Why so much hate for Tinkerer?

[Teriz]

And my point is that you so far has failed to prove that these "background attributes" are in any way, shape or form a requirement for class design.

Again, I'm not trying to prove that they're a requirement. I'm just pointing out the Tinker's similarities to other expansion class inclusions.

And TBC was the "perfect opportunity" to bring in the demon hunter class.

And WotLK was the perfect time to bring in the Necromancer. They brought in the Death Knight with the Necromancer's abilities instead.

1) So... a tinker class is profession locked? A tinker cannot pick the herbalism AND alchemy professions, for example?
2) The Death Knights never had such a thing. Death Knights are not, and were never "profession locked".

Death Knights started with 270 First Aid in WotLK. Nothing wrong with a Tinker also starting with a high level engineering. Like DKs, you would be free to drop Engineering if you so choose.

Conversely, the Tinker could also/or simply get a bonus to engineering. Again, this is nothing more than another one of your manufactured dilemmas.

- - - Updated - - -

There isn't a valid reason as to why a profession should be turned into a class.

Other than the fact that the Tinker concept isn't based on a profession, it's based on a WC3 hero (like Monks, DKs, and DHs).

[Motso]

The main arguments against it appear to be that it would destroy engineering as a concept, that the word tinker is stupid or that it doesn't fit the overall setting of WoW. Some of which I can understand.
In my personal experience people who are into engineering tend to really love it, so I can understand why those people are concerned about the idea.
Tinker is indeed a silly word, I don't like it much either but I can't think of a solid alternative so meh.
The not fitting in thing I think is just crap, 'tinkers' love or loathe them are a big part of the game and have been a long time, we just can't play em.

Then there is the perfectly legitimate forum fatigue. Tinker advocates and fans tend to be really vocal, stubborn and make a lot of threads about the bloody things. It gives me the shits and I am actually pretty keen on the idea of it as a class.

So basically there are a bunch of different reasons people are put off the idea, and since Tinker fans never seem to want to just chill and let the idea marinate, it tends to be a bit of a shitfight every time Tinkers come up here.

[Paperfox]

I'm totally okay with a new class that is a reskin & recoloring of an existing class. I'm just not in favor of a wholly new class. I think most classes are already present in game and the few that aren't could be added by reskinning/recoloring other ones. There are, imho, major issues around balancing plus all the effort a new class will take in the future.

I'd be fine if they added Tinkers, I just wouldn't play one. If they make the game better for you and/or some of the playerbase, then that is a good reason to add them.

[GreenJesus]

Most people came to wow because of wizards, knights, demons, elves, orcs, and dragons. Not for laser guns and grenade launchers.

Plus, "Tinker" is a pretty exclusive gnomish term and sounds stupid. Goblins would maybe called mechanics or something?

The other topic was a tinker fan that wants a time skip so there will he skyscrapers and futuristic stuff everywhere. That just isn't the warcraft theme of big orc boi charging a human in bulky metal armor with a sword. Or a big titty elf girl casting a fireball on an undead.

[Ielenia]

Again, I'm not trying to prove that they're a requirement. I'm just pointing out the Tinker's similarities to other expansion class inclusions.

And you've so far failed to show that those "similarities" count for anything, which is why mentioning them is meaningless, especially as an 'advantage'.

And WotLK was the perfect time to bring in the Necromancer. They brought in the Death Knight with the Necromancer's abilities instead.

And WotLK also basically made the warlock into a demon hunter, didn't it?

Death Knights started with 270 First Aid in WotLK.

Yeah, that's nowhere near the same thing, because having First Aid did not and does not prevent the DK player from picking cooking, fishing, and later on, archaeology. Whereas "profession locking" the tech class with engineering will basically eliminate a profession slot, allowing the player to pick only one profession that they want, instead of two. So a tech class wouldn't be able to be a herbalist/alchemist, for example.

Conversely, the Tinker could also/or simply get a bonus to engineering.

Which, again, brings us back to the "accountant that doesn't know math"/"astrophysicist that doesn't know astronomy" problem.

Again, this is nothing more than another one of your manufactured dilemmas.

