Why are there no new classes in Shadowlands?!

[kaminaris]

I really thought Tinker was going to be the new class. With all the tinker related things they have added this expansion and Gazlow having tinker abilities on island expedition. Maybe they are saving it for next expansion, tinker wouldn't make sense with Shadow land.

Yeah it was such a letdown...

And what makes sense or not it just a buzzword since blizzard can make anything fit anything, just like we had alternative timeline WoD with guldan achimonde and shit that nobody with right mind would expect to "make sense" after MoP.

[Sangfoudre]

Things are currently more balanced than they have ever been before, to be fair.

If we look carefully at statistics and logs, it's kinda true. Almost every spec is viable in high end content. Real problems begin at mythic raid progress and very high keys (and I guess high rating arenas). 99% of players can play whatever the spec they like, whenever they like.

[Doffen]

Goblins have tails? Or did you spontaneously forget that 100% means "everything"?

The male Goblin do have a tail...

[Hyeonh]

Why a new class? I rather have more new mainline races.

[Jowany]

Why we need new class? We have more than enought, you can pick what you want, you have big pool of classes (in comparism with other MMO's). It's not easy to balance new class with other or create just idea of new class, you have to create whole new playstyle, lore, etc.

[villie]

Everyone kinda thought Necromancer was coming, me included. But i'm glad its not, i would rather see them fix the issues they have with class and gameplay design than add another unknown quantity to the mixer.

At least with the current classes, you would hope, they know what they are working with and what to unprune etc without having to deal with all new abilities and interactions from a brand new class.

[Marrilaife]

Almost every spec is viable in high end content. Real problems begin at mythic raid progress and very high keys (and I guess high rating arenas).

You meant in low and medium level of content? Because then you immediately follow with an example how high end content has problems.

And even at average level of content people are gonna face situations like affliction warlock being declined from m+ because even though he can do that key, another class will do double his damage.

[Sangfoudre]

You meant in low and medium level of content? Because then you immediately follow with an example how high end content has problems.

And even at average level of content people are gonna face situations like affliction warlock being declined from m+ because even though he can do that key, another class will do double his damage.

High end content includes HC raids and keys below 15. That's why I specified MM while running for top 100 and higher keys. Aff locks are viable in keys even if this is not the area where they shine the most. I should have used endgame content instead of high end, but still, top 100 mythic raid guilds and keys above 15 represent less than 1 player out of 1000. So for the vast majority of aff locks (or other specs), it's possible.

[Timewalker]

They should fix core gameplay before they add another class.

[huth]

The male Goblin do have a tail...

a) Not a tail.
b) Given that the Vulpera haven't died out yet, male Vulpera have one of those too in most likely scenarios.

[Doffen]

a) Not a tail.
b) Given that the Vulpera haven't died out yet, male Vulpera have one of those too in most likely scenarios.

Mhm, good point.

[Marrilaife]

High end content includes HC raids and keys below 15.

That's seriously not "high end" content. It's widely puggable mainstream content.

I should have used endgame content instead of high end, but still, top 100 mythic raid guilds and keys above 15 represent less than 1 player out of 1000.

Seriously mythic raiding is not just "top 100", there are thousands of guilds raiding mythic and usually more than 1 thousand finishing the tier with Cutting Edge, the idea that mythic is only for "top 100" is the most false but widespread misconception in the community.

And I'm pretty sure next season more players will want to participate in keys +15, even people who stopped at +10 for now, because there was no gear incentive to go higher, while next season gear drops in keys will scale to +15. So how do you define "viable"? If a spec is doing 10% less damage on average in a +15 key is it still viable? How about 30% less? 50% less? Where do you draw the line?

Because yes, there are significant disparities in spec performance at a level of +15, you can still complete it because you can get carried by the rest of the team compensating for your spec shortcomings, you can even get afk-boosted by the top teams in boosting communities, and yes, you can fail the key in pugs not because of spec but because people don't know how to play their classes, even fotm ones, but that really doesn't reduce the problem, only mask it.

If we take some average Joe who can play a spec at 50% of max capacity he will still perform better with a stronger spec than a weaker one. People like to cherry pick occasions where average Joe was playing his fotm class at 50% skill level and got beaten by unique hipster Harry who somehow knows how to play his underdog spec at 90% skill level.

The truth is, people tend to band together by the level of skill and dedication, and you will rarely see 90% parsers playing in groups where everyone performs at much lower skill level, and if they do so, it's mostly to move up the ladder. So in typical scenario a person playing a stronger spec will perform better than the others around, because the others are of similar skill level, not vastly higher or lower.

The only difference will be if there are specs with very big learning curves, then you'll see them extra underperforming in the low skill / little practice bracket, like casual content. Most specs have been made easier to play in the last few expansions. There are still a few that rely on player knowing wtf are they doing, discipline is one example, it's godlike near the top of the skill ladder, and utter garbage in hands of completely inexperienced players, who are baffled why is disc getting nerfed for 8.3 if it's not even that good for them? When disc was good for low tier player, it's been completely out of control for skilled players in both pvp and raiding.

