Ion's last interview kind of turned the whole time skip thing on its head.
He said time is perceived to be longer in the shadowlands, like, when you are sleeping and it feels like you've been asleep for 8 hrs but in reality its been 2.
Tinkers are already possible, they just need to pull the trigger and do it already.
A timeskip is completely unnecessary.
As it stands warcraft already has a power saturation problem, the horde/alliance are so damn powerful that nothing other than eachother is a threat, we need the opposite of tech advancement, we need a wow dark age.
In fact, a dark age expansion would be even better for a tinker class since they would be much rarer and sought after. In a futuristic setting, a class that uses technology wouldnt stand out much considering warriors would be running around with chainsaws and hunters would have m60 machine guns with robot dogs as companions. In fact we are kind of already there tbh.
You're literally making this up as you go along, and it gets worse every single time.
Restricting Tinker abilities to talents causes a severe balance issue on multiple levels. Not only will these unique talents have to be balanced against the Druid talents, but internally, the talents have to be balanced against each other since they're optional. For example, if a Tinker player chooses Turrets over Grav Bomb, both of those abilities have to have equivalent levels of power and purpose. That's not even getting to the other issue of the Tinker player feeling a bit cheated because they have to choose what Tinker abilities they can use when they should all of those abilities.
Making Tinker a mirror of Druid mechanics is also a huge issue because Druid mechanics are not static, they change EVERY expansion, and that means that the developers have to figure out a way to make those Druid mechanics relatable to the Tinker theme EVERY TIME they alter the mechanics. Also Druid talents are not static, so will Tinker talents change alongside Druid talents, or will Tinker talents have to remain the same due to those talents being the location of the unique Tinker mechanics? BTW, those talents in turn have to be balanced against the NEW Druid talents coming in with each new expansion!
Again, a complete, total mess that can be avoided by simply making the Tinker a separate class.
See above.There would be new mechanics. Like I said, Rock-it Turret, Grav Bomb and Engineering Upgrade can all be added as Talents.
Last edited by Teriz; 2020-07-15 at 03:29 AM.
that is not rly a vallid comparison, nothing in making tinker locked to goblins and gnomes at first is "fuck the lore without lube", you are of course exaggerating
yes... now you are getting the nuancesWrong. Nature magic =/= druid magic. That's like saying "fire magic = warlock magic".
druid magic, is revolved around nature magic, but isn't just that.
warlock magic is also revolved around fire magic, but isn't just that.
The same as Tinker tools/tech isn't just "engineer"
therefore, they can lock the tinker class to just the ones who are "rly" tinkers" if they wish so with the premise of "tinkers are not just guys who do some mechasuits"
would never? this is just your opinion, stop tryint paint like absolute truth, it could be locked to gnomes and goblins yes, because the reasons i gave youA tech class would never be locked just to gnomes and goblins (and mechagnomes) for very strong reasons both within and OUTSIDE the game.
if you don't think so, thats on you
thats up to the devs, if they think that or not, like i said, its a two route they can takeand because it's a shot in the foot to develop a class and lock it to the two most unpopular races in the game.
again, nonsenseThankfully, we do.
first of all, you are again using double standards, up to a point only night elves have been to show to be demon hunters, they change that, and added blood elves, and decided to lock to elves and only then, its one route they could have taken.• Up until that point, only blood elves and demon hunters have been shown to be demon hunters. That is something that the tech class lacks as we have examples of many other races using technology.
The same way, tinker, specifically said tinker, is show to be locked to goblins, gnomes, and one dwarf and a race of demons from the burning legion, therefore, they can take one route and lock the tinker class to just then
you are using the argument of using tech = tinker herp derp, just like i said, a guy using a computer isn't a hacker, a guy o build a PC, does not became a hacker etc.
they of course can go with the route of "using tech = tinker" but its just one route to take
in this c ase is ok to lock a class to a race if they are popular? then your entire argument of lore is pointless, like you are trying to make.• Up until that point, blood elves and night elves were already two of the most popular races in the game. That is something the gnomes and goblins lack as they are two of the most unpopular races in the game.
first of all, they never said a thing about popularity, they specifically said "fantasy", even if we know between the lines the population thing affects, it doesn't mean they will not use the maina argument of "fantasy" again.
is very likely pointless, since you can't prove and it matter nothing in the discussion.You should learn what "red-herring" means. What I presented is a very likely possibility.
thats just your arrogant and pedant take on things, cause all the reasons are valid if they wish so, but they are "not valid enough for you"
And you've failed to present even a single one that holds up to scrutiny.
