View Poll Results: Which class are you most hoping to see in WoW?

Voters
482. You may not vote on this poll
  • Necromancer

    122 25.31%
  • Tinker

    143 29.67%
  • Bard

    77 15.98%
  • An unmentioned class

    140 29.05%
  1. #1041
    Quote Originally Posted by jellmoo View Post
    I mean, I agree. From a pure balance perspective it would be incredibly, incredibly difficult to balance, to the point of it just not being worth the effort.

    On a more intellectual exercise level, I'm wondering how closed to balanced it could be brought. The idea of just having multiple life bars is obviously a no go, but is there a way to work the concept into something that is feasible?
    Personally, I don't think so. The whole idea of your Mech being a seperate entity and you being able to jump out of it is just plain weird and sounds like something people would use to troll the shit out of others. Like jumping out of the mech after placing it right into a quest npc. It is a wacky RP Idea which would do more harm than good, just because a certain person can just use his damn imagination while rping. It just adds nothing and it creats too much of a mess. I mean, the interface alone, if the Mech which is your main combat form is a vehicle, it will just make everything messy, including for healers.

  2. #1042
    The Patient Recovery's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    214
    What happened to Teriz?

  3. #1043
    You dont need new classes if you actually rework the entire specs every 2-3 expansions or so and change the spec a bit every expansion.

  4. #1044
    Looks like he was banned, seemingly for being constantly flamed by 3 known poster. What a great system.

  5. #1045
    Quote Originally Posted by Recovery View Post
    What happened to Teriz?
    The obsessed tinker guy? Banned. Not sure why, but that's none of my business.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Trazzle View Post
    Looks like he was banned, seemingly for being constantly flamed by 3 known poster. What a great system.
    What on earth are you talking about? Don't pretend to know things just because it fits your narrative.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Talrath View Post
    You dont need new classes if you actually rework the entire specs every 2-3 expansions or so and change the spec a bit every expansion.
    I personally enjoy the total reworks. I don't care if it upsets 0.05% of the players who claim to be emotionally attached to an Avatar in a game - we really shouldn't be making decisions based on unstable people.

    I enjoy learning the new specs - SV, demo, new classes - I really enjoy it. Sure, sometimes it doesn't work out, but imo, change is good.

  6. #1046
    No new classes whit so many dead specs and even some classes,they shoud focus on fixing that rater then adding more

  7. #1047
    Quote Originally Posted by svetlio View Post
    No new classes whit so many dead specs and even some classes,they shoud focus on fixing that rater then adding more
    "Fixing" how, exactly? Especially considering there will always be people who like and dislike the changes. Look at Demonology warlock: some hated the changes in Legion with a passion, when they lost Metamorphosis. Others loved it with just as much intensity.
    I did a Necromancer thing. Check it out! All feedback welcome!
    Update 08/17: I changed how the Bone spec's golem mechanic works, as well as some other minor changes.
    I also did a Bard thing! Questions, comments and ideas, all welcome!
    Update 09/02: Apparently the mods decided to merge my class concept thread with an existing one.

  8. #1048
    This came up in the Bard thread, and I wondered what some thought about it in this thread;

    Quote Originally Posted by Salvager23 View Post
    I don't know, I mean only Demon Hunters can use warglaives. Maybe have the new class have their own set of weapons like shotguns or hand cannons that only they can use? Brewmaster Monks can only use staves, so maybe this new class could only use hand-held cannons in their tank spec. Once that's out of the way, give them blast-style abilities, like big shots and grenade launcher stuff. Think the engineer in TL2. People would go nuts even if its really still in melee.

    edit: Found a pic matching what I'm thinking:

    A Tinker tank spec with a large gun/Cannon.

  9. #1049
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    "Fixing" how, exactly? Especially considering there will always be people who like and dislike the changes. Look at Demonology warlock: some hated the changes in Legion with a passion, when they lost Metamorphosis. Others loved it with just as much intensity.
    Shadow Priest comes to my mind. Some may love the Insanity Mechanic, but overall it seems to be more disliked and it is just a broken spec. You can see this at the start of every expansion, when Shadow Priest starts off with no to little borrowed power and is just utterly broken and at the bottom. And then it goes back and forth between op and being nerfed over and over again. It is an inheritly broken spec and I would argue that the concept of a dot class with a high ramp up time is inheritly flawed.

