Dark Ranger Customizations (Coming in 9.2.5)!!!

[username993720]

I mean if you're making this argument, then Hunters are just using Dark Ranger techniques and could be the same class. End of discussion right? It was all a matter of perspective and you now figured it out.

Huh? What do you think a Dragonsworn would use?

The ones that Blizzard felt fit the story and setting they wished to pursue at the time. That is how they have been prioritizing classes. Story and setting comes first, then they see what Class fits, and decides to add them at that time.

Otherwise we could have assumed that any class could be added at any given time regardless of any thematic ties or waiting for the right moment, right?

I didn't ask what classes are fit to be added.
I asked which ones did they develop and expand? It certainly wasn't the Runemaster. But, it definitely was the Dark Ranger, Priestess of the Moon and Tinker through Sylvanas, Tyrande and Mekattorque.

I don't know how that would be counter-intuitive at all. You're comparing a sinking island to a historic location being explored through yet another alternate dimension and timeline.

New islands appearing from the depths has been a thing since Warcraft 2 and Gul'dan raising the Broken Isles/Tomb of Sargeras from the sea. I don't think anyone ever discounted Zandalar on the basis of it merely sinking.

Why wouldn't it be discounted? It was supposed to be underwater. Same for Broken Isles. It was nothing more than Night elven ruins.

There's so much untapped potential in these gorgeous artworks of Zin-Azshari and Dire Maul.

The initial concept for the game was that Garrosh would go to Outland as it currently exists and would use a horn of Nozdormu to resurrect the fallen warlords and invade Azeroth. The idea was changed in order to give players a new setting.[5]

Exactly. There was no realistic way to predict Warlords of Draenor. Not everything is predictable.

Like, nothing is preventing there being an Australia based continent. Yet my point here is that if that were ever to happen, we would not be able to actually predict it happening. All we can do is discuss it on the basis of being baseless, wild speculation. It'd be a wild theory.

But, we do have something. Chronicles Artwork. I went through every single location presented there, and those were the only original ones we didn't explore.

^ This is an example of correlation. Confirmation bias after it's already happened, regardless of the methodology being inconsistent with your argument.

"I know I said it was raining outside and it ended up being a leaky hose, but the ground is wet nonetheless"

If they weren't, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

You tell me. You are the one who keeps telling me how the door isn't closed while I've been telling you I never said the door was closed in the first place. For pages.

Are you kidding me? You're the one who tries to counteract me at every single turn. You've dismissed it from the very beginning. Otherwise, this thread wouldn't have gotten to 50 pages. "Dark Rangers would be just an allied race and a Hunter customization option" rings a bell?

Game Director and Designers have final say. Writers progress the story and recontextualize gameplay back into the story.

Metzen was creative director of the game at the time. Look at Metzen's history of requests of the game and how the game drastically changed in favour of gameplay instead. He wanted Druids to be Night Elf exclusive, he wanted playable Naga and Ogres from the start, he wanted Pandaren as early as TBC. Look how differently the game turned out.

End of the day, it was up to Tom Chilton to decide what new classes would have been added to the game and when they would be added. If it were up to Metzen, Demon Hunters would probably have been added as early as Vanilla or TBC.

You're not taking development time into consideration. They've just added 9 classes in vanilla. You think it would be reasonable to add another one right away at the whim of a creative director? It's a group decision, not a single person's.

By the way, who are the game directors and designers now?

The Dark Rangers which we know of are no longer exclusively loyal to her and are actively serving under Calia.

All we are discussing here is how you are speculating Sylvanas (current or future iteration) being relevant to Dark Rangers becoming playable.

Because gameplay would obviously be based on her.
Death Knights are also no longer loyal to the Lich King, and there are Demon Hunters who oppose Illidan. Loyalties mean shit.

Evoker is absolutely an asspull. You're telling me Dracthyr also existed in the TTRPG? You're telling me the Evoker name and class appear in the RPG?

Dragonsworn in the TTRPG is a completely different concept which involves mortals adopting Dragon powers.

"At BlizzCon 2010, it was mentioned in an offhand comment that something called a "dragonman" was based on unused concept art for a scrapped idea for a playable race."

An Evoker is just an upgraded version of the Dragonsworn. It is a 20 years old RPG concept after all. It needs a breath of fresh air and an overall update. Same with the Dracthyr.

What comes after 13.0 that would fit a Dark Ranger class? We've gone over the idea that any Death related expansions get connected back to Death Knights haven't we?

What? How did you get to that conclusion? And who said she needs a Death expansion of all things?
We'd need to see how they release expansions after 13.0 to determine anything.

In Heroes of the Storm, Wailing Arrow and Withering fire both displayed Banshee connections to them. I'm not sure how Withering fire looks in WoW, and whether it makes shadowy afterimages of your character or not. So difficult to say.

Banshee's Blight seems obvious. So yes, it looks like Blizzard is willing to pawn off the Banshee theme as borrowed power so far, doesn't it?

So, your whole bullshit argument that Dark Rangers do not present any Banshee abilities just got flushed down the drain.
Now that we've settled that, we can agree that they can, and would, pull abilities from Sylvanas.

Yeah but I don't understand why you single these out while assuming that Blizzard doesn't put effort into concepts without taking it the full way into realizing them as a standalone Player Class.