he didn't tried everything, you said yourself we have plenty of safe and the same effective, you are killing your own nonsense.No. He could not. Illidan tried everything he could. Joining the Legion to learn their secrets was the last thing he tried.
again, this is just your opinion, not an absolutely factNo. They cannot. They absolutely cannot.
and tinker is not just "guys using technology", the same reason as druids are not "just races using nature magic", or at least, is a route blizzard can take, and you are being delusion if you think they can'tBecause, unlike demon hunters, the game is full of example of characters from almost all races using technology.
your argument is shallow and absolutist.
you explain they are "bogus" with just your personal bias, with your personal and subjective opinion
I dismiss your reasons and explain why they're bogus. You? You just say "you're wrong" and move on.
"they can't make DH because they don't have reasons"
fuck, i did not you own the Illidari and know every fuck thing about their and their motivations, or you worked at blizzard to get that unknown reason
And nature magic is show to be used by many other races, but they aren't druidsNo. No, it doesn't. At all. Because technology has already been shown in the game and lore to be widespread to almost all races.
no its not, because the premise here is creating new lore, to proper shape the tinker class, and discuss the routes they can take.This is bullshit because you're taking game features and mechanics and treating them as lore.
and it is always the goblins and gnomes who stand above then all without restoring almost all their shit in magic, no one said a thing about "exclusive", but they can if they wish, lock the - tinker class - not the "tech users" to goblins and gnomesThere is a metric-ton amount of lore regarding technology in this game, and none of it shows it being "exclusive" to those two races.
like i said, the tinker wiki just show goblins, gnomes and one dwarf, with all that and other things, they can yes, lock the "tinker class" to gnomes and goblins, and latter open to other races, is just a valid possibility
or they could open to other races too from the launch, both options are possible.
no, you are literally thinking in absolutes thinking your biased and personal take on things are the only and one route that is right, and every other that you don't agree is just impossible.I'm not thinking in absolutes. I'm just pointing out how nonsensical your reasoning is
im saying a pattern with you in all subjectives that you "defend" religiously
ah yes, the fallacy of the appeal to ridicule, expect no less from you.What you're basically doing here is saying "I'm just saying, the idea that next morning will reveal two suns rising from the horizon, one red and one white, is just as valid as the idea that just one yellow sun will rise."
- - - Updated - - -
then why the fuck he said things would be different when get out of it
it will be like a week, how the fuck things would change that much, if it will, isn't easier to just do a proper timeskip?
this could be also a straight up lie, or they just change their stance along the expansion, saying things changed, just like the bfa mess
Perfectly illogical and stupid. That's "self-insert fanfic" level of stupidity.
Oh, really?Again, your applying real world logic to a fantasy video game. That’s what makes your entire argument here utterly silly and pointless.
That is exactly the same logic you're employing: "I don't see it happening, therefore it happened on its own."And here we go again.....
And your opinion has been shown to be bogus considering you find more likely that characters in WoW learn their skills on their own with no help whatsoever than to learn them from mentors like it was shown in the lore.Uh where’s the double standard in that response? I’m just pointing out what Blizzard is more likely to do.
Can you find any other example of Gelbin being called a "tinker"?You mean the political title that calls him a Tinker (which he achieved through inventing things) doesn’t count?
That’s convenient.
No. Not necessarily. I can cite a lot of game mechanics that do not reflect lore. Off the top of my head:Game mechanics reflect lore.
• Our characters need sleep. Game mechanics say they don't.
• Our characters don't have unlimited stamina. Game mechanics say they do.
• Our characters age. Game mechanics say they don't.
• Our characters cannot be brought from near-death by eating an apple. Game mechanics say they can.
• Our characters shouldn't be able to fight a monster over ten times our height. Game mechanics say they can.
• Our characters shouldn't be able to effortlessly swim when wearing full plate armor, much less float. Game mechanics say they can.
Oh yeah? Are you going to say that our characters never had a childhood because you start the game with them as an adult? That's the exact same logic. Are you going to say that our characters have infinite stamina and even as a level 1 they are super-strong because they can run from Silvermoon all the way to Booty Bay, without stopping or slowing down a single time, while carrying five bags full of stacks upon stacks of gold ore which totals over four hundred tons plus heavy plate armor and two two-handed swords... and not get even slightly winded?Doubtful, considering it was that way even when you had to return to a trainer every level to pay for new skills. Why wasn’t the trainer also giving you talents too?