  10. #1050
    Quote Originally Posted by arkanon View Post
    What on earth are you talking about? Don't pretend to know things just because it fits your narrative.
    Ahahahahahaha! It’s mere observation, Teriz couldn’t make a post without these flamers weakly grasping for anything to make comment on. What does it say on the moderation system to allow and there in promote these people to continue their abuse?

  11. #1051
    Quote Originally Posted by Shiza View Post
    Personally, I don't think so. The whole idea of your Mech being a seperate entity and you being able to jump out of it is just plain weird and sounds like something people would use to troll the shit out of others. Like jumping out of the mech after placing it right into a quest npc. It is a wacky RP Idea which would do more harm than good, just because a certain person can just use his damn imagination while rping. It just adds nothing and it creats too much of a mess. I mean, the interface alone, if the Mech which is your main combat form is a vehicle, it will just make everything messy, including for healers.
    Ultimately I think we have two things at play here though:

    1) The mechanic of the Tinker and the Mech: Is it a Form, Is it a Vehicle, or is it something new that Blizzard would have to design and implement that straddes the line between the two? If it's a Form, then the Pilot is never really outside of the mech, the pilot is just shifting between the two like a Druid would. This would be the easiest thing to implement by far. If it's a vehicle, it creates some issues, especially if it's a "permanent" thing. The most basic thing is that you could have an army of the things littered around Stormwind, for example, causing massive clutter. If it's a cooldown or something that requires resources to "build", it could be mitigated to a degree. If this is a brand new mechanic that Blizzard needs to make, I think that's just plain unlikely.

    2) How to handle the idea of a "pilot ejecting from the mech as an emergency thing" is tricky as I feel the criteria at play are mutually exclusive. It's a mechanic that works best if the form is not permanent, but one of the criteria for it (well, per Teriz) is that it be a permanent form. Trying to brainstorm ways to balance this is interesting, but could be futile as I'm not sure it would be worth the effort (by Blizzard I mean).

  12. #1052
    Quote Originally Posted by Trazzle View Post
    Ahahahahahaha! It’s mere observation, Teriz couldn’t make a post without these flamers weakly grasping for anything to make comment on. What does it say on the moderation system to allow and there in promote these people to continue their abuse?
    Link me one of these "abusive" posts? The point is, there is a report function, there are moderators. If you are unhappy with your ban, simply challenge it by contacting a mod. If you are unhappy with a post, report it, if you are that way inclined. Discussing moderation itself is ironically against the rules, so i dont know what you want to gain from all this.

    The person in question has been aggressively and desperately seeking approval of "his" fan class idea. The funny thing is, he copy / pasted over 70% of it from someone else's post, but thats another story. The support has not come, and the reason some people are frustrated is that the moment he sees ANY discussion about ANY class idea, he jumps in and tries to make it all about the tinker, "his" tinker.

    As others have commented, this thread is now quite productive and people are able to openly discuss the topic at hand without one person trying to be the loudest voice and shouting down every single critique of "his" idea.

    Now, on topic, the reason myself and a few others like the idea of ejecting from your mech and a dva style big badda boom is flavour, and its not a mechanic we have seen before on a class, at least not for a while. But, the major difference for me is i suggested it be used for the DPS spec - because that is FAR easier to balance. After the explosion, there is a short CD - 20 seconds or something, where you run around in "caster" form - and after that, you re summon your mech - it could even be automatic. During those 20 seconds you are next to useless, so its a balance - risk/reward.
    Last edited by arkanon; 2020-05-22 at 10:14 PM.

  13. #1053
    Quote Originally Posted by arkanon View Post
    Link me one of these "abusive" posts?
    No, the posts are here for all to see and in other threads which Teriz states his ideas/opinions. The same people dog and harass him for comments that they, the actual flamers, don’t agree with.

