Page 8 of 52 FirstFirst ...
6
7
8
9
10
18
... LastLast
  1. #141
    Quote Originally Posted by Ulfric Trumpcloak View Post
    What exactly doesn't make sense about them? You're gonna need to elaborate, because stating they don't make sense while not explaining why isn't getting getting it done.



    They were in warcraft 3, have been in wow since vanilla, and have been featured more and more in recent expansions. Gazlowe works just fine in Hots. LoL also has a ton of champs that could pass up as tinkers, Rumble, Heimerdinger, Ziggs, Viktor, Orianna. What about that "fantasy" doesn't make sense? You're saying a mage shooting fireballs from his hands and turning people into sheep makes sense, but using a mech suit and gadgets which are very much a thing in Warcraft doesn't make sense?
    But they are not Tinkers: they are good at engineering, A JOB IN WORLD OF WARCRAFT: i can't also play as a Blacksmith-Class just because as a dwarf i'm good at smithing. Tinkers are engineers, period.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    But they used to. It was such a terrible ability that they replaced it with a revised Serpent Sting.

    If Blizzard wants to do Dark Rangers, just give MM Hunters back Black Arrow and give them Wailing Arrow from HotS.

    Problem solved.
    And if you want to play tinkers: give engineering more toys that they can use everywhere. Problem solved.

  2. #142
    The Insane Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    16,407
    Quote Originally Posted by Velerios View Post
    But they are not Tinkers: they are good at engineering, A JOB IN WORLD OF WARCRAFT: i can't also play as a Blacksmith-Class just because as a dwarf i'm good at smithing. Tinkers are engineers, period.
    The difference being that there isn't a group of Blacksmiths running around with unique abilities and attributes. So clearly the Tinkers aren't the same thing as the engineering profession.

    And if you want to play tinkers: give engineering more toys that they can use everywhere. Problem solved.
    Except that will never happen because professions aren't meant to take the place of classes. Clearly with Gazlowe, Mekkatortoque and others we're looking at a class-like group of fighters who use technology the same way other groups use magic or weapons.

    It also sort of helps that WC3 has a Tinker hero, just like Monks, DKs, and Demon Hunters.

  3. #143
    Quote Originally Posted by Xorzor View Post
    A vast majority no doubt loathe the idea, but not everyone. I'm in the latter. Tinkerer, Machinist, Engineer - call it what you will. It could be a fantastic addition to WoW.

    That being said, it would have to be done right. One slip up and the fickle mob, aka the community, would have a fit. Monks fitted MoP because of the Pandaren culture, and Demon Hunters fitted Legion because it came time to fight fire with fire. Depending on what happens after Shadowlands, that could be the time to introduce a new class.

    But only time will tell. And HE is watching from beyond the veil. Damaged, but rebuilding.
    Pretty sure whenever there is a poll its at the top for most wanted class, your not a minority, its not hated, its a popular choice for most players.

  4. #144
    Quote Originally Posted by Velerios View Post
    But they are not Tinkers: they are good at engineering, A JOB IN WORLD OF WARCRAFT: i can't also play as a Blacksmith-Class just because as a dwarf i'm good at smithing. Tinkers are engineers, period.

    - - - Updated - - -



    And if you want to play tinkers: give engineering more toys that they can use everywhere. Problem solved.
    High Tinker Mekkatorque

    Nuff said

  5. #145
    Elemental Lord Kithelle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Somewhere where canon still exists
    Posts
    8,116
    Quote Originally Posted by Velerios View Post
    Because there are around 20 classes that makes more sense and I (and probably others) would rather see implemented than tinker. Necromancer, Spellsword, Dark Ranger, Spellbreaker...; there are far more classes that are better than tinkerer: we have engineering for it, and i rather have an extension to it than a class around it. If they want, they could make Tinkerer an earnable spec from engineering, but it's own class? Nah.
    Most of those can be added as a fourth spec to something, Tinker on the other hand makes sense as a class

    And enough with that lazy nonsensical argument that Engineering is Tinker, it holds no water. There is nothing in Engineering that makes it a class...
    #WithoutRespectWeReject

  6. #146
    Quote Originally Posted by Velerios View Post
    Because there are around 20 classes that makes more sense and I (and probably others) would rather see implemented than tinker. Necromancer, Spellsword, Dark Ranger, Spellbreaker...; there are far more classes that are better than tinkerer: we have engineering for it, and i rather have an extension to it than a class around it. If they want, they could make Tinkerer an earnable spec from engineering, but it's own class? Nah.
    UGH such a bad argument, Saying engineering fills the tinker fantasy is like saying a blacksmith fills the warrior fantasy, its really that retarded.