Yes. Yes, they do. Because that is what they do when decide to take up arms instead of working at their farms.Accept the average person isn’t going to travel all over Azeroth and to other worlds to sock monsters in the face.
No. I'm asking you because you are the one making the claims, here.You would have to ask Blizzard that question.
Time in the shadowlands move slower. Let's say we spend 2 years there, we will have been gone for like 20 minutes from azeroth. It's the complete opposite of a time skip so no, no tinkers.
That would happen to a Tinker regardless. The core gameplay of a caster DPS wouldn't factor in wild and crazy ideas like placing turrets while using your Grav Bomb to combo them all into your Deth Lazor. That isn't how WoW classes work, and there is absolutely no comparable class to this type of gameplay due to how the RPG mechanics work. WoW classes aren't build around providing action-oriented burst damage in a MOBA/RTS setting.
These are Class Skins. These are literal changes to text and numbers between ability names, with the odd addition of new graphics every expansion or major patch. No different than how the game has *always* progressed. I don't see what the fuss is about when the core gameplay of most classes, Druid specifically, has remained fairly static over the years. Maul, Mangle, Thrash, Pulverize, Lacerate... These have been the same 5 basic attack abilities of the Guardian Druid for over a decade. What has changed over time? Their numbers and their functions, but even then they use the same animations as they always did, and functionally act no different in terms of basic mechanics.Making Tinker a mirror of Druid mechanics is also a huge issue because Druid mechanics are not static, they change EVERY expansion, and that means that the developers have to figure out a way to make those Druid mechanics relatable to the Tinker theme EVERY TIME they alter the mechanics. Also Druid talents are not static, so will Tinker talents change alongside Druid talents, or will Tinker talents have to remain the same due to those talents being the location of the unique Tinker mechanics? BTW, those talents in turn have to be balanced against the NEW Druid talents coming in with each new expansion!
I'll even give you an example of how the Talents would work. Guardian Druid as an example, since it's the easiest to convey without too much assumption. We all know how Tanking gameplay generally works
Green = Unchanged Talent, only in name
Red = New Talent, relatively weighted in power to other Talents
In this example, I've incorporated 3 new Talents to incorporate Tinker flavour where necessary. Every other talent remains the same, and functionally speaking, already applies to any general Tanking spec.
Engineering Upgrade = Callback to WC3, this ability increases passive Movespeed (As it did in WC3). This is also a callback to Feline Swiftness (15% passive movespeed). Guardian had this in Mists of Pandaria, alongside Wild Charge and Displacer Beast movement abilities.
This replaces Ursol's Vortex, which is best left as a Druid ability. So what if you really want Ursol's Vortex? Then take Grav Bomb as a Tinker.
Grav Bomb = Basically the HotS version of Grav Bomb. Sucks enemies in, big BOOM and stun. Does not deal damage, but sets up for AoE
Cluster Rocket = Large AoE periodic Stun. Sends out waves of rockets that stuns enemies. Does not deal damage, great for disrupting enemies
These talent variations are meant to support Tank style gameplay, so they will not output high DPS. They are utility abilities, and replace Mighty Bash and Mass Entanglement. Considering these are all zoning/CC/Displacement abilities, Grav Bomb and Cluster Rocket would fit in thematically, and are absolutely situational. On IcyVeins, each one of these talents are optional and there is no 'ideal pick'
There isn't really a major necessity to redesign a new Tinker from the ground up. All of these abilities are designed to support a Tanking form. Most of these talents simply reduce CD on Oh-shit buttons, generate resource and reduce damage. There's nothing Druid specific about any of these talents or abilities; they're just gameplay mechanics.
Last edited by Triceron; 2020-07-15 at 04:04 AM.
Again, what's illogical and stupid is applying real-world logic to a fantasy game.
No,the logic I'm employing is that since there's no way to know either way for certain, either assumption is valid and sensible.That is exactly the same logic you're employing: "I don't see it happening, therefore it happened on its own."
Considering that you learn abilities as you level with no one else around you, it's perfectly fine to assume that lore wise you're learning abilities on your own. Again, that's how you ALWAYS learned talents.And your opinion has been shown to be bogus considering you find more likely that characters in WoW learn their skills on their own with no help whatsoever than to learn them from mentors like it was shown in the lore.
He's literally called High Tinker Mekkatorque, I don't need another example.Can you find any other example of Gelbin being called a "tinker"?
Yes, because those limitations would make the game awful to play. We aren't talking about that, we're talking about a profession versus a class. Nice try sidestepping the issue though.No. Not necessarily. I can cite a lot of game mechanics that do not reflect lore. Off the top of my head:
• Our characters need sleep. Game mechanics say they don't.