But then how do you solve it, do you dumb every spec down even further, especially the ones that still have a few things going on in them people have to pay attention to? There was already uproar when specs were simplified too much, unique resources removed from them and instead most dps specs made into "build - spend - watch for procs" triad.

[Dug]

They probably can't figure out a way to make a unique and fun class that isn't just build/spend resource honestly

[Sangfoudre]

That's seriously not "high end" content. It's widely puggable mainstream content.

Nope. It's not, HC raids are not done by the vast majority of players, the vast majority has LFR and NM or don't even raid at all. That's how these difficulties have been designed. I know reliable statistics are hard to find, but let's take wowhead example, Mythic sivara has been realized by 6% of the profiles, Wowhead users not being that much very casual players.

Seriously mythic raiding is not just "top 100", there are thousands of guilds raiding mythic and usually more than 1 thousand finishing the tier with Cutting Edge, the idea that mythic is only for "top 100" is the most false but widespread misconception in the community.

According to raider.io about 5000 guilds have killed an EP boss, and the tier live its last weeks. So if we consider that there are 2 million players left, this is merely a handful.

And I'm pretty sure next season more players will want to participate in keys +15, even people who stopped at +10 for now, because there was no gear incentive to go higher, while next season gear drops in keys will scale to +15. So how do you define "viable"? If a spec is doing 10% less damage on average in a +15 key is it still viable? How about 30% less? 50% less? Where do you draw the line?

This question is good, because it assumes that the player is playing perfectly but damage is not the only thing I'd consider if I were to push keys to the max I could (which is not the case). Considering the damage scaling with gear, the players I'll play with in +15 at S4 could fit as they fit in +10 now. I play mostly in guild groups so I play with whatever buddy is up to and has an adequate item level.

The problem is not about specs underperforming but about specs overperforming (or at least so useful it's worth its potential drawbacks).

Because yes, there are significant disparities in spec performance at a level of +15, you can still complete it because you can get carried by the rest of the team compensating for your spec shortcomings, you can even get afk-boosted by the top teams in boosting communities, and yes, you can fail the key in pugs not because of spec but because people don't know how to play their classes, even fotm ones, but that really doesn't reduce the problem, only mask it.

If we take some average Joe who can play a spec at 50% of max capacity he will still perform better with a stronger spec than a weaker one. People like to cherry pick occasions where average Joe was playing his fotm class at 50% skill level and got beaten by unique hipster Harry who somehow knows how to play his underdog spec at 90% skill level.

The truth is, people tend to band together by the level of skill and dedication, and you will rarely see 90% parsers playing in groups where everyone performs at much lower skill level, and if they do so, it's mostly to move up the ladder. So in typical scenario a person playing a stronger spec will perform better than the others around, because the others are of similar skill level, not vastly higher or lower.

The only difference will be if there are specs with very big learning curves, then you'll see them extra underperforming in the low skill / little practice bracket, like casual content. Most specs have been made easier to play in the last few expansions. There are still a few that rely on player knowing wtf are they doing, discipline is one example, it's godlike near the top of the skill ladder, and utter garbage in hands of completely inexperienced players, who are baffled why is disc getting nerfed for 8.3 if it's not even that good for them? When disc was good for low tier player, it's been completely out of control for skilled players in both pvp and raiding.

But then how do you solve it, do you dumb every spec down even further, especially the ones that still have a few things going on in them people have to pay attention to? There was already uproar when specs were simplified too much, unique resources removed from them and instead most dps specs made into "build - spend - watch for procs" triad.

An even better question, considered I disagree with you on the percentage of people for which this might be an issue and another issue which'd be (and you made an excellent phrase for it) "dumb every spec down". Yes, some spec have and will always underperfom in some activities. My point is this is an issue for a really small minority of players, those pushing the game to its limits.

You have to remove from your head that many people do mythic raids or +15 keys. These activities (as well as corresponding BG ratings) are done by a small minority of people. A thousand guilds clearing the raid before next tier only represents a few ten thousands chars so not that many people.

RIO S3: 300k keys above 15 out of 55 million keys run, so half a percent of keys, and it's safe to assume that people running +15 run keys more often than other.
Given that, highend content is not the content that address to less than 1% of the playerbase.

[Muffin the Manslayer]

As the title says, why are we not getting a new class. The way expansions worked in the past has been quite consistant.

Vanilla - all original classes and races
BC - New races
Wrath - New class
Cata - New races
MoP - Both new class and race
WoD - nothing due to MoP offering both
Legion - New class
End of Legion, Almost all of BFA - New races.