It's not manufactured. Those are basic logic and lore problems.

[Teriz]

And you've so far failed to show that those "similarities" count for anything, which is why mentioning them is meaningless, especially as an 'advantage'.

Meaningless to you, but not meaningless in terms of why a Tinker class is a viable concept.

And WotLK also basically made the warlock into a demon hunter, didn't it?

Yes it did. However if you're implying that Blizzard can remove the Necromancer's concepts from the DK the way they removed the DH concepts from Warlocks, you're sadly mistaken.

Yeah, that's nowhere near the same thing, because having First Aid did not and does not prevent the DK player from picking cooking, fishing, and later on, archaeology. Whereas "profession locking" the tech class with engineering will basically eliminate a profession slot, allowing the player to pick only one profession that they want, instead of two. So a tech class wouldn't be able to be a herbalist/alchemist, for example.

Except it isn't profession locking because the Tinker player can drop the profession at any time. Further, if the player wants to learn Engineering again, Blizzard could give them a hefty bonus to learning engineering that will make their leveling easier. Sort of like the Gnome bonus on steroids.

It's not manufactured. Those are basic logic and lore problems.

Yes it is. You're trying to make a mountain out of a molehill.

- - - Updated - - -

Most people came to wow because of wizards, knights, demons, elves, orcs, and dragons. Not for laser guns and grenade launchers.

Indeed. The problem is that Blizzard created a mechanical-based hero in WC3 and three races that heavily use technology in WoW. One of those races are literal cyborgs, and people kind of dig them and want a class based around those themes.

Plus, "Tinker" is a pretty exclusive gnomish term and sounds stupid. Goblins would maybe called mechanics or something?

Goblins use the term Tinker also.

The other topic was a tinker fan that wants a time skip so there will he skyscrapers and futuristic stuff everywhere. That just isn't the warcraft theme of big orc boi charging a human in bulky metal armor with a sword. Or a big titty elf girl casting a fireball on an undead.

There's no time skip required for a Tinker class. They're in WoW now without a time skip. Heck, they were present during the third war.

[Brocksley]

I don’t like gnomes. Tinkers are a very gnome centered thing. Therefore I don’t like tinkers.

[Kithelle]

There isn't a valid reason as to why a profession should be turned into a class. As mentioned many times by many many folks here, Mechagon was the perfect time to announce that if they had anything in mind, but they don't. You have mechagnomes, which are basically tinkers already.

Also, no other class in the game relies on a "machine" to do their dmg and or healing. The player/hero/person itself is basically worthless outside of the mech unit. With that in mind, ANY current class/player could just jump in a mech, and boom they're a tinker. It doesn't make sense. It will never be a class, but these bozo's on this forum are crying to make it one.

It will never be class because it doesn't fit into the game/lore/common sense. Get over it.

There isn't a Tinker profession, you must be very confused or thinking of a different game.

- - - Updated - - -

Most people came to wow because of wizards, knights, demons, elves, orcs, and dragons. Not for laser guns and grenade launchers.

Plus, "Tinker" is a pretty exclusive gnomish term and sounds stupid. Goblins would maybe called mechanics or something?

The other topic was a tinker fan that wants a time skip so there will he skyscrapers and futuristic stuff everywhere. That just isn't the warcraft theme of big orc boi charging a human in bulky metal armor with a sword. Or a big titty elf girl casting a fireball on an undead.

Just because a single player wants everyone who wants tinker must want it right?

[Digory Kirke]

I wouldn't worry too much about it. There was just as much hate for Demon Hunters.

[LadyLisanna]

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.




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.




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.




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 - - -



You can’t base future class populations on the current race populations.

I kinda can when historily they have been not that well liked.
Here are some stats for the races in 2019
https://www.statista.com/statistics/...cters-by-race/
Gnomes are 3.6% in the EU and 4.1% in the US
Goblins 2.7% EU 2.9%US
Where as Night elfs are 11.6% in both the EU and US
and 15.2% and 16.2%

They do not justify a class of their own. If in the 16 years of being around they cannot grow to 5% 10% of the player base.