• Our characters don't have unlimited stamina. Game mechanics say they do.
• Our characters age. Game mechanics say they don't.
• Our characters cannot be brought from near-death by eating an apple. Game mechanics say they can.
• Our characters shouldn't be able to fight a monster over ten times our height. Game mechanics say they can.
• Our characters shouldn't be able to effortlessly swim when wearing full plate armor, much less float. Game mechanics say they can.
Yes, it's possible that all of that is true. You know why? Because we're talking about a fantasy video-game.Oh yeah? Are you going to say that our characters never had a childhood because you start the game with them as an adult? That's the exact same logic. Are you going to say that our characters have infinite stamina and even as a level 1 they are super-strong because they can run from Silvermoon all the way to Booty Bay, without stopping or slowing down a single time, while carrying five bags full of stacks upon stacks of gold ore which totals over four hundred tons plus heavy plate armor and two two-handed swords... and not get even slightly winded?
Taking up arms to protect your farm or town is not the same as being an adventurer.Yes. Yes, they do. Because that is what they do when decide to take up arms instead of working at their farms.
The only claim I made was that the Mech is a core attribute of the Tinker concept.No. I'm asking you because you are the one making the claims, here.
Yes, it is, because technology is available to everyone and we even have examples of night elf tinkers.
So you think the game lore is nonsense? Because that's what it is, in the lore. We have examples of humans, night elves, blood elves, etec.again, nonsense
No. No, it's not. Just because a character is not called "tinker" doesn't mean they're not tech-oriented. And I'll repeat: we have human and night elf TINKERS.The same way, tinker, specifically said tinker, is show to be locked to goblins, gnomes, and one dwarf
I'm going out on a limb here, but I think it's fairly obvious to say that Blizzard designs classes with the intention that many people play that class. After all, they use those classes as one of the selling points of their expansions. With that in mind, I think it becomes fairly obvious that to lock the class to the two of the most unpopular races in the game, when there is zero lore to warrant such 'lock', is not a good strategy move.in this case is ok to lock a class to a race if they are popular? then your entire argument of lore is pointless, like you are trying to make.
Neither can you. And my idea is not a red-herring just because it throws a wrench in your attempts of claim your idea as fact.is very likely pointless, since you can't prove and it matter nothing in the discussion.
"Blizzard can do it" is a non-argument, as pointed out. We're not discussing what Blizzard can do "if they want", we're talking about what they can do with the lore we currently have. What they would or would not retcon of the lore is meaningless.thats just your arrogant and pedant take on things, cause all the reasons are valid if they wish so, but they are "not valid enough for you"
Wrong. I said we have "plenty of safe and just as effective ways" today, because the Legion is gone, and there are no more threats that require demon hunter expertise.he didn't tried everything, you said yourself we have plenty of safe and the same effective, you are killing your own nonsense.
But isn't that the requirement to be a "tinker"? To be able to understand and work with technology? Just like that to be a priest, you need to have faith. To be a warrior, you need to be able to swing a sword. And, for that, the majority of the races have shown a propensity to being able to deal with technology, indicated by engineer trainers of many of those races, like humans, blood elves, draenei, forsaken, kul tirans and even taurenand tinker is not just "guys using technology", the same reason as druids are not "just races using nature magic", or at least, is a route blizzard can take, and you are being delusion if you think they can't
So you're saying my "bias" is basic logic?you explain they are "bogus" with just your personal bias
No. It's retcon. Because to say that only gnomes and goblins can be tinkers is a retcon of the current lore. It's altering the current lore and making it less than what it was.no its not, because the premise here is creating new lore
Again: "Blizzard can do it" is a non-argument.and it is always the goblins and gnomes who stand above then all without restoring almost all their shit in magic, no one said a thing about "exclusive", but they can if they wish, lock the - tinker class - not the "tech users" to goblins and gnomes
Because your argument is ridiculous. You're defending the idea that the lore should be changed, retconed, into making just gnomes and goblins to be able to be tinkers.ah yes, the fallacy of the appeal to ridicule, expect no less from you.
Really? That sounds like your typical WoW caster. What's the difference between that and a Fire Mage using Fire Blast, Living Bomb, hitting Hot Streak, and then dropping an instant Flamestrike on a group of targets?
Yeah, Guardian Druid has remained fairly static gameplay wise, but what about Balance? Balance has been dramatically changed in pretty much EVERY expansion.These are Class Skins. These are literal changes to text and numbers between ability names, with the odd addition of new graphics every expansion or major patch. No different than how the game has *always* progressed. I don't see what the fuss is about when the core gameplay of most classes, Druid specifically, has remained fairly static over the years. Maul, Mangle, Thrash, Pulverize, Lacerate... These have been the same 5 basic attack abilities of the Guardian Druid for over a decade. What has changed over time? Their numbers and their functions, but even then they use the same animations as they always did, and functionally act no different in terms of basic mechanics.
Engineering Upgrade also enhanced the Tinker's abilities, it didn't ONLY increase movement speed.I'll even give you an example of how the Talents would work. Guardian Druid as an example, since it's the easiest to convey without too much assumption. We all know how Tanking gameplay generally works
Green = Unchanged Talent, only in name
Red = New Talent, relatively weighted in power to other Talents
In this example, I've incorporated 3 new Talents to incorporate Tinker flavour where necessary. Every other talent remains the same, and functionally speaking, already applies to any general Tanking spec.
Engineering Upgrade = Callback to WC3, this ability increases passive Movespeed (As it did in WC3). This is also a callback to Feline Swiftness (15% passive movespeed). Guardian had this in Mists of Pandaria, alongside Wild Charge and Displacer Beast movement abilities.
This replaces Ursol's Vortex, which is best left as a Druid ability. So what if you really want Ursol's Vortex? Then take Grav Bomb as a Tinker.
Gravity Bomb has a damage component (Even in WoW), Ursol's Vortex does not.
So what happens when the Druids talents change. Let's say for example that at some point the Guardian Druid loses the level 60 talents. Does that mean that the Tinker ends up losing iconic abilities like Cluster Rocket or Grav Bomb?Grav Bomb = Basically the HotS version of Grav Bomb. Sucks enemies in, big BOOM and stun. Does not deal damage, but sets up for AoE
Cluster Rocket = Large AoE periodic Stun. Sends out waves of rockets that stuns enemies. Does not deal damage, great for disrupting enemies
These talent variations are meant to support Tank style gameplay, so they will not output high DPS. They are utility abilities, and replace Mighty Bash and Mass Entanglement. Considering these are all zoning/CC/Displacement abilities, Grav Bomb and Cluster Rocket would fit in thematically, and are absolutely situational. On IcyVeins, each one of these talents are optional and there is no 'ideal pick'
There isn't really a major necessity to redesign a new Tinker from the ground up. All of these abilities are designed to support a Tanking form. Most of these talents simply reduce CD on Oh-shit buttons, generate resource and reduce damage. There's nothing Druid specific about any of these talents or abilities; they're just gameplay mechanics.
I'll repeat since you keep ignoring it:
No. It's not. Because that exact same logic of yours says it's "just as valid and sensible" to say that dog poo on your sidewalk spawned out of nowhere, as it is to say a dog pooped on the sidewalk.No,the logic I'm employing is that since there's no way to know either way for certain, either assumption is valid and sensible.
Gameplay concession. You're taking gameplay mechanics as lore.Considering that you learn abilities as you level with no one else around you, it's perfectly fine to assume that lore wise you're learning abilities on your own. Again, that's how you ALWAYS learned talents.
Yes, you do. Because that is a political title.He's literally called High Tinker Mekkatorque, I don't need another example.
Having to stop leveling to go learn new abilities also made the game "awful to play" therefore it was removed.Yes, because those limitations would make the game awful to play.
No. It's impossible that any of them is true. And you know why? Because we're talking about basic logic and consistency. Those are all gameplay concessions for the story being told.Yes, it's possible that all of that is true. You know why? Because we're talking about a fantasy video-game.
Who said anything about "just to protect your farm or town"? A kid who dreams of being an adventurer instead of helping their farm is still your "average joe".Taking up arms to protect your farm or town is not the same as being an adventurer.
And resurrecting units in the middle of combat is also a core attribute of the paladin in WC3.The only claim I made was that the Mech is a core attribute of the Tinker concept.
Does each expansion treat classes, specs and abilities the same across the board as if everything plays the same since MoP?
No, it doesn't. Some specs get overhauls. Some get Talent revamps. Some get complete shifts.
I would say that as the game progresses and balance and testing progress, Blizzard could ease into separating the specs further and further, progressively, through the Talents systems. If Druid loses all 60 talents, then it would have to be balanced across the board between each of the specs, and among other classes' level 60 talents. If that's the case then the designers have freedom to choose
A: Safe route; Druid and Tinkers both progress with the same New Talents
B: Legacy Route; if the 60 talents are still effective and balanced, then Tinker can adopt the old talents as their own while Druid diversifies into new territory
C: Diverse Route; since we're talking about the entire row being re-evaluated, the Tinker and Druid get addressed on their own merit and both can get New talents. Of course, this can still be a mix of both New and Shared talents, not just haphazardly slapping on new abilities.
There is choice moving forward, depending on how ballsy the devs feel that expansion.
And so would the Tinker. It's adopting Druid gameplay. Is this hard to understand or?Yeah, Guardian Druid has remained fairly static gameplay wise, but what about Balance? Balance has been dramatically changed in pretty much EVERY expansion.
I mean I could take any previous expansion's version of Balance Druid and I could still build a viable Tinker out of it simply by changing the theme and applying ability names. Just because they add a Lunar Strike here and Sunfire there doesn't mean the Tinker can't adapt the same way. Heavy Rocket, Explosive Blast, Deth Blast, Super Beam... like, is there really any limit to naming new abilities? This is no different than any of the Balance Druid spell names that we've gotten lately; Elune's This, Ysera's That, Lunar This, Sun That.
Last edited by Triceron; 2020-07-15 at 04:55 AM.
And you keep ignoring that in a fantasy setting, logic and consistency aren't the same as the real world.
.........No. It's not. Because that exact same logic of yours says it's "just as valid and sensible" to say that dog poo on your sidewalk spawned out of nowhere, as it is to say a dog pooped on the sidewalk.
You do understand that in the real world, a dog would actually have to poo on your sidewalk, while in a magical fantasy world (created and controlled by someone), poo could literally spawn on your sidewalk right?
Please tell me you understand that.
And you're making an assumption. Blizzard never specifically stated that you learned individual talents from a trainer.Gameplay concession. You're taking gameplay mechanics as lore.
A political title you could only get by being a great inventor.Yes, you do. Because that is a political title.
Exactly.Having to stop leveling to go learn new abilities also made the game "awful to play" therefore it was removed.
So you're saying it's IMPOSSIBLE for Chris Metzen or any Blizzard developer to add in lore that the player characters were never children and create some elaborate BS on why that's the case?No. It's impossible that any of them is true. And you know why? Because we're talking about basic logic and consistency. Those are all gameplay concessions for the story being told.
I can assure you it's not.
Who just happens to be able to also cast Shadowbolt and hear demonic voices......Who said anything about "just to protect your farm or town"? A kid who dreams of being an adventurer instead of helping their farm is still your "average joe".
The important part is resurrecting allies, which is what the Paladin does.And resurrecting units in the middle of combat is also a core attribute of the paladin in WC3.
Yeah, but each class is free to get those overhauls and revamps. Druids and Tinkers under your model are locked together development wise. Any decision Blizzard makes with Druids has to be workable with the Tinker, which can cause issues. Again, look at how volatile Balance's development has been in recent expansions, and then consider having to make sure a Tinker thematically works with whatever changes you want to implement.
A: means that eventually the Tinker will lose its unique abilities in order to bring it in line with any new Druid talents.I would say that as the game progresses and balance and testing progress, Blizzard could ease into separating the specs further and further, progressively, through the Talents systems. If Druid loses all 60 talents, then it would have to be balanced across the board between each of the specs, and among other classes' level 60 talents. If that's the case then the designers have freedom to choose
A: Safe route; Druid and Tinkers both progress with the same New Talents
B: Legacy Route; if the 60 talents are still effective and balanced, then Tinker can adopt the old talents as their own while Druid diversifies into new territory
C: Diverse Route; since we're talking about the entire row being re-evaluated, the Tinker and Druid get addressed on their own merit and both can get New talents. Of course, this can still be a mix of both New and Shared talents, not just haphazardly slapping on new abilities.
There is choice moving forward, depending on how ballsy the devs feel that expansion.
B/C: causes a myriad of balance issues. in addition, I wasn't just talking about one row. I'm talking about all of the talents. While the Druid class has retained some talents since MoP, the vast majority of talents came about in Legion.
Except it isn't just naming new abilities. You're also going to have to design animations specifically for those Tinker abilities. For example, Tinkers can't drop magical moons on people, their abilities aren't based on the eclipse, and they don't shoot bolts of sunlight from their hands. Blizzard would have to create specific graphics and animations exclusively for the Tinker for it to make sense. Is Blizzard prepared to do that along with permanently tying its balance to the Druid class? I really don't think they would be. I think Blizzard would vastly prefer for the Tinker to be its own class with its own abilities and its own design path.And so would the Tinker. It's adopting Druid gameplay. Is this hard to understand or?