In keeping with tradition, we should be getting either a new class or both a class and race. I wonder what gives. I did see a youtube video where someone alluded to a new class (necromancer) but I think that is doubtful. Does anyone else think there might or might not be a new race for a specific reason. I personally wanted a new class but I know that an overhaul of the current classes and leveling is more important. Let me know what yall think.

We got updates to all the original races in WoD which was way more work than any single new race or class since they remade the skeletons and didn't just update the textures.

I think everyone can agree that balancing the game is more important than a new class and i will also add that you have to be bonkers to think we won't be getting any new allied races.

[Conscious]

Why spend the money on a game you're trying to limp into retirement?

[Marrilaife]

This question is good, because it assumes that the player is playing perfectly but damage is not the only thing I'd consider if I were to push keys to the max I could (which is not the case).

That's assuming there's a tradeoff between damage and utility, which often isn't the case and widens the gap of imbalance. Why do you think rogues and demon hunters are popular dps in m+? Because they have both the damage and the utility to shine.

Considering the damage scaling with gear, the players I'll play with in +15 at S4 could fit as they fit in +10 now.

The dungeons get upscaled 30% per season to keep the difficulty curve similar. They won't became much more easier unless the new affix is a joke (which I doubt) or we get some huge power spike from legendary cloak (I don't think so either, essences in season 3 were a bigger bump and new essences are not beating the existing ones).

The problem is not about specs underperforming but about specs overperforming (or at least so useful it's worth its potential drawbacks).

This is the same problem, it's only a matter whether you think top specs should be nerfed or bottom specs buffed.

Also most people who are "casuals", pick herbs, do pet battles, collect transmog and raid only lfr will not be impacted negatively by balancing changes, they probably won't even notice if a spec is buffed by 5% or nerfed, or if talent A is now better than talent B in competitive scenario. For casuals, picking a solo friendly class like hunter or demon hunter will impact them more than balancing passes. But if you can improve the life of people who participate even in "high end" as you call it heroic raiding or mythic+15, these people are more than 1% of the playerbase, and also they tend to be subbed longer overall than casual Bob who only plays for the story so had 3 afternoons of content per patch then quit.

So I don't see why improving the balance for people who participate in the end game is a bad thing if it has next to zero impact on the casual.

Another thing is the "trickle down effect" created by "following the meta", you can see that people on lower levels of content follow the ideas that appear on the top and are popularized by streamers, websites, discords etc. Clear example is the fact that m+ groups have a fixation on inviting rogues even if the level of key they're doing belongs to the bracket of "you can do it with any class". You can't completely eradicate the meta, but you can shake it up, in pvp you have multiple arena comps being considered as "viable" but in m+ the meta has been stale for many seasons and it impacts the compositions and desirability of the classes more than "on paper" viability of each.

One reason why I wouldn't want a new class in the mix is that in many types of content the space is already very crowded and dominated by a handful of specs, adding more without proper balancing first can only cause 2 effects both negative: 1 - new class isn't wanted in x content 2 - new class is wanted in x content and pushes out one of the current occupants of that slot into "unwanted" category.

I've seen it time and time again when depending on balancing changes and community perception a spec can be dropped from fotm to "do not invite" in a whim, for example what happened with guardian druids going from legion into bfa. This might not affect people who are already in an established team / guild, but it affects people who pug or look to find a guild, which more often than not are players below the "super hardcore" bracket but above "casual".

[Seranthor]

As the title says, why are we not getting a new class. The way expansions worked in the past has been quite consistant.

Vanilla - all original classes and races
BC - New races
Wrath - New class
Cata - New races
MoP - Both new class and race
WoD - nothing due to MoP offering both
Legion - New class
End of Legion, Almost all of BFA - New races.

In keeping with tradition, we should be getting either a new class or both a class and race. I wonder what gives. I did see a youtube video where someone alluded to a new class (necromancer) but I think that is doubtful. Does anyone else think there might or might not be a new race for a specific reason. I personally wanted a new class but I know that an overhaul of the current classes and leveling is more important. Let me know what yall think.

Yes, consistent... until its not... it was consistent on where they announced new expansions... until it wasn't...

we already have 36 specs to balance... and no one is happy with the balancing when that is done... so you want to add 2-3 more to that flaming dumpster fire? No thank you.

[Sangfoudre]

snip

this doesn't oppose completely with what I said.
I don't mind the slight nerf/buff done to top specs in some metas, almost nobody won't see a difference, save the top 0.5%.

As for a new class, I don't mind whether wow has one or not as I won't play anything else than I do now, unless one day I'm able to transfer everything from a char to another.
Classes are probably more balanced now than they've ever been and any new class that has been added made a mess for quite a moment.

[Black Goat]

If a car manufacturer can't make cars that run and perform reliably and smoothly, the last thing they need to do is make a new model.

We don't need another class. The ones we have play like crap. Get the game back to a healthy, enjoyable state and then worry about new classes.