    Necromancer will have more flavour after shadowlands but it was pretty much already split between warlock and death knight and really? we need 3 dark magic classes?

    dark ranger is worth a spec at most, spellbreaker is just blood elf warrior and WAY too specific to blood elves, just like warden or priestess of the moon is to night elves or shadow hunter is to trolls.

    Honestly all of the classes you mentioned overlap significantly with existing classes, and if you think that engineering covers tinker than enchanter covers spellblade.

    We dont have any tech focused class, if it was added to the game blizz wouldnt need to take a single thing from any other class.

  7. #147
    Elemental Lord Kithelle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Somewhere where canon still exists
    Posts
    8,116
    Quote Originally Posted by McNeil View Post
    They look at is as to goofy while the game has been that way since the very beginning. They'd rather want more edgy classes as apparently demon hunters didn't bring enough edgyness to the table.
    Well I do enjoy the edgy classes...Dark Ranger and Necromancer could just be 4th specs of another class. While they may fit the theme of the expansion there are already classes that kinda cover what they do.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by rhrrngt View Post
    I really don't understand a community that hates variety so much. A technical based class with steampunk vibes is usually a staple in many fantasy games and its a clear missing component in WoW despite the myriad of technologies the world offers. Yet anytime someone suggests a desire for the class or even comes up with creative ways to implement it half the community it seems nearly has a stroke with the amount of rage they bring.
    I mean in reality it doesn't have to be called tinkerer, but i do think the game would benefit from a class that embodies a mechanical steam punk type vibe.
    Think part of the reason they hate it is because the class would primarily be centered around Gnomes and Goblins...which are some of the less popular races.

    But they don't want to admit they don't like it so they use the lazy argument that Engineering = Tinker
    #WithoutRespectWeReject

  8. #148
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Reason #1: The Tinker shares the same pedigree as other expansion classes (Monks, DKs, and DHs).
    This "pedigree" is bogus because this claim that a concept needs a "Warcraft 3 hero" to be created is bogus. It's a claim you love to make, yet could never prove.

    Reason #2: Goblins, Gnomes, and Mechagnomes have no class that reflects their racial background. When you start one of those three races, you begin in an area surrounded by technology. This works against the immersion of the race, and causes people to only choose these races for irony purposes. This problem is amplified when you look at Mekkatorque, Gazlowe, and Gallywix, the leaders of these races. All three of these characters pilot mechs, and that alongside with the nature of these three races indicates that their use of technology is pretty common.
    FYI, though? Gallywix isn't a tinker. His mech was commissioned from others.

    Reason #3: A Tinker class won't take away from existing class concepts. Necromancers would take abilities from Death Knights.
    You're basically admitting you can't make the tinker concept stand on its own so you need to make up lies.

    Reason #4: It will actually HELP Enigneering.

    Reason #5: A profession isn't a replacement for a class.
    It makes no lore sense for both to exist separately. A tinker that doesn't know engineering is like an accountant that doesn't know math. Or an astrophysicist that doesn't know astronomy.
    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.

  9. #149
    Quote Originally Posted by Tumble View Post
    Not that i hate them, I've just never seen a version that makes sense. All the versions I've seen have basically been a gadget themed hunter for ranged, a cross between rogues and shamans for melee, I've never seen a healer spec that made sense, and the tank specs have all been some version of a mechsuit.

    None of them have been interesting (yes i know that's subjective) from what I've seen. They've just been the edgy steampunk version of stuff already in the game.
    The sky is the limit with tinkers, any gadget that wouldnt work with another class would be right at home with them.
    Stealth suits, rocket boosters, flamethrowers, tesla coils, turrets, bombs (cluster bombs, bouncy bombs, fire bombs), wind up gadgets.

    DPS is ranged zone control unit with guns, bombs and can change to different specialist weapons like flamethrowers for aoe or tesla coil for... some other niche (maybe make it a talent). Drop mines and turrets.

    Healer is apothecary spec using potions like deckard cain from hots, have healing turrets and drones

    For tank you could do full time mech or keep it as a mechanic. I think having it as a cooldown or resource would be better since there is a ton you could do so much else without it.

    Its the only class really that could fill every role in the game with ease.