I mean I could take any previous expansion's version of Balance Druid and I could still build a viable Tinker out of it simply by changing the theme and applying ability names. Just because they add a Lunar Strike here and Sunfire there doesn't mean the Tinker can't adapt the same way. Heavy Rocket, Explosive Blast, Deth Blast, Super Beam... like, is there really any limit to naming new abilities? This is no different than any of the Balance Druid spell names that we've gotten lately; Elune's This, Ysera's That, Lunar This, Sun That.
Has there ever been a spec that hasn't gotten changes and works exactly as they have between multiple expansions?
Every class, every spec goes through changes every expansion. If Druid and Tinker are tied together by gameplay, or Necromancer and Warlock or Spellbreaker and Paladin, then that has to be accomodated with any plans for change going forward. The decision to rework specs or remove a line of talents would be weighed accordingly, not just taken out of context of class skins in play.
This means more work could be applied in supplementary means, such as Covenants, or opening up more varied ways of customization without tweaking spec balance, such as Mechagon.
Who really knows what classes will look like by next expansion or beyond. Every expansion tries something new, something different. Balancing talents is still much more controllable.A: means that eventually the Tinker will lose its unique abilities in order to bring it in line with any new Druid talents.
B/C: causes a myriad of balance issues. in addition, I wasn't just talking about one row. I'm talking about all of the talents. While the Druid class has retained some talents since MoP, the vast majority of talents came about in Legion.
By all means, this is similar to adding an optional 4th talent option for classes with class skins. Thats one way to look at it.
Think about it. New expansion, new abilities, new graphics. Thats always considered, always in the bag.
Except it isn't just naming new abilities. You're also going to have to design animations specifically for those Tinker abilities. For example, Tinkers can't drop magical moons on people, their abilities aren't based on the eclipse, and they don't shoot bolts of sunlight from their hands. Blizzard would have to create specific graphics and animations exclusively for the Tinker for it to make sense. Is Blizzard prepared to do that along with permanently tying its balance to the Druid class? I really don't think they would be. I think Blizzard would vastly prefer for the Tinker to be its own class with its own abilities and its own design path.
If it comes to a decision to overhaul a class that has a class skin involved, then it wouldn't be taken lightly. You could say this already with druid forms and their transmogs - Legion added a whole bunch of form transmogs, then took em away, and in BFA added new Druid classes with completely unique non-bear shapeshifts. Do they have to make armored and Werebear and Stonebear forms for each and every Druid race moving forward? Is it a major problem that is holding the game or Druids back? Not really.
Green Flame effects were added with questline. Wwrlock specs changed a lot, got graphic overhauls too. Were Warlocks held back for it? No, because all of the work was planned out accordingly
They wouldn't need to overhaul Boomkin/Artillery spec until it's necessary, and when the time is right to do any major changes to abilities, then both themes would be taken into consideration and they can choose what to keep and what to remove.
So an example like taking out entire chunks of the talents at a time or massive overhauls is what the game already does. Diversity is given, shifted, taken away ALL THE TIME. Horde and Alliance Paladins had diverse abilities, later removed. Now flash forward and Glyphs added gameplay diversity, then removed. Then Talents add diversity, and this was kept. Then Legion added some diversity with Artifact Power (though limited since you can max it out), then removed again. Now Shadowlands has Covenants.
Diversity being added and removed is cyclical, not constant.
Last edited by Triceron; 2020-07-15 at 07:58 AM.
but no oneis talking about tecnology, we are talking about a proper tinker class, youa re just making just a simplification of a tinker is/could be, donwgrading then to mere "tecnology users" ignoring all other examples
and show me a night elf tinker, cause i never saw one.
nonsense is what you are talking aboutSo you think the game lore is nonsense? Because that's what it is, in the lore. We have examples of humans, night elves, blood elves, etec.
sine they are not called "tinker" they are not tinkersNo. No, it's not. Just because a character is not called "tinker" doesn't mean they're not tech-oriented.
your entire premise is based around your idea of "tinker = tech users" and just that, and its where you are failing, cause your premise is false
show some, cause again, never saw one, there is none in the wiki pageAnd I'll repeat: we have human and night elf TINKERS.
yeah, you thinkI'm going out on a limb here, but I think
if this is tru they could ahve opened the DH class to more races, so A LOT MORE people would play that classit's fairly obvious to say that Blizzard designs classes with the intention that many people play that class.
but wait, you will say that elves only is already enough am ir right?
