Poll: Do you like the Drac'thyr Evoker?

Page 10 of 27 FirstFirst ...
8
9
10
11
12
20
... LastLast
  1. #181
    Haven’t played Evoker, so I can’t tell. As for Dracthyr, don’t like the race locked to one class.

  2. #182
    Quote Originally Posted by Gumble View Post
    Its not a new race. Its BE and human models with mardi gras outfits.
    What? Why are you ignoring Dracthyr form which is the new race?




    I said they could be that or make it a model shift like bear form. It could be one or the other. I am able to do everything in Sandstone Drake form and get through every door. What would make it not work due to size? I've made my bear bigger than the drake and still able to play in raid quite easily.
    Being able to do it is vastly different from doing it as a norm... you also use the term "quite easily" which means it made a difference. And yes, during progs asking people to not cause unnecessary confusion or using items to make them huge so it blocks for others is showing it's a problem.

    Being able to do it for fun is another matter.



    2 specs, limited race looks, no other classes the race can be, and a form that is literally just an Argonian on a worgen skeleton?

    Yep, lazy.
    You're solution is more lazy... Do you want them to be lazy or more lazy?

  3. #183
    Quote Originally Posted by Kumorii View Post
    You're solution is more lazy... Do you want them to be lazy or more lazy?
    I wanted them to make a dragon class, not a lizardman class.

  4. #184
    The Unstoppable Force Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Dragon Isles
    Posts
    23,123
    Quote Originally Posted by Gumble View Post
    We shall see on the customizations, but no tank spec kills that class for me.

    As far as lizardmen or no "dragon" class, I feel like you are granting them belief that their own game shows is simply not true.

    The type of dragon class people would have been happy with

    A) Visage like they did (but of any race that dragons can mimic)
    B) Dragon flight form
    C) Ability to become a dragon in combat (either through form shift or cooldowns)
    TBF, if Blizzard had given every race the level of customization they're supposedly giving this custom race, it would have ate up dev time. Again, limiting the Visage form is decision that I understand, and simply isn't a deal breaker IMO. The vast majority of players would have been elves and humans anyway. Also its not like they can't add more Visage races later on.

    Dragon Flight form IS an issue for me though. It should be a no brainer that Dracthyr get flight in old content. We'll see what happens, but I think that Blizzard simply doesn't want to give another class flightform because of druids. I DO like that the Dracthyr will be able to do Dragonflight on dragon isles. That's something I suppose.

    We are getting the ability to be a dragon in combat. Not a huge, four-legged one, but a sizeable two legged one that has some very impressive abilities. Also there are examples of bipedal dragons in other media, so I can tolerate a Dracthyr.



    C would be the question. Can you do a form or cooldown dragon in combat?

    Answer, YEP, its already been done. Between druid forms, scaling effect visuals for others in the raid, and cooldown forms like Meta that show you could easily make dragons in combat a thing.


    So, them saying they had to do it the way they did is simply a lie. Its lazy and low effort. They have all of the components they would need to make an ACTUAL dragon class, and they chose to go with these bipedal lizards.


    If you like these, congratz to you. But this sucks for a lot of people that were looking for actual dragons, which these simply are not.
    Well consider that in combat, you're going to be in dragon form all the time. I'm fine with that as well, in fact that was my original concept for Dragonborne, but I had to modify it because permenant dragon form was an issue. While I have no problem with visages being able to be used in combat, the character really should spend the vast majority of combat (like 95%) in dragon form. Given that Evokers have tail and wing attacks, and can fly in combat, I think doing something more akin to Worgen is the smartest way to go.

    At the end of the day, we wanted to be able to play as dragons empowered by the dragonflights. That's exactly what we're getting.
    Last edited by Teriz; 2022-04-28 at 02:43 PM.

  5. #185
    Quote Originally Posted by Gumble View Post
    I wanted them to make a dragon class, not a lizardman class.
    That's fair... using "lazy" as an argument for things you don't like is just weird.
    People say it's lazy that DH only have 2 specs and here I am thinking it makes perfect sense and a 3rd spec would be a hamfisted mess.
    Dunno why people have this focused idea on "bigger numbers = better".

    Though for me Drachthyr is more of a dragon fantasy than playing like the regular races with some horns and ugly textures slapped onto them... each to their own. I'm gonna stay away from visage form as much as I can because they look horrid.
    Last edited by Kumorii; 2022-04-28 at 02:45 PM.

  6. #186
    Quote Originally Posted by Theangryone View Post
    Haven’t played Evoker, so I can’t tell. As for Dracthyr, don’t like the race locked to one class.
    The race and class are one so you cant be an evoker without being a dracthyr, would make no sense if other races could be one.
    STAR-J4R9-YYK4 use this for 5000 credits in star citizen

  7. #187
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Also there are examples of bipedal dragons in other media, so I can tolerate a Dracthyr.
    They do look like things from other media (I think Argonians with wings), but they don't look like dragons from Warcraft. If you can tolerate them, enjoy them I suppose, but given you say "tolerate", I think you are trying to put the best face on this while understanding that this is not what people asked for.

  8. #188
    Quote Originally Posted by mst3kfan View Post
    All-in-all the whole Race, and Class are both underwhelming.

    While the model is probably going to be visually stunning, it could have just as easily been a visual overhaul, and more of a reuse of the already established Drakinoid form others have pointed out. In present iteration the Drac'thyr form looks WAY to... wimpy?

    Fundamentally, I agree with adding a new class. Their choice of whatever this Evoker is was... bold. Instead of adding something that's more of a fan favorite like the Tinker or something (Don't start whining and complaining about Dark Rangers. They are at best a theme, not a new "class"). Maybe it's just the name. I'm less concerned with only the Drac'thyr being able to play Evoker. It is no different then DHs at this point. What is a huge fowl is that the Drac'thyr can ONLY be Evoker. That is just complete and utter foolishness. They should be able to be most of the other classes. Though I would possibly consider they shouldn't be able to play a number of the classes.