  10. #150
    People arguing that Tinkers aren’t in the game already crack me up. How the hell do you think we got to Mechagon? Who’s the current leader of the gnomes?? Oh right, the ‘High Tinker’... Need we also mention the island expedition teams?

  11. #151
    I have one... It would be limited to a races not many people want to play. Most versions want it locked to Gnomes and Goblins. Two of the least played races. Most would not play it only cuase they do not want to play a gnome/Goblin. Unlike Demon Hunters, with the popular Elfs Gnomes and Goblins are not like from verious reasons. So No Tinker is not a good idea for a class unless they make it like monk and DK and be open to every race

  12. #152
    The Insane Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    16,407
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    This "pedigree" is bogus because this claim that a concept needs a "Warcraft 3 hero" to be created is bogus. It's a claim you love to make, yet could never prove.
    Not what I’m talking about. I’m saying that the Tinker has the same qualities that the Death Knight, Brewmaster, and the Demon Hunter has before they became classes.


    FYI, though? Gallywix isn't a tinker. His mech was commissioned from others.
    Again not what I’m talking about. In that quote I was merely pointing out the Goblin/Gnome affinity towards technology, and how the available classes don’t match up to that lore.


    You're basically admitting you can't make the tinker concept stand on its own so you need to make up lies.
    Considering that Blizzard had an ample opportunity to bring a Necromancer into the game with Shadowlands and instead proclaimed that the Death Knight is WoW’s “death class”, i would say that it isn’t a lie.


    It makes no lore sense for both to exist separately. A tinker that doesn't know engineering is like an accountant that doesn't know math. Or an astrophysicist that doesn't know astronomy.
    And who’s to say that Blizzard wouldn’t give the Tinker a bonus to engineering? Either having them start at a high level, or simply giving them a bonus.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by LadyLisanna View Post
    I have one... It would be limited to a races not many people want to play. Most versions want it locked to Gnomes and Goblins. Two of the least played races. Most would not play it only cuase they do not want to play a gnome/Goblin. Unlike Demon Hunters, with the popular Elfs Gnomes and Goblins are not like from verious reasons. So No Tinker is not a good idea for a class unless they make it like monk and DK and be open to every race
    You can’t base future class populations on the current race populations.

  13. #153
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    The difference being that there isn't a group of Blacksmiths running around with unique abilities and attributes. So clearly the Tinkers aren't the same thing as the engineering profession.
    Wrong: They haven't unique abilities and attributes, they have unique items that have unique abilities and attributes. That's part of engineering. And that's not enough for a class. If blizzard brings in the future unlockable side-specs out, and make there something like an engineering-spec (it can be called tinker if necessary), maybe ok, but for a whole class this is by far not enough. As said before: there are many other classes that have far more lore in World of Warcraft as tinkerer.

    All in all: i would rather like to see blizzard bringing their ass up, and making professions and especially engineering viable and maybe allow us an unique playstyle with it. And engineering-items should scale with spellpower or attackpower so that they doesn't get totally useless later in the game.

    But a whole spec: nah

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Not what I’m talking about. I’m saying that the Tinker has the same qualities that the Death Knight, Brewmaster, and the Demon Hunter has before they became classes.
    Brewmaster never became a class, it became a spec, a big difference. And it does by far not have enough qualities as Demon Hunters: demon Hunters have around one crapload of lore behind it, as do Death Knights. Tinker... by far not so much.

  14. #154
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Not what I’m talking about. I’m saying that the Tinker has the same qualities that the Death Knight, Brewmaster, and the Demon Hunter has before they became classes.
    I'll repeat what I said: this "pedigree" you speak of is bogus because none of it has been proven to be any sort of requirement for WoW class deesign.

    Considering that Blizzard had an ample opportunity to bring a Necromancer into the game with Shadowlands and instead proclaimed that the Death Knight is WoW’s “death class”, i would say that it isn’t a lie.
    Yes, it is. Because you're making assumptions as to what Blizzard is thinking and passing those assumptions as facts.

    And who’s to say that Blizzard wouldn’t give the Tinker a bonus to engineering?
    That's not what I'm talking about. What I'm saying is that it makes no lore sense whatsoever to have a tech class without engineering. As per my examples: a tech class without engineering is like an accountant that does not know math, or an astrophysicist that doesn't know astronomy.
    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. #155
    Pandaren Monk Rusken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    1,940
    Why is there ANY love for the idea I think is a more valid question.

