote.

Then why can't we discuss Tinkers as a class. How have they been "rejected" if the possibility they could be a class exists?

You must have like a 2nd graders reading comprehension, honestly.