After all, they use those classes as one of the selling points of their expansions. With that in mind, I think it becomes fairly obvious that to lock the class to the two of the most unpopular races in the game, when there is zero lore to warrant such 'lock', is not a good strategy move.
And again, there is lore to expand and lock then.
if blizzard wan to do an expansion around tinker fantasy, and focus more on those races, they can do that, one could argu that is a good strategy to lock tinker to few races - at first - so people can play something different and more thematic.
Again, you don't work at blizzard, you don't know how they will do, for certain
and i didn't, are youe ven trying? you are do one claiming ideas as fact LUL, you said with all the letters "blizard can't, its impossible, blablabla"Neither can you. And my idea is not a red-herring just because it throws a wrench in your attempts of claim your idea as fact.
im merelly saying it is possible, its one possibility, that that will do or not do
in this case is a completely valid argument"Blizzard can do it" is a non-argument, as pointed out
you point out with your biased opinion that its not possible
we are not "discussing with the lore we currently have", we barely have lore at all, we are discussing, the future, and possible routes blizzard can use to expand th tinker class/lore, so you are just arguing for the sake of argue, completely uselessWe're not discussing what Blizzard can do "if they want", we're talking about what they can do with the lore we currently have.
with the lore we current have we could lock tinkers to goblins and gnomes and we can expand on that for the various reasons and possible explanations
no one is talking about retcons but simple expansion of the lore, meaningless is your rant thinking you are always rightWhat they would or would not retcon of the lore is meaningless.
and this is just more of your attempts of nonsense, back there we still had all the classes we have today except monks and Death knights, yous aid Illidan tried everything(without proof)Wrong. I said we have "plenty of safe and just as effective ways" today, because the Legion is gone, and there are no more threats that require demon hunter expertise.
Cause by your logic, Illidan tried to create an order of paladins, and that is bogus
Legion is going but there is as much stronger enemies that would require the DH, you don't want to aknowledge that is your own problem
it is? where is stated that? again, we barely have shit about tinker to give those proper responses, being able to be tinekrs don't look like just "understand and work with technology"But isn't that the requirement to be a "tinker"? To be able to understand and work with technology?
we have races who understand and work the light(being priests), but not all races are paladins, regardless of paladins also understanding and working with the light
there you go, an easier analogy, lets see if you can understand now
[QUOTE]you need way more than that to be able to be those classes, you are oversimplying things, like you always do, to fit more your argumentJust like that to be a priest, you need to have faith To be a warrior, you need to be able to swing a sword.
if i say yes then both of us will be wrongSo you're saying my "bias" is basic logic?
no its not, right now, only goblins, gnomes, and a dwarf are proper called tinkers, so isn't a retcon.No. It's retcon. Because to say that only gnomes and goblins can be tinkers is a retcon of the current lore
you think it is because in your head, Engineer trainer = tinker, tech user = tinker.
isn't cause they literally did with DH, we have a precedence of blizzard going for a more thematic route, despite other routes they could takeAgain: "Blizzard can do it" is a non-argument.
my argument is based around the possibility of a route being take with precedence in lore and in previous interactions(DH), you think its ridiculous and its outrage because one, you fail to understand that tinker if became a proper class are not just engineer trainers, and there is no need to retcon nothing.Because your argument is ridiculous. You're defending the idea that the lore should be changed, retconed, into making just gnomes and goblins to be able to be tinkers.
but i wonder why its the outrage of a mere possibility, i can only guess
They aren't making Stinkers get over it.
There is an endless list of things they can/should fix with existing classes/races/lore/etc. They also just proved they are fully willing to release an xpac without a class or new race. Ending that stupid cycle of adding unnecessary content every other xpac.
What you're not seeming to grasp here is that different classes are allowed to be imbalanced from each other, and perfect balance is something that is strived for, but is acknowledged as being unachievable. A sub class would need to be perfectly balanced with the mother class in order for this to not cause a host of issues. So essentially what you're advocating for is that Blizzard do ALL of the work of creating a new class, but having an added burden of making sure there is perfect balance between the two concepts. Further, this perfect balance must be maintained in future expansions to avoid balance complications in the future.
To make this worse, all that extra work would do nothing but make fans of both Druids and Tinkers angry. Druid fans won't like that their development and balance are tied to a sub class, and Tinker fans won't be happy that their class is neutered by Druid design and concept. In short, Blizzard would never do what you're suggesting here.
- - - Updated - - -
They've already made Tinkers. The only remaining issue is that players can't access them (yet).