  16. #156
    The Insane Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    16,407
    Quote Originally Posted by Velerios View Post
    Wrong: They haven't unique abilities and attributes, they have unique items that have unique abilities and attributes. That's part of engineering. And that's not enough for a class. If blizzard brings in the future unlockable side-specs out, and make there something like an engineering-spec (it can be called tinker if necessary), maybe ok, but for a whole class this is by far not enough. As said before: there are many other classes that have far more lore in World of Warcraft as tinkerer.
    Except an item in World of Warcraft is something that is carried in your bags or equipped on your character. A Tinker dropping a Turret, just like a Shaman dropping a Totem is not an item, it's an ability.

    Also the abilities shown with the Island Expedition teams like Deth Lazor aren't housed within a device.

    All in all: i would rather like to see blizzard bringing their ass up, and making professions and especially engineering viable and maybe allow us an unique playstyle with it. And engineering-items should scale with spellpower or attackpower so that they doesn't get totally useless later in the game.
    Except that would never happen because it would imbalance the professions.


    Brewmaster never became a class, it became a spec, a big difference.
    And the Brewmaster's concept and influence was evident throughout the entire Monk class. Which is why the Brewmaster hero Chen Stormstout became the lore figure for the Monk class.

    And it does by far not have enough qualities as Demon Hunters: demon Hunters have around one crapload of lore behind it, as do Death Knights. Tinker... by far not so much.
    And that's entirely your opinion.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    I'll repeat what I said: this "pedigree" you speak of is bogus because none of it has been proven to be any sort of requirement for WoW class deesign.
    Again, not the argument. The argument is that the Tinker has the exact same background attributes as the previous three expansion classes.


    Yes, it is. Because you're making assumptions as to what Blizzard is thinking and passing those assumptions as facts.
    It's not what Blizzard is thinking, it's what Blizzard has said.

    I gotta say, it's honestly hilarious that you believed Blizzard would create a Necromancer class without undead minions. What did you say would replace them? Golems?


    That's not what I'm talking about. What I'm saying is that it makes no lore sense whatsoever to have a tech class without engineering. As per my examples: a tech class without engineering is like an accountant that does not know math, or an astrophysicist that doesn't know astronomy.
    Again, give the tech class 300 Engineering from the start. They did the same thing for Death Knights, so its not like its unheard of.

    And just like that your manufactured "dilemma" is solved.

  17. #157
    Spam Assassin! MoanaLisa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Tralfamadore
    Posts
    29,873
    Quote Originally Posted by Slowpoke is a Gamer View Post
    I feel like most people are merely ambivalent to the idea of Tinkers, and would rather something they like more. Frankly if certain fans of Tinkers weren't so obnoxious about hijacking threads, it probably wouldn't be as hated.
    That's certainly a part of it.

    It's well to remember that a dedicated group of 3 or 4 people can create threads on some topic and generate a feeling like there's maybe some mass movement for it. I have no idea if there is any kind of popular movement or not for a Tinker class but you can't say that a few people making threads about them for several years on this forum (or any other including Blizz's) is an indication that the idea is popular. And too, the threads created degenerate pretty quickly into the same dozen people arguing back and forth. That's a longer way of saying that ideas that are popular on a forum are not necessarily ideas that are popular with everyone. It doesn't take very many people to make a lot of noise.
    “We live in a moment where everything immediately seems to default to outrage. There’s a kind of M.O. of either it’s exactly how I see it, or you’re my enemy.”

  18. #158
    Quote Originally Posted by rhrrngt View Post
    I really don't understand a community that hates variety so much. A technical based class with steampunk vibes is usually a staple in many fantasy games and its a clear missing component in WoW despite the myriad of technologies the world offers. Yet anytime someone suggests a desire for the class or even comes up with creative ways to implement it half the community it seems nearly has a stroke with the amount of rage they bring.
    I mean in reality it doesn't have to be called tinkerer, but i do think the game would benefit from a class that embodies a mechanical steam punk type vibe.
    Because they can't even get it right as a profession, so why would anyone expect them to get it right as a class.

  19. #159

  20. #160
    Elemental Lord Kithelle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Somewhere where canon still exists
    Posts
    8,116
    Quote Originally Posted by melodramocracy View Post
    Because they can't even get it right as a profession, so why would anyone expect them to get it right as a class.
    There isn't a Tinker profession in WoW so you must be confused.
    #WithoutRespectWeReject

Posting Permissions

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