We have had plenty of NPC classes designed and not pushed forward as a new class. Look at all the Engineer NPCs in BFA Island Expeditions that used Tinker abilities from Heroes of the Storm. Look at Mekkatorque and Gallywix's mech battle in Dazar'alor. Look at the addition of Mechagon and all the new tech we have access to from there. Did that end up paying off with a Tinker class?

Sometimes Blizzard will put effort into a theme and a potential class without paying it off as a playable thing. And now, we have seen that they can instead choose to add a completely new concept that never existed before instead, like Evokers.

Tinkers are definitely being expanded upon. I expect it to pay off someday.

You can't say they strayed away from the Death archetype while asking for Banshee abilities to be represented

I meant that unlike the Necromancer, for example, Dark Rangers do not tread upon Death Knight themes.

I would argue that conceptually playing an experienced adventurer gaining draconic powers by serving a dragon is far different than playing as a dragon with dragon powers.

playing.
The concept is still around using Dragon powers.
Again. You and Triceron need to realize that old concepts require update and adjustments for modern era. That's what the Evoker is.

[Triceron]

Huh? What do you think a Dragonsworn would use?

Dragon powers.

I didn't ask what classes are fit to be added.
I asked which ones did they develop and expand? It certainly wasn't the Runemaster. But, it definitely was the Dark Ranger, Priestess of the Moon and Tinker through Sylvanas, Tyrande and Mekattorque.

What's the difference?

Why wouldn't it be discounted? It was supposed to be underwater. Same for Broken Isles. It was nothing more than Night elven ruins.

You think we're gonna get an underwater expansion after the mess that was Vashj'r? That's the whole reason Nazjatar wasn't an underwater zone. We literally already have Zin Azshari in the game.

But, we do have something. Chronicles Artwork. I went through every single location presented there, and those were the only original ones we didn't explore.

Yeah and we also have entire novel trilogy of the War of the Ancients. It doesn't mean we're gonna get an expansion out of it, does it?

If they weren't, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Are you kidding me? You're the one who tries to counteract me at every single turn. You've dismissed it from the very beginning. Otherwise, this thread wouldn't have gotten to 50 pages. "Dark Rangers would be just an allied race and a Hunter customization option" rings a bell?

You're not taking development time into consideration. They've just added 9 classes in vanilla. You think it would be reasonable to add another one right away at the whim of a creative director? It's a group decision, not a single person's.

By the way, who are the game directors and designers now?

Ion Hazzikostas is the Game Director, who isn't giving you a Dark Ranger and is giving you an Evoker.

Because gameplay would obviously be based on her.
Death Knights are also no longer loyal to the Lich King, and there are Demon Hunters who oppose Illidan. Loyalties mean shit

If you say so. I mean, if loyalties mean shit then there's no reason why we even have to talk about Sylvanas to have Dark Rangers playable. We already have them in the story through Calia Menethil.

An Evoker is just an upgraded version of the Dragonsworn. It is a 20 years old RPG concept after all. It needs a breath of fresh air and an overall update. Same with the Dracthyr.

Hard disagree. They're ultimately different concepts because Dracthyr are not servants of Dragonflights nor mortals blessed with Draconic powers. The concept of a Dragonsworn hinges on transferring Draconic power from a Dragon to a Mortal, or a Mortal capable of wielding Draconic power. It is not a power born within an individual.

The only way it could be considered an evolution of Dragonsworn is if the Evoker ends up being playable by other races, with new lore to support that possibility.

What? How did you get to that conclusion? And who said she needs a Death expansion of all things?
We'd need to see how they release expansions after 13.0 to determine anything.

What setting and story would 13.0+ be in order to make sense of a playable DR class? Why wait that long even? We're talking at least another 6+ years at that point. Is it even worth discussing something so far in the future? Like I said, by then Microsoft would have completely taken over Activision and we don't know what the direction of the game would be by then.

So, your whole bullshit argument that Dark Rangers do not present any Banshee abilities just got flushed down the drain.
Now that we've settled that, we can agree that they can, and would, pull abilities from Sylvanas.

Could. Not would. Blizzard has already established existing classes being able to draw the same themes from Sylvanas, including having Black Arrow that summoned undead minions.

Tinkers are definitely being expanded upon. I expect it to pay off someday.

So is that 16.0 and beyond?

I meant that unlike the Necromancer, for example, Dark Rangers do not tread upon Death Knight themes.

Sure they do. That's the whole reason why they were omitted from Shadowlands. Because they literally tread the Death Knight themes.

[username993720]

Dragon powers.

And what are Alextrasza's powers?
You pretty much answered yourself.

What's the difference?

The difference is that it has nothing to do with current story. But, we see bits and pieces of the development of some concepts that might soldify into a new class.

You think we're gonna get an underwater expansion after the mess that was Vashj'r? That's the whole reason Nazjatar wasn't an underwater zone. We literally already have Zin Azshari in the game.

No. The realistic expectation was that we're not going to see it. Yet, then came BfA which pretty much retconned it, with only Nazmir being flooded at some areas.

Yeah and we also have entire novel trilogy of the War of the Ancients. It doesn't mean we're gonna get an expansion out of it, does it?

I'm not talking old books. I'm talking about Chronicles, which was meant to set things straight in terms of lore and was seeded with all kinds of hints, like the Zul'dazar artwork.

Ion Hazzikostas is the Game Director, who isn't giving you a Dark Ranger and is giving you an Evoker.

There wasn't supposed to be one. I don't need to explain it every single time.

Refresh my memory, please. Is Ion part of the old group of devs? Because we might have some hope. Because i don't trust the new generation. Though, he is responsible for all of the borrowed power system fiasco.

If you say so. I mean, if loyalties mean shit then there's no reason why we even have to talk about Sylvanas to have Dark Rangers playable. We already have them in the story through Calia Menethil.

As long as the gameplay is based on her character, whoopi fucking doo.

Hard disagree. They're ultimately different concepts because Dracthyr are not servants of Dragonflights nor mortals blessed with Draconic powers. The concept of a Dragonsworn hinges on transferring Draconic power from a Dragon to a Mortal, or a Mortal capable of wielding Draconic power. It is not a power born within an individual.

The only way it could be considered an evolution of Dragonsworn is if the Evoker ends up being playable by other races, with new lore to support that possibility.

Dragon powers nonetheless.
The method of wielding it is just different.

What setting and story would 13.0+ be in order to make sense of a playable DR class? Why wait that long even? We're talking at least another 6+ years at that point. Is it even worth discussing something so far in the future? Like I said, by then Microsoft would have completely taken over Activision and we don't know what the direction of the game would be by then.

Karazhan, Electric Boogalooo.

Right now, the only thing i can think of is an elven centric expnasion like my old Kalimdor concept.

Could. Not would. Blizzard has already established existing classes being able to draw the same themes from Sylvanas, including having Black Arrow that summoned undead minions.

Blizzard also did it with the Demon Hunter and the Warlock.
Black Arrow didn't last, did it? And it would probably no longer summon and Undead.
You know, you're so hanged up on an equippable item that might go away soon. Not to mention the themes being found in the Rogue as well, yet you won't call the Rogue a Dark Ranger.

So is that 16.0 and beyond?

When we're old and shriveled.
Probably a Kezan expansion. Or a Titan one. Who knows.

Sure they do. That's the whole reason why they were omitted from Shadowlands. Because they literally tread the Death Knight themes.

*facepalm*

They were omitted because the Evoker was being developed. How can you not see that?

https://wowpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Syl...ics)#Abilities
Does this remind of a Death Knight?

[Triceron]

And what are Alextrasza's powers?
You pretty much answered yourself.

So do Evokers. And we are clear that Alexstrasza is neither a Dragonsworn or Evoker, right?

The difference is that it has nothing to do with current story. But, we see bits and pieces of the development of some concepts that might soldify into a new class.

Yet as Blizzard indicated themselves, the class itself is informed by setting and story.

I wouldn't amuse the idea of Blizzard adding Dark Rangers or Tinkers in Dragonflight just because they have their class concepts readily available.

We got Evokers because they are thematic to Dragonflight.

No. The realistic expectation was that we're not going to see it. Yet, then came BfA which pretty much retconned it, with only Nazmir being flooded at some areas.

I'm not talking old books. I'm talking about Chronicles, which was meant to set things straight in terms of lore and was seeded with all kinds of hints, like the Zul'dazar artwork.

Your argument is all over the place. Kezan got damaged during Cataclysm as well and we saw that first hand with the Goblins evacuating. The expectation for Undermine and Kezan being revisited is as strong as ever.

Zandalar was absolutely expected. They were strong enough to appear in full force alongside Mogu in Mists of Pandaria, and we hadn't even seen the formal introduction of Rastakhan yet.

I'd say it would be a realistic expectation of not seeing Zandalar if Rastakhan and Prophet Zul made formal appearances outside of their realm and removed any further purpose from exploring it as an entire zone. Much like how the Emerald Nightmare parts of Legion pretty much diminished any future expectations of a full blown Emerald Dream expansion.

There wasn't supposed to be one. I don't need to explain it every single time.

Refresh my memory, please. Is Ion part of the old group of devs? Because we might have some hope. Because i don't trust the new generation. Though, he is responsible for all of the borrowed power system fiasco.

Ion was the lead raid encounter designer for many years before being promoted to Game Director. He prioritizes maintaining raid balance. He could be considered the one responsible for all the borrowed power for the last 2 expansions, and arguably, the one who finalizes decisions like having Covenants. Hard to tell if you would consider that being 'hope' for more classes in the future. I mean, he is responsible for no new class in 9.0.

The reason why Evokers are even playable today is likely part of the owning up they're doing from all blowback they got on Shadowlands. He officially came out to admit that they took the game in the wrong direction and are now trying to correct course. I can see the decision to add a new class being made to placate fans and build back hype for 10.0.

As long as the gameplay is based on her character, whoopi fucking doo.

Well that's sorta my point. Hunters already have access to her abilities and gameplay from Heroes of the Storm. All they would have to do is formalize a few abilities as either customizations or as permanent Hunter abilities, if they chose to do so. That is a possibility.

Dragon powers nonetheless.
The method of wielding it is just different.

Method of wielding is the difference between Shamans and Monks, Priests and Paladins and Demon Hunters and Warlocks.

I mean if we're just talking about Bow user that uses Dark powers, then Hunter with Sylvanas' bow and quiver already cover both aspects.

Karazhan, Electric Boogalooo.

Right now, the only thing i can think of is an elven centric expnasion like my old Kalimdor concept.

What would Dark Rangers have to do with old Kalimdor?

Blizzard also did it with the Demon Hunter and the Warlock.
Black Arrow didn't last, did it? And it would probably no longer summon and Undead.
You know, you're so hanged up on an equippable item that might go away soon. Not to mention the themes being found in the Rogue as well, yet you won't call the Rogue a Dark Ranger.

IMO, it didn't last because they were positioning to make Dark Ranger a playable class. And for whatever reasons, they ultimately cut those plans, so Black Arrow remains absent because of those original plans to make room for a standalone Dark Ranger class.

And as for Rogues, there's no reason for me to assume them to be Dark Rangers since Blizzard hasn't actually tied them to being Dark Rangers in the lore; but I could see them being a multi-class title if Blizzard was inclined to do so.

Like the 9.2.5 Velonara datamine quest specifically refers to Huntsmaster, not any other class. If it also referred specifically to Rogues, then I'd draw that connection too.

Just based on weapons though? Alone, it isn't enough to draw a comparison. My argument is the full package here.

When we're old and shriveled.
Probably a Kezan expansion. Or a Titan one. Who knows.

Kezan could be featured as early as 12.0. I don't see any reason for them saving it for an expansion 12 years down the line.

*facepalm*

They were omitted because the Evoker was being developed. How can you not see that?

You don't actually know that is the reason though. We have an Evoker class and we don't have a Dark Ranger class. We don't actually know the reasons why one was chosen over the other.

'Because Evoker was being developed' is not something that either of us can see, only something we can baselessly assume through correlation. We have no inside knowledge to any of the actual reasons why Evoker is a new class and why Dark Ranger is not.

For example: Let's swap your argument with Demon Hunters and Death Knights.

"Demon Hunters in TBC were omitted because Death Knights were being developed. How can you not see that?"

Would you agree with the above statement? I wouldn't, at all.

Expansion story and setting come first, then they see what features fit into the story and setting. It doesn't work the other way around where they are actively developing a certain class years ahead of time, before they even figured out the next expansion. We know that their own plans for story and setting shift in concept, like their explanations of the Mongrel Horde and an Azeroth-based 6.0 expansion instead of what eventually became WoD.

[Mechagnome]

[SIZE=4][B][COLOR="#B22222"]DARK RANGER CUSTOMIZATION AND GEAR THAT WE WANT IS ALREADY IN GAME!!

2:1 not in favor. That's probably why. Want for Pandaren Monks was far greater, lik mor than 90% interest. 33% of this tiny sample size is not enough to encourage $100k worth of man hours and production.

[cocomen2]

Want for Pandaren Monks was far greater, lik mor than 90% interest. .

This is how Mechagnomes killed me, dying from laugh. 90% out of these 100 furry people?

[Mechagnome]

This is how Mechagnomes killed me, dying from laugh. 90% out of these 100 furry people?

Not sure what you were going for here. We technically already have the equivalent of a Dark Ranger. Void Elf + Rogue or Hunter class. You might want to work on your insults/humor. It's not particularly clever when you are the only one who gets the joke.

But hey, put it on the main forum in 10 years. You might get your wish.

[TheramoreIsTheBomb]

2:1 not in favor. That's probably why. Want for Pandaren Monks was far greater, lik mor than 90% interest. 33% of this tiny sample size is not enough to encourage $100k worth of man hours and production.

lol so putting a texture available for PCs to use at the barbershop costs 100k worth of man hours and production? got it.

[Schwert]

Not sure what you were going for here. We technically already have the equivalent of a Dark Ranger. Void Elf + Rogue or Hunter class. You might want to work on your insults/humor. It's not particularly clever when you are the only one who gets the joke.

But hey, put it on the main forum in 10 years. You might get your wish.

Void Elves lack the typical red eyes that goths want. Which is weird, because red is a void colour, but they likely never got them to prevent that community from complaining the way Night Elves did about Nightborne.

Mess of a situation.

[wowrefugee]

2:1 not in favor. That's probably why. Want for Pandaren Monks was far greater, lik mor than 90% interest. 33% of this tiny sample size is not enough to encourage $100k worth of man hours and production.

lmao again with someone using an mmo-champion poll as empirical evidence

[Ielenia]

Correct. I didn't believe that Blizzard would rip apart an existing class to bring in a new class.

I'd just like to point out that this specific claim is impossible to prove as true. We have the two events happening at the same time, but we have zero concrete evidence that they're connected.

- - - Updated - - -

Want for Pandaren Monks was far greater, lik mor than 90% interest.

What? Are you saying "90% of the player base wanted pandaren monks"?

[arkanon]

2:1 not in favor. That's probably why. Want for Pandaren Monks was far greater, lik mor than 90% interest. 33% of this tiny sample size is not enough to encourage $100k worth of man hours and production.

90% of what? where did that number come from? And where did you come up with $100,000 from?

[username993720]

So do Evokers. And we are clear that Alexstrasza is neither a Dragonsworn or Evoker, right?

Technicalities. They use the same powers.

Yet as Blizzard indicated themselves, the class itself is informed by setting and story.

I wouldn't amuse the idea of Blizzard adding Dark Rangers or Tinkers in Dragonflight just because they have their class concepts readily available.

We got Evokers because they are thematic to Dragonflight.

Then, we'll just have to wait.
If i'm somehow wrong, and the MoP equivalents do add a new class, it might be the Blademaster.

Your argument is all over the place. Kezan got damaged during Cataclysm as well and we saw that first hand with the Goblins evacuating. The expectation for Undermine and Kezan being revisited is as strong as ever.

And we didn't expect to see it again until the MOTHERLODE! dungeon in BfA changed it.

Zandalar was absolutely expected. They were strong enough to appear in full force alongside Mogu in Mists of Pandaria, and we hadn't even seen the formal introduction of Rastakhan yet.

Appearing outside of their sinking homeland was absolutely reasonable, as they sought the piece of land promised to them by the Mogu.

I'd say it would be a realistic expectation of not seeing Zandalar if Rastakhan and Prophet Zul made formal appearances outside of their realm and removed any further purpose from exploring it as an entire zone. Much like how the Emerald Nightmare parts of Legion pretty much diminished any future expectations of a full blown Emerald Dream expansion.

Like Prophet Zul in Cataclysm 4.1?

What? Those tidbits of the Emerald Nightmare never diminished anything about the Emerald Dream. It's as small as Yjomba Isle representing the entirety of Zandalar.

Ion was the lead raid encounter designer for many years before being promoted to Game Director. He prioritizes maintaining raid balance. He could be considered the one responsible for all the borrowed power for the last 2 expansions, and arguably, the one who finalizes decisions like having Covenants. Hard to tell if you would consider that being 'hope' for more classes in the future. I mean, he is responsible for no new class in 9.0.

The reason why Evokers are even playable today is likely part of the owning up they're doing from all blowback they got on Shadowlands. He officially came out to admit that they took the game in the wrong direction and are now trying to correct course. I can see the decision to add a new class being made to placate fans and build back hype for 10.0.

And not a regret in storytelling or features like borrowed power? Who said the Evoker was never planned?

Well that's sorta my point. Hunters already have access to her abilities and gameplay from Heroes of the Storm. All they would have to do is formalize a few abilities as either customizations or as permanent Hunter abilities, if they chose to do so. That is a possibility.

You consider two temporary, weapon-related, abilities as the pinnacle of Dark Ranger representation? This is sad...

Method of wielding is the difference between Shamans and Monks, Priests and Paladins and Demon Hunters and Warlocks.

I mean if we're just talking about Bow user that uses Dark powers, then Hunter with Sylvanas' bow and quiver already cover both aspects.

Come on. You play a Dragon using Dragon powers. They just couldn't let you play as a full-sized Dragon on all fours. They let you have a mortal disguise. This is pretty much a re-interpretation of the Dragonsworn and Dragon aspects.

What would Dark Rangers have to do with old Kalimdor?

An elf class, the Ranger.

IMO, it didn't last because they were positioning to make Dark Ranger a playable class. And for whatever reasons, they ultimately cut those plans, so Black Arrow remains absent because of those original plans to make room for a standalone Dark Ranger class.

And as for Rogues, there's no reason for me to assume them to be Dark Rangers since Blizzard hasn't actually tied them to being Dark Rangers in the lore; but I could see them being a multi-class title if Blizzard was inclined to do so.

Like the 9.2.5 Velonara datamine quest specifically refers to Huntsmaster, not any other class. If it also referred specifically to Rogues, then I'd draw that connection too.

Just based on weapons though? Alone, it isn't enough to draw a comparison. My argument is the full package here.

Yet, you use Sylvanas' bow at every point.

Kezan could be featured as early as 12.0. I don't see any reason for them saving it for an expansion 12 years down the line.

Because 12.0 is supposed to be based around MoP themes. But, who knows.

You don't actually know that is the reason though. We have an Evoker class and we don't have a Dark Ranger class. We don't actually know the reasons why one was chosen over the other.

'Because Evoker was being developed' is not something that either of us can see, only something we can baselessly assume through correlation. We have no inside knowledge to any of the actual reasons why Evoker is a new class and why Dark Ranger is not.

For example: Let's swap your argument with Demon Hunters and Death Knights.

"Demon Hunters in TBC were omitted because Death Knights were being developed. How can you not see that?"

Would you agree with the above statement? I wouldn't, at all.

Expansion story and setting come first, then they see what features fit into the story and setting. It doesn't work the other way around where they are actively developing a certain class years ahead of time, before they even figured out the next expansion. We know that their own plans for story and setting shift in concept, like their explanations of the Mongrel Horde and an Azeroth-based 6.0 expansion instead of what eventually became WoD.

Are classes a last minute decision?
Because, as it seems, they are working according to a pattern and, therefore, the Dark Ranger was never meant for Shadowlands, while the Evoker was supposed to appear in a Cataclysm equivalent, which i remind you, had no class.

[Triceron]

Are classes a last minute decision?
Because, as it seems, they are working according to a pattern and, therefore, the Dark Ranger was never meant for Shadowlands, while the Evoker was supposed to appear in a Cataclysm equivalent, which i remind you, had no class.

Expansions are planned first, classes are features within an expansion. We already know this is how things are prioritized.

Wrath of the Lich King wasn't built around the idea that they planned a Death Knight and decided to go with Northrend after. We know this already not being true, since Runemaster was one of the planned classes on the shortlist for Wrath of the Lich King expansion. They weren't going to change up the story and setting to some other location that would have been more central to the Runemaster; it would have been a Runemaster class for a Northrend-centric expansion.

And no, I do not believe any pattern exists other than whatever people are choosing to correlate. As I pointed out, Dragonflight is a mishmash of so many concepts that you can point at it being a literal Mists of Pandaria 2.0 for literally being a time-lost forgotten island shrouded by mists that we are discovering for the first time. It's not even broadening the scope to being floating islands or something more fantastic. It's literally an island shrouded in fog and mist.

Then, we'll just have to wait.
If i'm somehow wrong, and the MoP equivalents do add a new class, it might be the Blademaster.

I doubt they would revisit MoP themes (or other Asian equivalents) considering the tepid reception surrounding its themes. The expansion itself was great, but the themes were very poorly received overall and if you remember anything about MoP, people were praising WoD for bringing the series 'back to its roots' and couldn't wait to get out of Pandaria. You see the same kind of thing happening in Shadowlands where people are feeling the expansion being too disconnected from what they consider the roots of Warcraft's high fantasy setting and taking a step too close to cosmic scale sci-fantasy. As much as I want them to take risks and explore new and different cultures, I acknowledge it being a risk they don't want to take. I mean look at Dragon Isles; they have an opportunity to explore vastly rich new races and cultures and instead we have mostly retreads of existing races like new types of Centaur or Gnolls or Tuskarr. Way more familiarity than anything really new, and that's mostly because they know that most WoW players are actually quite conservative when it comes to new concepts.

I mean even look at the Kul Tirans they added and spent so much time and effort creating for BFA. Kul Tiran remain one of the least played Allied Races, and one of the lowest played Races overall in the game. As much as it makes sense to have Kul Tiran playable, it's kinda sad when a simple reskin of Blood Elves with Void magic ends up completely overshadowing all the time and effort put into a brand spanking new Kul Tiran option.

Most of the fanbase just wants more of the same. That's why we're seeing so many repeats of themes. This is the primary reason why people are lead to believe that there must be some pattern repeating different expansion themes. There isn't actually any pattern, it's more the case that Blizzard is taking less and less risks to explore completely new concepts because the existing playerbase isn't very open to change and new settings. Sad truth is, WoW's success is primarily drawn from retreading all of WC3's tropes, and they tend to gain more traction when presenting a new setting that is familiar (like old Draenor), rather than something that is completely new (like Pandaria).

Who said the Evoker was never planned?

Considering it's a class that is exclusive to one Race and only has 2 specs, I doubt there was any real long-term planning involved here. If they spent multiple expansions worth of time planning this out, then a 2-spec class that can only be playable by 1 race and does not even have weapons or armor visible in its combat form doesn't lead me to believe it was planned very well. I really do see this class being a reaction to recent player feedback rather than something they intentionally planned since BFA.

[username993720]

Expansions are planned first, classes are features within an expansion. We already know this is how things are prioritized.

Wrath of the Lich King wasn't built around the idea that they planned a Death Knight and decided to go with Northrend after. We know this already not being true, since Runemaster was one of the planned classes on the shortlist for Wrath of the Lich King expansion. They weren't going to change up the story and setting to some other location that would have been more central to the Runemaster; it would have been a Runemaster class for a Northrend-centric expansion.

And no, I do not believe any pattern exists other than whatever people are choosing to correlate. As I pointed out, Dragonflight is a mishmash of so many concepts that you can point at it being a literal Mists of Pandaria 2.0 for literally being a time-lost forgotten island shrouded by mists that we are discovering for the first time. It's not even broadening the scope to being floating islands or something more fantastic. It's literally an island shrouded in fog and mist.

Well, you're right. It has some Pandaria vibes. But, its focus on Dragons make it unmistakenably a Cataclysm equivalent.

How long before an expansion is annouced do they work on a class?

I doubt they would revisit MoP themes (or other Asian equivalents) considering the tepid reception surrounding its themes. The expansion itself was great, but the themes were very poorly received overall and if you remember anything about MoP, people were praising WoD for bringing the series 'back to its roots' and couldn't wait to get out of Pandaria. You see the same kind of thing happening in Shadowlands where people are feeling the expansion being too disconnected from what they consider the roots of Warcraft's high fantasy setting and taking a step too close to cosmic scale sci-fantasy. As much as I want them to take risks and explore new and different cultures, I acknowledge it being a risk they don't want to take. I mean look at Dragon Isles; they have an opportunity to explore vastly rich new races and cultures and instead we have mostly retreads of existing races like new types of Centaur or Gnolls or Tuskarr. Way more familiarity than anything really new, and that's mostly because they know that most WoW players are actually quite conservative when it comes to new concepts.

I mean even look at the Kul Tirans they added and spent so much time and effort creating for BFA. Kul Tiran remain one of the least played Allied Races, and one of the lowest played Races overall in the game. As much as it makes sense to have Kul Tiran playable, it's kinda sad when a simple reskin of Blood Elves with Void magic ends up completely overshadowing all the time and effort put into a brand spanking new Kul Tiran option.

Most of the fanbase just wants more of the same. That's why we're seeing so many repeats of themes. This is the primary reason why people are lead to believe that there must be some pattern repeating different expansion themes. There isn't actually any pattern, it's more the case that Blizzard is taking less and less risks to explore completely new concepts because the existing playerbase isn't very open to change and new settings. Sad truth is, WoW's success is primarily drawn from retreading all of WC3's tropes, and they tend to gain more traction when presenting a new setting that is familiar (like old Draenor), rather than something that is completely new (like Pandaria).

You are aware that WoW's decline started in Cataclysm and that it was considered one of the worst expansions, considering the small amount of content at launch due to the revamp, the anti climatic fight with Deathwing, underwater zone and green jesus Thrall. They chose to retread this with Dragonflight.

There's nothing unfamiliar about Orcish culture. Or, since we've already got WoD, Ankoan one.

Considering it's a class that is exclusive to one Race and only has 2 specs, I doubt there was any real long-term planning involved here. If they spent multiple expansions worth of time planning this out, then a 2-spec class that can only be playable by 1 race and does not even have weapons or armor visible in its combat form doesn't lead me to believe it was planned very well. I really do see this class being a reaction to recent player feedback rather than something they intentionally planned since BFA.

Blizzard's new lazy approach?
Demon Hunters - 2 specs, 2 races, existing skeletons (so armor is not an issue).
You forget it began long ago.

[Triceron]

Well, you're right. It has some Pandaria vibes. But, its focus on Dragons make it unmistakenably a Cataclysm equivalent.

How long before an expansion is annouced do they work on a class?

It doesn't matter when their development starts, it matters when they actually plan a class to be made. And from what we know from their own post-mortem discussions, it's always after the expansion's story and setting are known.

That is why I gauge predictions based on what potential expansions come next and what classes would fit what we can feasibly predict in the near future. That is the most surefire way to predict a future upcoming class. And so far it's been able to predict Demon Hunters and a Dragon themed class in succession to what we knew on the shortlist of future expansions.

You are aware that WoW's decline started in Cataclysm and that it was considered one of the worst expansions, considering the small amount of content at launch due to the revamp, the anti climatic fight with Deathwing, underwater zone and green jesus Thrall. They chose to retread this with Dragonflight.

There's nothing unfamiliar about Orcish culture. Or, since we've already got WoD, Ankoan one.

I'm well aware since Cata was the last time I subbed to WoW.

Player sub decline after Cataclysm was an inevitable thing for any game lasting over certain number of years and simply 'getting old'. WoW being relevant at all today with a sub fee intact is well beyond the normal standard for MMO's.

Dragons are a rich theme to explore and Dragon Isles was even planned as far back as Vanilla. Cataclysm having dragon lore doesn't mean Dragonflight is a retread of Cataclysm. Dragon Isles was already built and in the lore and cut from the original WoW Vanilla beta.

And again, we could even consider TBC, Wrath, Legion and BFA to be drsgon expansions because they all featured Dragons prominently in parts of the story too. It's all a matter of perspective. If I look at Cataclysm, I actually consider it an Old God/Twilight's Hammer expansion since every boss is related to being an agent of the Old Gods. Deathwing was merely a giant Draconic agent of Old Gods, which could only be defeated by the powers he locked away in the demon soul.

Blizzard's new lazy approach?
Demon Hunters - 2 specs, 2 races, existing skeletons (so armor is not an issue).
You forget it began long ago.

Demon Hunter I give more leeway because it was a niche concept to begin with. Evoker has no excuse, really, but is understandable having less because Blizzard simply doesn't have the same budget as they used to for developing WoW today.

Hell, lack of resources could literally have been the reason Dark Rangers weren't playable and content got cut. And yes, I imply content was cut considering 8.1 was when we first saw the Velonara quest, and only now have we seen any indication of it continuing. I double down on my tinfoil hat theory that they were initially planned to be playable and got cut. Too many things point at this, many of which you have pointed out yourself like the prominence of Sylvanas or the creation of the Night Elf Dark Rangers and all the banshee abilities Sylvanas had in recent years.

[Mechagnome]

lol so putting a texture available for PCs to use at the barbershop costs 100k worth of man hours and production? got it.

Betting it takes more than $50 to flesh out, design, and make customizable to say nothing of the animations, gear (if they even wear any), heritage armor, a rep system that makes sense for earning Exalted with them, potentially new mounts, and at the very least the original artwork to give us a pinch of their history, not to mention the opening cinematics for race creation with voice over actors, music, etc.

If you don't understand game design concept and business expense, then it is better to remain silent and thought a fool than to type it all out and remove all doubt.

- - - Updated - - -

Void Elves lack the typical red eyes that goths want. Which is weird, because red is a void colour, but they likely never got them to prevent that community from complaining the way Night Elves did about Nightborne.

Mess of a situation.

This is another SOLID response. Thank you.

- - - Updated - - -

lmao again with someone using an mmo-champion poll as empirical evidence

Hardly Empirical. I even notated the "SMALL SAMPLE SIZE" and recommended taking it to the main forums where it would STILL get a low level of responses. Sethrak was last expac. No one wants more of the same. None of us. Also, we just delt with sethrak. Personally, I am uninterested.

- - - Updated - - -

I'd just like to point out that this specific claim is impossible to prove as true. We have the two events happening at the same time, but we have zero concrete evidence that they're connected.

- - - Updated - - -


What? Are you saying "90% of the player base wanted pandaren monks"?

Depends... did you read what I wrote?

- - - Updated - - -

90% of what? where did that number come from? And where did you come up with $100,000 from?

It's called approximation. It is what happens when the exact number is unavailable. Personally, I never wanted Pandas or Pandaland, I am likely the minority.

[username993720]

It doesn't matter when their development starts, it matters when they actually plan a class to be made. And from what we know from their own post-mortem discussions, it's always after the expansion's story and setting are known.

That is why I gauge predictions based on what potential expansions come next and what classes would fit what we can feasibly predict in the near future. That is the most surefire way to predict a future upcoming class. And so far it's been able to predict Demon Hunters and a Dragon themed class in succession to what we knew on the shortlist of future expansions.

I don't disagree. The theme of the expansion determines the class. Yet, you can't predict all of the expansion themes to come and, therefore, eliminate classes by it.

I'm well aware since Cata was the last time I subbed to WoW.

Player sub decline after Cataclysm was an inevitable thing for any game lasting over certain number of years and simply 'getting old'. WoW being relevant at all today with a sub fee intact is well beyond the normal standard for MMO's.

Dragons are a rich theme to explore and Dragon Isles was even planned as far back as Vanilla. Cataclysm having dragon lore doesn't mean Dragonflight is a retread of Cataclysm. Dragon Isles was already built and in the lore and cut from the original WoW Vanilla beta.

And again, we could even consider TBC, Wrath, Legion and BFA to be drsgon expansions because they all featured Dragons prominently in parts of the story too. It's all a matter of perspective. If I look at Cataclysm, I actually consider it an Old God/Twilight's Hammer expansion since every boss is related to being an agent of the Old Gods. Deathwing was merely a giant Draconic agent of Old Gods, which could only be defeated by the powers he locked away in the demon soul.

Come on... that's like calling Shadowlands a non-death expansion or Legion a non-legion expansion.

Demon Hunter I give more leeway because it was a niche concept to begin with. Evoker has no excuse, really, but is understandable having less because Blizzard simply doesn't have the same budget as they used to for developing WoW today.

Hell, lack of resources could literally have been the reason Dark Rangers weren't playable and content got cut. And yes, I imply content was cut considering 8.1 was when we first saw the Velonara quest, and only now have we seen any indication of it continuing. I double down on my tinfoil hat theory that they were initially planned to be playable and got cut. Too many things point at this, many of which you have pointed out yourself like the prominence of Sylvanas or the creation of the Night Elf Dark Rangers and all the banshee abilities Sylvanas had in recent years.

Where does it say that their budget went down?
I see it as being lazy for the purpose of creating more profit for less work.

[Triceron]

I don't disagree. The theme of the expansion determines the class. Yet, you can't predict all of the expansion themes to come and, therefore, eliminate classes by it.

It's better than blindly assuming that X Y Z classes will all be playable sometime in the far future.

Come on... that's like calling Shadowlands a non-death expansion or Legion a non-legion expansion.

Deathwing was literally the only connection to Dragons, and he was the only reason the Aspects were involved at all. The entire theme of the expansion was Old God agents, which is why the major raids included Cho'gall and the Twilights Hammer cultists and the Elemental Lords.

Like most expansions, they aren't really just containers of one theme. They contain many themes, from which people choose to interpret what is and is not relevant.

As an argument I made before, Legion at the outset is very Demon themed, but if you actually do all the questing on Broken Isles then you'd realize that the entire Pillars of Creation storyline and all of the villains you meet on the Broken Isles are actually Old God related, not demonic. Xavius, Azshara, the Drogbar King and Deathwing's lair are all Old God themed, not Legion. The only main things demon themed are Broken Shore, the Invasions, and the mid tier and end tier raids. The actual leveling content had relatively little to do with Demons at all.

Where does it say that their budget went down?
I see it as being lazy for the purpose of creating more profit for less work.

We've known this since the first major budget cuts back in 2019. They cut out a significant percent of the WoW workforce. 800 layoffs, which included a lot of community managers, GM's and Quality Assurance people.

https://twitter.com/jasonschreier/st...06632235921408

This has been an ongoing thing that has not only affected WoW, but plenty of other games as well like Heroes of the Storm and most recently, the whole WC3 Reforged fiasco.

https://www.ign.com/articles/special...t-a-crossroads

Some feel Blizzard has been on the decline over the past three or four years amid layoffs, budget cuts, and a lack of major releases.


https://us.forums.blizzard.com/en/wo...tment/947369/3

This thread, while admittedly full of speculation, pretty much captures the overall 'big picture' of what's going on. There is no concrete proof for Blizzard officially saying 'Hey we cut our budget!', nothing like this exists. Yet based on their answers to interview questions like 'We hear you and we're doing our best to get to it' and the lowered amount of content or high amount of corner-cutting in recent expansions, it's pretty clear that they don't have the 'creative freedom' that they once used to have.

[wowrefugee]

.

His post was about red eyes/undead skin already in the files that could be used for Dark Ranger barbershop customization. The fact you misunderstood his post and then was pretentious enough to post this:

If you don't understand game design concept and business expense, then it is better to remain silent and thought a fool than to type it all out and remove all doubt.

Is hilarious and embarrassing.

To your other points:
Allied races no longer require reputation to unlock.

Darkfallen wouldn't require new animations or new armor mapping.

No, 90% of people did not like Pandas. You must be new and missed the hate MoP got.