[Trollokdamus]

Also, no other class in the game relies on a "machine" to do their dmg and or healing. The player/hero/person itself is basically worthless outside of the mech unit. With that in mind, ANY current class/player could just jump in a mech, and boom they're a tinker. It doesn't make sense.

Except most classes rely on an outside force to do damage/healing for them and would be worthless if the connection to such a force was cut. Elements, arcane, fel, light, you name it. How is relying on mechanical gadgets any different? Also, no. Using a mech and other stuff would require you to undergo specific training, same as every other class mastering their respective skills.

[agentsi]

There isn't a Tinker profession, you must be very confused or thinking of a different game.

- - - Updated - - -



Just because a single player wants everyone who wants tinker must want it right?

Nope, engineering is often referred to as tinkering. so Not, very clearly not thinking of a different game. Try again bucko.

- - - Updated - - -

Except most classes rely on an outside force to do damage/healing for them and would be worthless if the connection to such a force was cut. Elements, arcane, fel, light, you name it. How is relying on mechanical gadgets any different? Also, no. Using a mech and other stuff would require you to undergo specific training, same as every other class mastering their respective arts.

Outside force? Those things you mentioned, are from within. They're able to control and use them and generate them without first building a metal contraption to sit in. You're REALLY stretching the idea of magic-users here. And very poorly at that.

[Nfinitii]

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.

Pretty simple, if it’s not the class they want. Then it means not getting or waiting longer for the class they want.

[Teriz]

I kinda can when historily they have been not that well liked.
Here are some stats for the races in 2019
https://www.statista.com/statistics/...cters-by-race/
Gnomes are 3.6% in the EU and 4.1% in the US
Goblins 2.7% EU 2.9%US
Where as Night elfs are 11.6% in both the EU and US
and 15.2% and 16.2%

They do not justify a class of their own. If in the 16 years of being around they cannot grow to 5% 10% of the player base.

That tends to happens when your race lacks a class that closely mirrors it's racial lore.

For example, here's a visual representation of the top three Night Elf Classes;



Which also happen to be the most popular Night Elf characters.

What's the most popular/well known Goblin and Gnome characters?




Something we can't play as.....

[Cyranis]

I have no clue either OP. I've yet to see a single valid argument against a Tinker class.

- - - Updated - - -

Opinions don't need validation by you or anyone else.

[Cosmic Janitor]

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.

This. Just look at this one. It has already devolved into the the usual suspects having started to bicker back and forth by dissecting their arguments; one sentence at a time.

[Trollokdamus]

Outside force? Those things you mentioned, are from within. They're able to control and use them and generate them without first building a metal contraption to sit in. You're REALLY stretching the idea of magic-users here. And very poorly at that.

What do you mean "from within"? The forces I mentioned are not native to Azeroth or to a living being. They are located outside of Azeroth. Magic-users can readily access them because they have an established connection to these forces and are trained to make use of it. It is equivalent to a Tinker (or whatever else a tech user might be called) always having their gadgets by their side.

[Teriz]

Outside force? Those things you mentioned, are from within. They're able to control and use them and generate them without first building a metal contraption to sit in. You're REALLY stretching the idea of magic-users here. And very poorly at that.

Would this silly argument extend to Hunters who literally rely on Bows/Guns, arrows/bullets, Grenades, pets and traps to fight with? I suppose they shouldn’t be a class either right?

[agentsi]

Would this silly argument extend to Hunters who literally rely on Bows/Guns, arrows/bullets, Grenades, pets and traps to fight with? I suppose they shouldn’t be a class either right?

A single weapon is not the same thing as jumping inside of a Gundam. No matter how you try to spin it, it isn't remotely the same. Even when we kill the King (tinker) in Mechagon, he jumps out of the mech and dies in one hit. They are never going to allow a class, who's entire basis is sitting inside of a machine while the hero/person itself is 100% worthless.

Just stop. Your logic is so extremely biased and flawed, it's borderline worrisome.

[draugril]

They're a sideshow. The periphery. To focus on them would be to deviate from the core of WarCraft. It's like the constant, asinine focus on the "faction war." Their philosophy is clear, and Tinkers will never be at the forefront of it.