  14. #1054
    Quote Originally Posted by Trazzle View Post
    No, the posts are here for all to see and in other threads which Teriz states his ideas/opinions. The same people dog and harass him for comments that they, the actual flamers, don’t agree with.
    Do you even know what "flamer" means? And you say the guy is being "flamed" because people don't agree with his ideas... would you call him a "flamer" too if he was disagreeing with other peoples' ideas?
    I did a Necromancer thing. Check it out! All feedback welcome!
    Update 08/17: I changed how the Bone spec's golem mechanic works, as well as some other minor changes.
    I also did a Bard thing! Questions, comments and ideas, all welcome!
    Update 09/02: Apparently the mods decided to merge my class concept thread with an existing one.

  15. #1055
    Quote Originally Posted by Trazzle View Post
    No, the posts are here for all to see and in other threads which Teriz states his ideas/opinions. The same people dog and harass him for comments that they, the actual flamers, don’t agree with.
    All I'M saying is that this thread has been interesting for the last two pages, and that seems to coincide with missing persons.

  16. #1056
    Quote Originally Posted by arkanon View Post
    The person in question has been aggressively and desperately seeking approval of "his" fan class idea. The funny thing is, he copy / pasted over 70% of it from someone else's post, but thats another story. The support has not come, and the reason some people are frustrated is that the moment he sees ANY discussion about ANY class idea, he jumps in and tries to make it all about the tinker, "his" tinker.
    .
    He did? From who did he copy/paste it from?

    I think the only thing Teriz is guilty of is being passionate about the Tinker and his belief that it should follow the model from WC3.

  17. #1057
    Quote Originally Posted by konialis View Post
    It could be either way. However i personally think they would inflict fire or frost damage based on the consumption of the mark debuff itself.

    i.e the spellblade activates mark of fire. they then attack a target using ability xyz with each ability applying a stack of mark of fire on target. Then the spellblade activates mark of frost. The first ability that hits the target that is already affected with mark of fire, applies mark of frost that causes the marks of fire to "blow up" and cause fire damage based on the stacks.

    The only difference i think would be cool is if you are using Frost-Fire Bolt and/or Frost-Fire sweep where the mark damage would synergise in some way with the marks applied on the target to either cause even more damage or an additional effect eiter on the target or the spellblade itself.
    Hmmm... that gives me an idea for a different form of "combo builder": basically, the Battle-Mage starts the fight by applying a mark. The mark by itself does nothing, but all your other offensive abilities have a chance of adding one more stack of the mark, and then you have two "finisher" abilities (one for ST, one for AE) that consumes all the stacks, but not the mark itself, and the "finishers" would do additional effects depending on the number of stacks the target had.

    Kinda-sorta similar to how Rogue combo points work, but it's an actual debuff (and thus dispelable) plus the stacks do more than just "extra damage/duration", giving the finishers new effects.
    I did a Necromancer thing. Check it out! All feedback welcome!
    Update 08/17: I changed how the Bone spec's golem mechanic works, as well as some other minor changes.
    I also did a Bard thing! Questions, comments and ideas, all welcome!
    Update 09/02: Apparently the mods decided to merge my class concept thread with an existing one.

  18. #1058
    YES! exactly what i had in mind. With the added effect of the marks "detonating" each other when both applied at the same target, mostly so that the debuffs dont become too op.

    Talents and specific abilities used to apply the marks could change the effect of the finisher as a way of fleshing out the spec.

    Plus it instantly creates 2 play styles.

    1. Apply the greatest amount of marks on the target to de-buff them continuously and "detonate" them for huge damage

    2.Switch between marks more frequently for less debuffs but more consistent damage
    Last edited by konialis; 2020-05-22 at 10:46 PM.

  19. #1059
    It’s the culmination of many follow up argumentative posts that created an environment of abuse.

  20. #1060
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    Do you even know what "flamer" means? And you say the guy is being "flamed" because people don't agree with his ideas... would you call him a "flamer" too if he was disagreeing with other peoples' ideas?
    I think the main issue is that Teriz didn’t like reused concepts, and a lot of people here don’t have a problem with it. That dust up over the Void Knight was a pretty good example of that.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •