1. #3201
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Really? Where in lore is Reeves Combat Module mentioned? Where in lore does it say that Tinkers pilot Reeves? Where do we see Gazlowe, Mekkatorque, or Gallywix piloting a Reeves Combat Module?



    I don't think a Hunter shooting a Rocket from a bow really helps your case. Also a Rocket on a platform with a fuse is also rather primitive tech. The Chinese were doing that over a 1000 years ago.



    Yeah that would never happen. A class would have the same abilities regardless of race.



    Why would you need to play as a Samurai in a game where Japan doesn't exist? If you want to play as a barechested Orc swordsman, Arms Warrior is where you need to go. You even get the Blademaster's ultimate ability.
    Reaves is a Shredder. Shredders are mechs used by Goblins.

    You said they were throwing it.
    Launching a Rocket from a bow does not make sense. It comes to show you how little they care about visual representation. Example: Rocket Barrage's description vs Its animation.

    Yes but, the Tinker is composed of Goblin and Gnomish engineering, respectively. Otherwise, it would just be a general technology class. Example: the differences in abilities between Mekkatorque and Gazlowe.

    I, already, showed you a few pages ago that Japan is represented in WoW. From the Night elven architecture (Pagoda and Torii gates) to the Subtelty Rogue ninja fantasy (Shuriken) to the Blademaster's Katana and banner.

    I could ask you the same thing. Why would you need to play as a Chinese Monk in a game where China didn't exist before MoP?

    Saying a Samurai doesn't fit within WoW is ignoring the base premise of WoW and its classes, that are based on old historical and mythological professions. That's the densest thing someone could claim.

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Compare GMOD to Sky Golem;



    GMOD's animation is far smoother.



    Yes, really. We spent 5.2 dealing with the Thunder King on the Thunder Isle. 5.3 we left Pandaria entirely and dealt with the Darkspear Rebellion. 5.4 was the Siege of Orgrimmar where we dealt with Garrosh. Yeah, the Pandaren were there, but they were far from the center of attention. They were our allies while we were dealing with multiple threats. Even Chen was woefully underutilized, and he was on the cover!
    Yet, you ignore all the sparks, smoke and shaking engine parts i mentioned. Far from being a clean mech.

    Not to mention you, completely, ignored the parts where i showed you that Blackfuse's and Gazlowe's mechs shake just as much as the Sky Golem.

    You forget to mention the reasons why.
    Mists of Pandaria was received by the general audience as a bad expansion, mostly due to the existence of "cute and fluffy" Pandarens. They had to deviate from that theme in order to maintain their subscribers. You can see that in the revamp of the Jade Forest, during beta, into a more Alliance-Horde focused zone, due to players' outcry about it being just another pandaren zone.

    By the way, Throne of Thunder and Mogu, in general, are a Pandaren theme. They were their mortal enemies.

  2. #3202
    The Insane Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Undermine
    Posts
    18,126
    Quote Originally Posted by Unbelievable View Post
    Reaves is a Shredder. Shredders are mechs used by Goblins.




    Reeves isn't a shredder.

    You said they were throwing it.
    Launching a Rocket from a bow does not make sense. It comes to show you how little they care about visual representation. Example: Rocket Barrage's description vs Its animation.
    You said they were throwing it. In fact your argument was that throwing a bomb is no different than a machine launching a bomb.

    Also launching a rocket from a bow makes perfect sense when the original concept was a stick of dynamite tied to an arrow, which is still preset on the ability icon;



    Yes but, the Tinker is composed of Goblin and Gnomish engineering, respectively. Otherwise, it would just be a general technology class. Example: the differences in abilities between Mekkatorque and Gazlowe.
    Again, the only difference between Goblin and Gnome you're going to see is mech forms. I would like to believe that Blizzard would go further than that, but I doubt it.

    I, already, showed you a few pages ago that Japan is represented in WoW. From the Night elven architecture (Pagoda and Torii gates) to the Subtelty Rogue ninja fantasy (Shuriken) to the Blademaster's Katana and banner.
    Cool. Play an Orc Arms warrior and pretend to you heart's content.

    Yet, you ignore all the sparks, smoke and shaking engine parts i mentioned. Far from being a clean mech.

    Not to mention you, completely, ignored the parts where i showed you that Blackfuse's and Gazlowe's mechs shake just as much as the Sky Golem.
    Because we don't have examples of their complete animation like we do for GMOD and Sky Golem. Further, GMOD is the newer Goblin Mech and a Tinker is more likely to follow that design than the Shredder.

    You forget to mention the reasons why.
    Mists of Pandaria was received by the general audience as a bad expansion, mostly due to the existence of "cute and fluffy" Pandarens. They had to deviate from that theme in order to maintain their subscribers.
    Yeah that had nothing to do with it. The patches were planned before MoP was even announced.

    By the way, Throne of Thunder and Mogu, in general, are a Pandaren theme. They were their mortal enemies.
    Yeah, but that's not being centered on Pandaren. If it were centered on Pandaren, the Thunder King would be an evil Pandaren himself.

  3. #3203
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post




    Reeves isn't a shredder.



    You said they were throwing it. In fact your argument was that throwing a bomb is no different than a machine launching a bomb.

    Also launching a rocket from a bow makes perfect sense when the original concept was a stick of dynamite tied to an arrow, which is still preset on the ability icon;





    Again, the only difference between Goblin and Gnome you're going to see is mech forms. I would like to believe that Blizzard would go further than that, but I doubt it.



    Cool. Play an Orc Arms warrior and pretend to you heart's content.



    Because we don't have examples of their complete animation like we do for GMOD and Sky Golem. Further, GMOD is the newer Goblin Mech and a Tinker is more likely to follow that design than the Shredder.



    Yeah that had nothing to do with it. The patches were planned before MoP was even announced.



    Yeah, but that's not being centered on Pandaren. If it were centered on Pandaren, the Thunder King would be an evil Pandaren himself.
    Reaves
    Image of Reaves
    Race Shredder (Mechanical)
    Level 110
    Reaction Alliance Horde
    Status Alive

    Gameplay-wise, damage-wise and appearance-wise it might have the same range, damage and visuals.
    Yet, they picked a Goblin Rocket animation, when they could have just used an arrow.

    Unlikely. They are going to combine Mekkatorque style of abilities with Gazlowe style of abilities. You're gonna notice the differences.

    "Cool. Play a Gnome Engineer and pretend to you heart's content."

    We don't? just press Animation: Tap to Load... on the 3D model viewer.

    I like how you switched to G.M.O.D and, suddenly, dumped Siegecrafter Blackfuse and Gazlowe, even though it was used by Gallywix, who isn't a Tinker.

    Not everything has to be about Pandaren. Otherwise, it would have been, extremely, monotonic and boring as hell. The fact that we got a Pandaren race, a Monk class (Which, is based on Pandaren), Pandaria as a continent and a famous Pandaren (Chen) on the box and cinematic trailer, shows you how much Pandaren that expansion was.

  4. #3204
    The Insane Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Undermine
    Posts
    18,126
    Quote Originally Posted by Unbelievable View Post
    Reaves
    Image of Reaves
    Race Shredder (Mechanical)
    Level 110
    Reaction Alliance Horde
    Status Alive
    Yeah, that's false. Reeves is a Reaver (hence its name) and Shredders aren't a "race". Where'd you pull that from?

    Gameplay-wise, damage-wise and appearance-wise it might have the same range, damage and visuals.
    Yet, they picked a Goblin Rocket animation, when they could have just used an arrow.
    And they picked a bow to shoot it with.

    Unlikely. They are going to combine Mekkatorque style of abilities with Gazlowe style of abilities. You're gonna notice the differences.
    No, they're going to use the Tinker abilities from WC3 and HotS. Those will be the foundation of the class' abilities.

    "Cool. Play a Gnome Engineer and pretend to you heart's content."
    A transmogged Orc arms warrior is viable. A gnome using engineering items is not.

    I like how you switched to G.M.O.D and, suddenly, dumped Siegecrafter Blackfuse and Gazlowe, even though it was used by Gallywix, who isn't a Tinker.
    GMOD wasn't built by Gallywix. Also GMOD represented an entire series of newer Goblin mechs. It also needs to be mentioned that the Tinker class wouldn't be using shredders.

    Not everything has to be about Pandaren. Otherwise, it would have been, extremely, monotonic and boring as hell. The fact that we got a Pandaren race, a Monk class (Which, is based on Pandaren), Pandaria as a continent and a famous Pandaren (Chen) on the box and cinematic trailer, shows you how much Pandaren that expansion was.
    But the expansion wasn't centered on Pandaren, that was the point.

  5. #3205
    All of you ppl want tinker, but it won't be something cool like WoW version of iron man, it will be some turret-deploying, grenade throwing, claw-robot-as-a-backpack idiot like Gazlowe model from HotS. Do you really want something like that?
    They won't let you play in a robot.
    How is it fun?

  6. #3206
    The Insane Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Undermine
    Posts
    18,126
    Quote Originally Posted by Shedaar View Post
    All of you ppl want tinker, but it won't be something cool like WoW version of iron man, it will be some turret-deploying, grenade throwing, claw-robot-as-a-backpack idiot like Gazlowe model from HotS. Do you really want something like that?
    They won't let you play in a robot.
    How is it fun?
    The mech form is the Tinker ultimate ability from WC3. So yes it will be implemented. In fact, my money is on the claw pack being completely replaced by the mech because in BFA Blizzard added various mechanics to mech-using NPCs. You see this with Gazlowe in Island Expeditions, the Mech Jockeys in MOTHERLODE, and Exarch Orelis during the Mag'har recruit scenario. It would be rather redundant to have a claw pack AND a mech.

  7. #3207
    Runemaster would be an obvious option, alongside any name you want for pure buffing classes.

  8. #3208
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Uh, the Death Knight wasn’t the first concept to have that removed. Again, Mage and Shaman heroes were also mounted.

    Did I forget to mention that they’re not abilities?
    Sure, and fans of those classes may have been disappointed too. Who knows? The point remains that something was changed from WC3 to WoW. And whether something was an ability or not is an arbitrary distinction to make when at the end of the day the issue is a changing of class fantasy.

    True, instead of getting an ability that allows them to summon multiple undead minions, they get a spell to summon multiple undead minions....
    No. Instead of getting an ability that let them reanimate the corpses of powerful foes that had been slain, rendering them indestructible monstrosities that could be controlled to wreak havoc on enemies, they got an ability that let the spawn a bunch of weak minions that mindless zerg. These abilities are very much not the same.

    It allowed you to control individual parts at first, but I believed that was changed in Legion, 2 expansions after it first appeared.
    I don't remember that at all, but granted I didn't play a WW in either MoP or WoD so you could be right. I am pretty sure though that the Storm image created didn't get a ranged attack to park itself away from the fight and go pew pew pew.

    The Warlock version did. Blizzard took the DH version from HotS. So yes, while not EXACTLY the same, the theme of the ability remains the same. There’s no reason why a permanent mech form would cause Blizzard to scrap the concept altogether.
    But Demon Hunters didn't get the Warlock version (no matter how much I may wish that they did). They got the version they got, without a ranged attack. And you're right. There's no reason that they couldn't have recreated the ability more directly. Except they didn't. Kinda indicates that they are open to changing the Ultimate abilities to suit whatever character narrative they want.

    Despite balance and technical issues, Blizzard was able to faithfully recreate the ultimates of the other expansion class additions.
    Except they didn't. Three times out of three when it comes to classes added after the fact, they did not "faithfully recreate" the ultimates of the classes. They created an approximation of each, with each having distinct and key differences over what was present in WC3.

    But again, GMOD, Blackfuse’s shredder, and Gazlowe’s shredder aren’t janky, falling apart, etc. We would expect the Tinker to be more in line with those mechs over the Sky Golem.
    You really overestimate how much better looking those mechs are though, They're all pretty janky and filled with Goblin aesthetic. Going back to the example from before, certainly to the point that a random Orc farmer would have no real way of differentiating between them if they showed up at his farm. Giant scary Goblin mech 1 or Giant scary Goblin mech 2 are largely the same to him.

    The Claw Pack already launches bombs and whacks people on the head. It did that in WC3.
    That was kind of my point though. It's more than just "thing that turns into a mech". For my money, what they can make it do is a lot more interesting than that.

    Just because it takes place in Undermine doesn’t mean it needs to center on Goblins. Mists of Pandaria didn’t center on Pandarens for example.
    The rise and fall of the Pandaren empire was pretty much the central story of the expansion though. While an Undermine expansion could have stuff other than Goblins involved, the central theme of such a thing would absolutely be Gobin related given their history. I just don't see Blizzard making an entire expansion around such an unpopular race. I'd think it far more likely it would get the Mechagon treatment. Just my two cents though.

    Uh, we just got Demon Hunters 4 years ago, and the current expansion revolves around Sylvanas with special appearances by Uther, Arthas, Vol’jon, Kelthuzad, and Karl’thas whom were all WC3 characters.

    How can you say they’ve moved far beyond it?
    It's rather telling that 5 of those characters are dead though, with most having little in game presence in quite a while, and they return in an expansion centered around visiting the dead. Look, I'm not saying that there's zero chance or reason to revisit the past, just that there isn't the same need to. When the game launched, it didn't have history of its own. So it took very liberally from source material. The game absolutely does have history now though. It has an identity and narrative that is uniquely WoW. The need to go back to WC3 just isn't there anymore. They can build entire expansions based on the story and lore within WoW if they want. They don't have to. They can absolutely return to WC3 and snag more. I hope they do. I want a Tinker class too. I'm just saying that they don't have to.

    Gotta say, the mech sounds better, and far more interesting. That might be because the mech-based Tinker is actually Blizzard’s tech hero concept.
    Agree to disagree then. A Mech based concept sounds sci fi and bland to me. And the idea of what a tech class can do and what stuff they can make is littered throughout WoW.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Shedaar View Post
    All of you ppl want tinker, but it won't be something cool like WoW version of iron man, it will be some turret-deploying, grenade throwing, claw-robot-as-a-backpack idiot like Gazlowe model from HotS. Do you really want something like that?
    They won't let you play in a robot.
    How is it fun?
    Yes. Yes I do. One of the coolest character classes I've ever played in an MMO was the Engineer in GW2. Having an approximation of that, but whackier so as to better fit the WoW tech aesthetic, would be amazing. I don't want to play as Iron Man in WoW.

  9. #3209
    The Insane Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Undermine
    Posts
    18,126
    Quote Originally Posted by jellmoo View Post
    Sure, and fans of those classes may have been disappointed too. Who knows? The point remains that something was changed from WC3 to WoW. And whether something was an ability or not is an arbitrary distinction to make when at the end of the day the issue is a changing of class fantasy.
    Yeah I've never seen anyone ever complain about this until now. Is there any thread you can point to where there's a group of DK players complaining over them not being able to permanently ride their undead horses? If not, this seems much ado about nothing.

    No. Instead of getting an ability that let them reanimate the corpses of powerful foes that had been slain, rendering them indestructible monstrosities that could be controlled to wreak havoc on enemies, they got an ability that let the spawn a bunch of weak minions that mindless zerg. These abilities are very much not the same.
    Well yeah, mainly because the latter ability is far more balanced and sensible. In the end it still serves the same purpose; Allows the DK to summon multiple undead minions at once.

    I don't remember that at all, but granted I didn't play a WW in either MoP or WoD so you could be right. I am pretty sure though that the Storm image created didn't get a ranged attack to park itself away from the fight and go pew pew pew.
    I'm not sure of the ranged attack, but yes you could control each spirit individually in earlier iterations. Blizzard simplified the ability to its current version.

    But Demon Hunters didn't get the Warlock version (no matter how much I may wish that they did). They got the version they got, without a ranged attack. And you're right. There's no reason that they couldn't have recreated the ability more directly. Except they didn't. Kinda indicates that they are open to changing the Ultimate abilities to suit whatever character narrative they want.
    The point though is that Blizzard did fully translate the WC3 ultimate ability into WoW.

    Except they didn't. Three times out of three when it comes to classes added after the fact, they did not "faithfully recreate" the ultimates of the classes. They created an approximation of each, with each having distinct and key differences over what was present in WC3.
    See above. By all accounts they did.

    You really overestimate how much better looking those mechs are though, They're all pretty janky and filled with Goblin aesthetic. Going back to the example from before, certainly to the point that a random Orc farmer would have no real way of differentiating between them if they showed up at his farm. Giant scary Goblin mech 1 or Giant scary Goblin mech 2 are largely the same to him.
    So you're saying an Orc wouldn't be able to tell these two mechs apart;




    C'mon man.

    That was kind of my point though. It's more than just "thing that turns into a mech". For my money, what they can make it do is a lot more interesting than that.
    Or they can completely skip the Claw Pack part and just have the Tinker in the mech. That's the entire point of the concept.


    The rise and fall of the Pandaren empire was pretty much the central story of the expansion though. While an Undermine expansion could have stuff other than Goblins involved, the central theme of such a thing would absolutely be Gobin related given their history. I just don't see Blizzard making an entire expansion around such an unpopular race. I'd think it far more likely it would get the Mechagon treatment. Just my two cents though.
    Well think back to what we were doing in Pandaria. The Pandaren were just there to guide and help us. We were fighting an empire of sentient bugs, exploring ancient Mogu dungeons, dealing with an army of dino-riding trolls, and remnants of an Old God. When it was all over, we had to deal with a Horde rebellion and take out Garrosh. I wouldn't call that an expansion centered on Pandaren.

    Also it sort of helps that MoP is often regarded across the board as one of WoW's best expansions, despite the bitching of some in the community.

    It's rather telling that 5 of those characters are dead though, with most having little in game presence in quite a while, and they return in an expansion centered around visiting the dead. Look, I'm not saying that there's zero chance or reason to revisit the past, just that there isn't the same need to. When the game launched, it didn't have history of its own. So it took very liberally from source material. The game absolutely does have history now though. It has an identity and narrative that is uniquely WoW. The need to go back to WC3 just isn't there anymore. They can build entire expansions based on the story and lore within WoW if they want. They don't have to. They can absolutely return to WC3 and snag more. I hope they do. I want a Tinker class too. I'm just saying that they don't have to.
    Well the expansion before this one had about half of its content dedicated to Jaina Proudmoore dealing with the decision of killing her father, which occurred in WC3, Sylvanas dealing with her death which also happened in WC3, the return of Thrall who was introduced in WC3, and the return of Azshara, a character first mentioned in WC3.

    So again, it's kind of hard to say that they've moved "far beyond" WC3. That statement simply is not true.

    Agree to disagree then. A Mech based concept sounds sci fi and bland to me. And the idea of what a tech class can do and what stuff they can make is littered throughout WoW.
    Why would a mech-based concept seem sci-fi to you when we have stuff like this;



    In WoW currently?

  10. #3210
    The Insane Ielenia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    15,676
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    There's a difference between an ability being altered to fit into WoW's class structure and you attempting to argue that an item is a stand-in for an ability.
    And it's arguable that the tinker abilities from WC3 were altered to fit into WoW as the character concept was turned into the engineering profession.

    On top of that, there was no need to alter the ability's name, was there?

    Also, I'm still waiting for your answer to my question:
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    What, exactly, did the demon hunters had to offer, mechanically, that was "unique"? Because, mechanically speaking, "turning into a demon" is not different than a shaman turning into an Ascendant, or, back in pre-Legion days, a warlock turning into a demon.

    And for clarification: before it was made into a playable class.
    I did a Necromancer thing. Check it out! All feedback welcome!
    I also did a Bard thing! Questions, comments and ideas, all welcome!

  11. #3211
    interesting i want to learn more about it

  12. #3212
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Yeah, that's false. Reeves is a Reaver (hence its name) and Shredders aren't a "race". Where'd you pull that from?



    And they picked a bow to shoot it with.



    No, they're going to use the Tinker abilities from WC3 and HotS. Those will be the foundation of the class' abilities.



    A transmogged Orc arms warrior is viable. A gnome using engineering items is not.



    GMOD wasn't built by Gallywix. Also GMOD represented an entire series of newer Goblin mechs. It also needs to be mentioned that the Tinker class wouldn't be using shredders.



    But the expansion wasn't centered on Pandaren, that was the point.
    https://wow.gamepedia.com/Reaves

    If it was a Fel Reaver it would have been categorized as one.

    Do explain how you shoot a rocket with a bow.

    So, the Tinker will, exclusively, be based on nothing but, Goblin tech? I, highly, doubt it.

    No, it's not viable. It's like telling a Warrior to wear a Dreadnaught gear before WotLK and pretend he's a Death Knight, a Warlock to wear Betrayer regalia or a Rogue to wear Blindfold and Glaives of Azzinoth, before Legion, and pretend they are a Demon Hunter.

    A Gnome/Goblin/Mechagnome Hunter with Engineering is viable. Just use your imagination

    For a guy who has been using Shredders this entire 160 pages arguments, this is a little hypocritical. Plus, didn't you say the Tinker would get a mech different from the ones in game?

    It is centered around Pandarens. You just can't have them be the entire expansion. Like Legion was a Demon Hunter expansion, yet it wasn't all just about them. WotLK was about Death Knights, yet it wasn't all about them. Warlords of Draenor being about Orcs, yet it is changed midway to demons. BfA being about the faction war yet, it gets changed to Void stuff mid-way. Cataclysm being about dragons but, also about elementals and the twilight hammer. You can't have just one element the whole entire expansion. especially, when the Pandaren are the good guys, not the big baddy.

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    The mech form is the Tinker ultimate ability from WC3. So yes it will be implemented. In fact, my money is on the claw pack being completely replaced by the mech because in BFA Blizzard added various mechanics to mech-using NPCs. You see this with Gazlowe in Island Expeditions, the Mech Jockeys in MOTHERLODE, and Exarch Orelis during the Mag'har recruit scenario. It would be rather redundant to have a claw pack AND a mech.
    The speed in which you change your opinions is remarkable. Just in page 100 you posted artwork of Goblins, Gnomes and Mechagnomes with claw pack. You stick to both WC3 and HotS, which clearly present the Tinker with a claw pack, yet you dismiss it because you prefer constant mech. The amount of hypocrisy here is tremendous.

    Quote Originally Posted by jellmoo View Post
    Yes. Yes I do. One of the coolest character classes I've ever played in an MMO was the Engineer in GW2. Having an approximation of that, but whackier so as to better fit the WoW tech aesthetic, would be amazing.I don't want to play as Iron Man in WoW.
    Thank you. Players want to play as a romanticised inventor, not as a sci-fi superhero.

  13. #3213
    The Insane Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Undermine
    Posts
    18,126
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    And it's arguable that the tinker abilities from WC3 were altered to fit into WoW as the character concept was turned into the engineering profession.
    Then why are these here instead of inside the profession;

    https://www.wowhead.com/spell=135574/cluster-rocket
    https://www.wowhead.com/spell=148085/healing-spray

    Also the HotS abilities were altered to fit into WoW as well;

    https://www.wowhead.com/spell=261516/rock-it-turret
    https://www.wowhead.com/spell=261752/deth-lazor
    https://www.wowhead.com/spell=261788/grav-o-bomb-3000
    https://www.wowhead.com/spell=261739/xplodium-charge
    https://www.wowhead.com/spell=276851...goblin-defense

    None of these are items, and they’re altered for WoW. So again, why aren't they in the profession if the Tinker and Alchemist were turned into a profession?

    On top of that, there was no need to alter the ability's name, was there?
    Maybe they thought Army of the Dead was more appropriate. Animate Dead is used by quite a few Necromancer mobs in WoW, and it's a single skeleton summoning ability.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Unbelievable View Post
    https://wow.gamepedia.com/Reaves

    If it was a Fel Reaver it would have been categorized as one.
    It's listed as a notable Fel Reaver, but isn't on the list of notable shredders.

    I wonder why.....

    Do explain how you shoot a rocket with a bow.
    Because it's actually an arrow.

    So, the Tinker will, exclusively, be based on nothing but, Goblin tech? I, highly, doubt it.
    They'll make abilities that can work with both races. Deth Lazor for example.

    No, it's not viable. It's like telling a Warrior to wear a Dreadnaught gear before WotLK and pretend he's a Death Knight, a Warlock to wear Betrayer regalia or a Rogue to wear Blindfold and Glaives of Azzinoth, before Legion, and pretend they are a Demon Hunter.
    Except the difference being that there are actually Blademaster abilities available to Warriors, whereas there were no DK abilities were available to Warriors.

    It is centered around Pandarens. You just can't have them be the entire expansion. Like Legion was a Demon Hunter expansion, yet it wasn't all just about them. WotLK was about Death Knights, yet it wasn't all about them. Warlords of Draenor being about Orcs, yet it is changed midway to demons. BfA being about the faction war yet, it gets changed to Void stuff mid-way. Cataclysm being about dragons but, also about elementals and the twilight hammer. You can't have just one element the whole entire expansion. especially, when the Pandaren are the good guys, not the big baddy.
    No, WoD was all about Orcs and it remained that way throughout. It switched from Grom in the beginning to Gul'dan in the end.

    The Pandaren in Pandaria were pretty much an after thought.

    The speed in which you change your opinions is remarkable. Just in page 100 you posted artwork of Goblins, Gnomes and Mechagnomes with claw pack. You stick to both WC3 and HotS, which clearly present the Tinker with a claw pack, yet you dismiss it because you prefer constant mech. The amount of hypocrisy here is tremendous.
    Where's the hypocrisy? I said that the Claw Pack is a high possibility due to the precedence of Blizzard sticking fairly close to their WC3 concepts in the previous three expansion classes. However, I personally prefer them going all mech.
    Last edited by Teriz; 2021-01-20 at 08:02 PM.

  14. #3214
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Yeah I've never seen anyone ever complain about this until now. Is there any thread you can point to where there's a group of DK players complaining over them not being able to permanently ride their undead horses? If not, this seems much ado about nothing.
    I;m not entirely sure what threads from over 12 years ago would prove though. I'm not saying that there was a huge and rabid groupd of people itching to play a mounted Death Knight. I have absolutely no idea if there were. I'm saying that the possibility exists. I'm saying that Blizzard looked at the mounted Death Knight concept and said "nah fam, we ain't doing that", which kinda indicates that they are willing to deviate from what was in WC3.

    Well yeah, mainly because the latter ability is far more balanced and sensible. In the end it still serves the same purpose; Allows the DK to summon multiple undead minions at once.
    But... It isn't... One is a random bunch of ghouls that zerg. The other literally raises friends and foes around you, powerful ones, to attack for you in an organized manner. They are so functionally different that they have different names.

    I'm not sure of the ranged attack, but yes you could control each spirit individually in earlier iterations. Blizzard simplified the ability to its current version.

    The point though is that Blizzard did fully translate the WC3 ultimate ability into WoW.
    But they didn't give it to the class they made for that unit. Hell, the two versions are even functional different. The one with the ranged attack wasn't a cooldown.

    See above. By all accounts they did.
    So, your argument is that those are the same abilities, but a Mech form for a Tinker has to a permanent form and if it isn't it is not the same ability? Seriously?

    So you're saying an Orc wouldn't be able to tell these two mechs apart;




    C'mon man.
    A random Orc Farmer is supposed to know that one of those is built by a tinker and one is built by an Engineer? He's supposed to know the ins and outs of those things and what they produce? C'mon man.

    Or they can completely skip the Claw Pack part and just have the Tinker in the mech. That's the entire point of the concept.
    So the claw pack is optional to the theme, despit being very present in the materials you quote, but the mech somehow is not?

    Well think back to what we were doing in Pandaria. The Pandaren were just there to guide and help us. We were fighting an empire of sentient bugs, exploring ancient Mogu dungeons, dealing with an army of dino-riding trolls, and remnants of an Old God. When it was all over, we had to deal with a Horde rebellion and take out Garrosh. I wouldn't call that an expansion centered on Pandaren.
    Yeah. And it quite literally wrapped all around the Pandaren. They were very, very present every step of the way. They were an incredibly pivotal part of the story. Are you trying to suggest that an Undermine story wouldn't be heavily wrapped around Goblins in the same way?

    Also it sort of helps that MoP is often regarded across the board as one of WoW's best expansions, despite the bitching of some in the community.
    And I don't disagree. MoP was by far my favourite expansion. I just don't think that Blizzard is all that likely to go down that road again.

    Well the expansion before this one had about half of its content dedicated to Jaina Proudmoore dealing with the decision of killing her father, which occurred in WC3, Sylvanas dealing with her death which also happened in WC3, the return of Thrall who was introduced in WC3, and the return of Azshara, a character first mentioned in WC3.

    So again, it's kind of hard to say that they've moved "far beyond" WC3. That statement simply is not true.
    I don't see it that way though. Sure, characters from WC3 are still around. Why wouldn't they be? But we;ve also done a lot to take us past that point. Multiple Horde leaders. New characters taking central focus. Characters from WC3 dying. New areas opening up and new stories being told. The story from WC3 was very narrow and specific, which makes sense for the game. We've moved in a ton of different directions since then. Of course popular xharacters from that game are still around and get used, but we've hit a point where that's not needed anymore. We can actually get new stories featuring new heroes and villains.

    Why would a mech-based concept seem sci-fi to you when we have stuff like this;



    In WoW currently?
    Because that's very sci fi as it is, but is far easier to compartmentalize when it's the random NPC here and there that you seldom see, as opposed to an entire class based around Robotech.

    And why would I want to turn WoW into Robotech, when this is so much more interesting?




  15. #3215
    goblin and gnome stuff is steam punk.

    Legion and draenei stuff is more of sci-fi
    the report systems sucks and the mods are bias.

  16. #3216
    The Insane Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Undermine
    Posts
    18,126
    Quote Originally Posted by jellmoo View Post
    I;m not entirely sure what threads from over 12 years ago would prove though. I'm not saying that there was a huge and rabid groupd of people itching to play a mounted Death Knight. I have absolutely no idea if there were. I'm saying that the possibility exists. I'm saying that Blizzard looked at the mounted Death Knight concept and said "nah fam, we ain't doing that", which kinda indicates that they are willing to deviate from what was in WC3.
    Well why would it need to be 12 years ago? If this was a problem for the DK community, wouldn't it be an ongoing problem that they would be discussing up till now? Heck, Shaman players still gripe about 2H Enhancement, and they've been griping about that since TBC. Again, I see your point about a deviation from WC3, but this isn't really something I've ever heard DK players complain about.

    Perhaps in the future Blizzard could give them something like the Paladin ability Divine Steed.

    But... It isn't... One is a random bunch of ghouls that zerg. The other literally raises friends and foes around you, powerful ones, to attack for you in an organized manner. They are so functionally different that they have different names.
    No, you simply positioned yourself over a pile of corpses, used the spell and it summoned up to 6 invulnerable undead copies of the most powerful units in that pile. I don't see how you say they attacked in an organized manner. My memory of the spell was that you typically performed that ability after you had just downed your enemy's front line attackers, parked yourself near where they fell, and boom, you have 6 invincible Knights, 6 invincible Tauren, or 6 invincible Druids of the Claw turned against their own forces, and typically it would turn the tide of a fight.

    There's a lot of reasons why that ability wouldn't work in WoW, and why Army of Dead simply makes a lot more sense.

    But they didn't give it to the class they made for that unit. Hell, the two versions are even functional different. The one with the ranged attack wasn't a cooldown.
    Yeah, probably because Blizzard didn't want Demon Hunters to have the Warlock version because they seem to have a huge issue with classes sharing abilities, and wanted to make a clean break from Warlock's version of the spell. However, it's important to note that Demon Hunters got what is essentially the HotS version of the spell instead. And once again, in HotS the Tinker also converts the Claw Pack into a mech (or sorts).

    So, your argument is that those are the same abilities, but a Mech form for a Tinker has to a permanent form and if it isn't it is not the same ability? Seriously?
    I'm saying that Blizzard was faithful to the WC3 ultimate abilities of the previous three expansion classes, and there's no reason to believe they wouldn't be faithful to the Tinker's ultimate ability as well. That ultimate ability is mech piloting.

    A random Orc Farmer is supposed to know that one of those is built by a tinker and one is built by an Engineer? He's supposed to know the ins and outs of those things and what they produce? C'mon man.
    I thought the point of this exercise was seeing if an Orc farmer would be able to tell the difference between a janky Goblin mech and a less janky Goblin mech.


    So the claw pack is optional to the theme, despit being very present in the materials you quote, but the mech somehow is not?
    The entire point of the concept is the mech, because the Claw Pack itself is a mech of sorts as well. Once you get Robo Goblin, you can flip from the claw pack to the mech at will, and most of the time you stay in the mech because it's faster, stronger, repairable, and capable of smashing buildings. In terms of a class, a Claw Pack would be rather redundant.

    Yeah. And it quite literally wrapped all around the Pandaren. They were very, very present every step of the way. They were an incredibly pivotal part of the story. Are you trying to suggest that an Undermine story wouldn't be heavily wrapped around Goblins in the same way?
    They were present as allies and as individuals we needed to help. If we have an Undermine expansion, we would only be in Undermine to assist the Goblins, and based on lore, Undermine is filled with all sorts of races and creatures. I really don't think that people would lose their minds if your quest giver is a Goblin and that Goblin sends you into a Sluicetown dungeon to clean up some chemically altered monsters.

    And I don't disagree. MoP was by far my favourite expansion. I just don't think that Blizzard is all that likely to go down that road again.
    Well why not? They made a ton of money off of it, and they know that it's highly regarded by the community. In addition, the community itself has expressed a desire to calm down on the cosmic extra dimensional adventures and have a more down to earth expansion. In short, people want another MoP.

    I don't see it that way though. Sure, characters from WC3 are still around. Why wouldn't they be? But we;ve also done a lot to take us past that point. Multiple Horde leaders. New characters taking central focus. Characters from WC3 dying. New areas opening up and new stories being told. The story from WC3 was very narrow and specific, which makes sense for the game. We've moved in a ton of different directions since then. Of course popular xharacters from that game are still around and get used, but we've hit a point where that's not needed anymore. We can actually get new stories featuring new heroes and villains.
    I think here we've entered more your opinion where you feel that WoW needs to move on from WC3. I can see how someone would make that argument. However, WoW hasn't moved far beyond WC3 and still rely on it to rope in long time Warcraft fans and keep their story going. You are starting to see more WoW-centric characters come into their own like Anduin, Bolvar, Mekkatorque, Greymane, Nathanos, etc. But by and large, people still love Jaina, Thrall, Tyrande, Malfurion, Gazlowe, Rexxar, etc.

    And of course Sylvanas is the most popular Warcraft character at the moment.

    The point though is that Blizzard is nowhere near "far beyond" WC3.

    Because that's very sci fi as it is, but is far easier to compartmentalize when it's the random NPC here and there that you seldom see, as opposed to an entire class based around Robotech.

    And why would I want to turn WoW into Robotech, when this is so much more interesting?
    Well it wouldn't be us turning WoW into "robotech", it would be Blizzard, since the mech-based Tinker is their tech hero concept.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by The Council View Post
    goblin and gnome stuff is steam punk.

    Legion and draenei stuff is more of sci-fi
    I agree with this.

  17. #3217
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    It's listed as a notable Fel Reaver, but isn't on the list of notable shredders.

    I wonder why.....



    Because it's actually an arrow.



    They'll make abilities that can work with both races. Deth Lazor for example.



    Except the difference being that there are actually Blademaster abilities available to Warriors, whereas there were no DK abilities were available to Warriors.



    No, WoD was all about Orcs and it remained that way throughout. It switched from Grom in the beginning to Gul'dan in the end.

    The Pandaren in Pandaria were pretty much an after thought.



    Where's the hypocrisy? I said that the Claw Pack is a high possibility due to the precedence of Blizzard sticking fairly close to their WC3 concepts in the previous three expansion classes. However, I personally prefer them going all mech.
    I guess we're both right:
    "Reaves is a multi-function fel reaver-shredder summoned by engineers via [Reaves Battery] or [Rechargeable Reaves Battery]"

    An arrow the size of a rocket with a fiery trail?

    So, they'll pass on abilities like Force Shield, Spark bot, World Enlarger and Discombobulation?

    An ability. Singular. Bladestorm. That's like expecting a player to play a Warlock with Death Coil before the addition of Death Knights.

    It started out as Iron Horde being the threat to Legion being the threat.

    An afterthought? are you kidding? the whole premise of the expansion is Mists of Pandaria. When they revealed it on Blizzcon they showed the Pandaren race, the monk class and Pandaria as a continent.

    A possibility? You demanded that we have claw pack. You emphasized how important it is to the fantasy of a Tinker. You're just flipping agendas like you flip pancakes.

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    The entire point of the concept is the mech, because the Claw Pack itself is a mech of sorts as well. Once you get Robo Goblin, you can flip from the claw pack to the mech at will, and most of the time you stay in the mech because it's faster, stronger, repairable, and capable of smashing buildings. In terms of a class, a Claw Pack would be rather redundant.

    I agree with this.
    Unless, you can't be healed while in mech form. And, why would Blizzard make the Claw pack for both the WC3 and HotS version if it's, simply, useless?

    You don't seem to agree with that. What you want is Iron Man. What the Tinker technology is steampunk.

  18. #3218
    Quote Originally Posted by Unbelievable View Post
    A possibility? You demanded that we have claw pack. You emphasized how important it is to the fantasy of a Tinker. You're just flipping agendas like you flip pancakes.

    Unless, you can't be healed while in mech form. And, why would Blizzard make the Claw pack for both the WC3 and HotS version if it's, simply, useless?

    You don't seem to agree with that. What you want is Iron Man. What the Tinker technology is steampunk.
    Yeah it's crazy how easily he flips to suit his agenda. He was constantly going on about how engineers aren't tinkers cause they don't invent things on their own they use schematics and Tinkers should be this amazingly smart create shit on the spot type of person then he going 200 pages on G.M.O.D when the dude who pilots it knows very little about tech and didn't even invent the thing.

  19. #3219
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    The mech form is the Tinker ultimate ability from WC3. So yes it will be implemented. In fact, my money is on the claw pack being completely replaced by the mech because in BFA Blizzard added various mechanics to mech-using NPCs. You see this with Gazlowe in Island Expeditions, the Mech Jockeys in MOTHERLODE, and Exarch Orelis during the Mag'har recruit scenario. It would be rather redundant to have a claw pack AND a mech.
    Just because it was an ultimate ability in WC3 doesn't mean it will become a core aspect of a class across all specs, here is a list of all the "ultimate abilities" from WC3 that became standard rotation abilities that work on short cooldowns or resource: Earthquake, Starfall, Death and Decay.

    Here are the "ultimate abilities" that became standard big (1.5 minutes or more) dps/tanking/healing cooldowns specific to certain specs: Tranquility (Restoration Druid), Storm, Earth, And Fire (Windwalker), Animate Dead/Army of the Dead (Unholy)

    The only "ultimate ability" that became a core element of a WoW class in the transition between WC3 and WoW is Metamorphosis which became a big dps/tanking cooldown ability and several talent choices allowing for temporary Metamorphosis, this is the only Ultimate which created a core gameplay element of a WoW class, all the others became spec specific abilities that operate as either a rotation, resource or cooldown based system.

    I'm genuinely not getting this perception you've invented that the WC3 hero units are created on a near 1:1 transition majority of "ultimate abilities" belonging to WC3 units didn't even get put into WoW (if thats the case wheres a combat rez for paladins or wheres phoenix summon for fire mages) WC3 is not held on this sacred pedestal, Blizzard mines it for concepts the same way they mine other material for concepts, like how chinese culture/mysticism became the basis for literally everything in the Monk class that didn't involve brewing like Celestials (who are based on the cardinal guardians), Wuxia-style martial arts and Chi

    If a Tinker (or whatever the class would be called) gets put into to WoW is there a chance that some form of mech would be utilized? yes, Will it become a ability used by all potential specs? I doubt it since the gameplay concept a "mech" creates is A: better armor B: better melee capabilities C: stronger weaponry (cannons, flamethrowers), majority of those in gameplay terms to me sound like tanking concepts, especially given that the common perception of a Engineer/Artificer style class is that of a primarily ranged fighter (guns, explosives, ect) if the Tinker ultimate Robo-Goblin became a WoW ability I see it being a cooldown or a "form" for a tanking spec built around the concept of using a mech instead of an ability that all specs would have.

    Quote Originally Posted by Unbelievable View Post
    A possibility? You demanded that we have claw pack. You emphasized how important it is to the fantasy of a Tinker. You're just flipping agendas like you flip pancakes.
    I'm actually sort of impressed at the degree of moving the goalpost moving on display all in the name of keeping a class limited to some of the least popular races in the game.

    First it was that visuals of a Tinker class don't suit anyone but Goblins/Gnomes which is a fair point but plenty of race/class combos have inconsistent visuals such as Kul Tiran & Zandalari druids having unique shapeshift visuals but standard visuals for their spells, or Night Elf Priests having golden light instead of moonlight visuals, Draenei mechs being unique but having more standard visuals isn't that out of the question, and stuff like Dwarf/Orc engineering isn't even that visually different from Gnome/Goblin engineering.

    Then it was that no race but Gnome/Goblins fit Claw-packs due to their height which is flawed for a number of reasons one is assuming that claw-packs would be a core part of the class (visuals like that aren't usually attached to models like that on a permanent basis look at DH wings.), second would be the visual/animation issues claw-packs create even with dimunitive races, also ignoring that dwarves are only marginally taller than gnomes/goblins so wouldn't even have said issues.)

    Then it became that only Gnome/Goblin mechs are small enough to not create issues with size in terms of clarity for dungeon/raid mechanics which is another potentially fair point but ignores that A: is the Gnome/Goblin mech seriously only going to be 6-7ft tall? that would look utterly pathetic on a visual/power fantasy level B: there are workarounds such as having larger races sit/crouch to operate a mech C: Dwarves are once again only marginally taller than Gnomes/Goblins and wouldn't have these size issues.
    Last edited by Imperator4321; 2021-01-20 at 10:13 PM.

  20. #3220
    The Insane Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Undermine
    Posts
    18,126
    Quote Originally Posted by Unbelievable View Post
    I guess we're both right:
    "Reaves is a multi-function fel reaver-shredder summoned by engineers via [Reaves Battery] or [Rechargeable Reaves Battery]"
    Yeah, that's a typo because it doesn't look like a Shredder it looks like a Reaver, and it was introduced in Legion. Also it's listed as a Reaver on the Reaver page and its not listed as a Shredder at all on the Shredder mech page.

    An arrow the size of a rocket with a fiery trail?
    It's supposed to be an arrow with a stick of dynamite attached. They simply use that for the graphic.

    So, they'll pass on abilities like Force Shield, Spark bot, World Enlarger and Discombobulation?
    Robo Goblin has 2 types of shields in HotS, so I don't see why there wouldn't be a force field. Beyond that, you're more than likely looking at abilities similar to the nearly 2 dozen Tinker abilities and passives in WC3, HotS, and Island Expedition.

    An ability. Singular. Bladestorm. That's like expecting a player to play a Warlock with Death Coil before the addition of Death Knights.
    Not really, since the main point of a Blademaster is a master swordsman. You can accomplish that with Arms Warrior.

    An afterthought? are you kidding? the whole premise of the expansion is Mists of Pandaria. When they revealed it on Blizzcon they showed the Pandaren race, the monk class and Pandaria as a continent.
    Yeah, because a new race, new class, and a new continent were the main selling points of that expansion.

    Unless, you can't be healed while in mech form. And, why would Blizzard make the Claw pack for both the WC3 and HotS version if it's, simply, useless?

    You don't seem to agree with that. What you want is Iron Man. What the Tinker technology is steampunk.
    The Claw Pack was in WC3 and HotS to make a Goblin character easier to see from the top-down perspective of the RTS game. Blizzard made it part of its ability set by connecting it to Robo Goblin.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Imperator4321 View Post
    Just because it was an ultimate ability in WC3 doesn't mean it will become a core aspect of a class across all specs, here is a list of all the "ultimate abilities" from WC3 that became standard rotation abilities that work on short cooldowns or resource: Earthquake, Starfall, Death and Decay.

    Here are the "ultimate abilities" that became standard big (1.5 minutes or more) dps/tanking/healing cooldowns specific to certain specs: Tranquility (Restoration Druid), Storm, Earth, And Fire (Windwalker), Animate Dead/Army of the Dead (Unholy)

    The only "ultimate ability" that became a core element of a WoW class in the transition between WC3 and WoW is Metamorphosis which became a big dps/tanking cooldown ability and several talent choices allowing for temporary Metamorphosis, this is the only Ultimate which created a core gameplay element of a WoW class, all the others became spec specific abilities that operate as either a rotation, resource or cooldown based system.
    I would argue that Robo Goblin is as pivotal to the Tinker as Metamorphosis was to Demon Hunters.

    I'm genuinely not getting this perception you've invented that the WC3 hero units are created on a near 1:1 transition majority of "ultimate abilities" belonging to WC3 units didn't even get put into WoW (if thats the case wheres a combat rez for paladins or wheres phoenix summon for fire mages) WC3 is not held on this sacred pedestal, Blizzard mines it for concepts the same way they mine other material for concepts, like how chinese culture/mysticism became the basis for literally everything in the Monk class that didn't involve brewing like Celestials (who are based on the cardinal guardians), Wuxia-style martial arts and Chi
    You're comparing classic classes to expansion classes. Expansion classes tend to be more closely tied to their WC3 iterations and based on singular WC3 heroes whereas the classic classes were by and large amalgamations of multiple heroes that had similar thematics. Again, with that precedent in place, there's no reason not to believe that the Tinker would follow the same design pattern as the previous three expansion classes.

    If a Tinker (or whatever the class would be called) gets put into to WoW is there a chance that some form of mech would be utilized? yes, Will it become a ability used by all potential specs? I doubt it since the gameplay concept a "mech" creates is A: better armor B: better melee capabilities C: stronger weaponry (cannons, flamethrowers), majority of those in gameplay terms to me sound like tanking concepts, especially given that the common perception of a Engineer/Artificer style class is that of a primarily ranged fighter (guns, explosives, ect) if the Tinker ultimate Robo-Goblin became a WoW ability I see it being a cooldown or a "form" for a tanking spec built around the concept of using a mech instead of an ability that all specs would have.
    Yeah, I don't see that happening. I see Blizzard copying Druid mechanics and giving the Tinker mech piloting that mechanically works like Druid shapeshifting. It's simply too much of a layup not to do it that way, and frankly it makes perfect sense.

    For a RDPS Tinker for example, instead of having high armor, they would get more mobility and farther weapon range. For a Tank Tinker, you would get higher armor, less mobility, less range and more AoE abilities. A Healing Tinker would get a medical mech that would simply have a set of healing abilities like bio grenades, healing turrets, heal bots, and healing sprays.

    Beyond combat roles, you can also utilize the mech for transportation forms. For example, Gazlowe in Island Expeditions has an ability called Turbocharge. This ability allows Gazlowe to move 30% faster when outside of combat while inside his mech. I would keep that ability and expand it to give the Tinker travel forms, and do it transformer style. The various mech mounts already do this, so the base of this is already in place.

    You do it that way because the main selling point of the class is the mech, and the mech is what gives the class it's uniqueness and "cool" factor. Making it a wacky variation of the Hunter class simply doesn't work.

    The user base has demonstrated that they want a mech-based class in WoW akin to Mekkatorque, so give them what they want. Also I really wouldn't want to limit a mech to just tanking. DPS players are going to want to be able to pilot a mech as well.

Posting Permissions

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