    As far as playable Classes:
    Druid - Yes - Nature/Elements being very connected to Dragon flights. Druid would be feasible.
    Death Knight - No - Could be a swing since other dragons were risen in undeath, but I don't think it fits the theme. Also, the Drac'thyr were locked to Dragon Isles when all the Northrend stuff was occurring.
    Demon Hunter - No - Drac'thyr should NOT be connected to external sources of power Light/Fel ect...
    Evoker - Yes - New Drac'thyr only class.
    Hunter - Yes - No reason not to be Hunter.
    Monk - No - Could be a swing class. Initial feeling is NO.
    Mage - Yes - Dragons and Mages are synonymous
    Paladin - No - Drac'thyr should NOT be connected to external sources of power Light/Fel ect...
    Priest - No - Drac'thyr should NOT be connected to external sources of power Light/Fel ect...
    Rogue - Yes - No reason not to be Rogue.
    Shaman - Yes - Nature/Elements being very connected to Dragon flights. Shaman would be feasible.
    Warlock - No - Drac'thyr should NOT be connected to external sources of power Light/Fel ect...
    Warrior - Yes - No Reason not to be Warrior.

    Evoker spec choices are fine, but should include a Tank as well. I agree the whole two-spec concept is a poor choice. Just like with DHs, they could have easily given them a 3rd ranged spec as well.
    Only thing I'll comment on specifically is that DK's are no longer tied specifically to what was going on in Northrend, they're not locked in time to Arthas the Lich King and DK's are available to all of the current races because Bolvar has begun raising them since the end of BfA. The allied races don't go through the traditional starter experience for DK's. That said, it does make sense for the Drac'thyr to NOT be DK's because they weren't around during the end of BfA or during SL. I don't disagree with your logic on the classes though, I just don't care. Maybe they'll open them up to other classes at a later time after they've had time to acclimate to the world and learn new trades and whatever, but from a lore point of view it makes sense to me why they wouldn't know how to be other classes if they were specifically trained in being an Evoker, then that's all they would know when the woke up.

  9. #189
    The Unstoppable Force Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Dragon Isles
    Posts
    23,123
    Quote Originally Posted by Gumble View Post
    I wanted them to make a dragon class, not a lizardman class.
    You're a "lizardman" with wings, claws, a tail, and you can breathe various forms of dragon fire. If you saw a large reptilian creature flying around and roasting stuff with fire-breath, you would easily call that a dragon.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gumble View Post
    They do look like things from other media (I think Argonians with wings), but they don't look like dragons from Warcraft. If you can tolerate them, enjoy them I suppose, but given you say "tolerate", I think you are trying to put the best face on this while understanding that this is not what people asked for.
    I would have definitely preferred the standard dragon, of course. However, let's not pretend that people wouldn't be complaining about that as well. Again, the Dracthyr are a fine stand-in for a standard looking dragon.
    Last edited by Teriz; 2022-04-28 at 02:52 PM.

  10. #190
    Quote Originally Posted by Kumorii View Post
    That's fair... using "lazy" as an argument for things you don't like is just weird.
    People say it's lazy that DH only have 2 specs and here I am thinking it makes perfect sense and a 3rd spec would be a hamfisted mess.
    Dunno why people have this focused idea on "bigger numbers = better".

    Though for me Drachthyr is more of a dragon fantasy than playing like the regular races with some horns and ugly textures slapped onto them... each to their own. I'm gonna stay away from visage form as much as I can because they look horrid.

    DHs having 2 specs made sense because healer makes no sense for them. They could be given a ranged dps spec (I made one awhile ago) where they throw glaives or cast using them, but it isn't required.

    A dragon class not having a black dragon influenced spec when they were MADE by THE black dragon, makes zero sense. They have Red,Blue,Bronze,Green..... but no black? Why not? Especially since they were made by a black dragon. It looks like they simply didn't want to do the work to make a tank black dragon spec work.

    And you keep saying my suggestion is "more lazy" than what Blizzard is doing without actually detailing how it would be.


    They are using a tiny subset of models to create the visage, I want them to use "almost" all the models to create visages.

    They are making 2 specs, I want 3 specs.

    They are making their race able to be 1 class, I want it to be able to be MANY classes.

    They are making the "dragon" aspect of the class a combat shift, which means they are just a skin on top of the worgen skeleton and mechanics. I wanted them to craft a dragon form (likely chromatic to make sense for all the different spec/flights) that the character could shift into like bear form or flight form or Meta form.


    You can argue that the last part is approximately similar work between either option, both are just retrofitting a new skin on top of existing game mechanics with new graphics and spells, but everything else is requesting more work from them than they are providing.


    So, I say again, choosing to limit the class/race in the ways they have feels lazy, and the "dragon" they are presenting feels like something not from the Warcraft universe that doesn't fit with the lore they are even establishing for it.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    I would have definitely preferred the standard dragon, of course. However, let's not pretend that people wouldn't be complaining about that as well. Again, the Dracthyr are a fine stand-in for a standard looking dragon.
    Again, if you like it, I'm happy for you. I'm not and I don't think its fine.

  11. #191
    The Unstoppable Force Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Dragon Isles
    Posts
    23,123
    Yeah, there should have been a tanking spec. I think the problem is that Blizzard appears to not want to take any chances with the tank spec, and wants them all to adhere strongly toward melee without any deviation. They did the exact same thing when Warlocks were a hair away from becoming legitimate faux ranged tank via Dark Apotheosis.

    I would have liked to see a faux ranged tanking spec using the black dragonflight, but I don't think Blizzard even wants to go that far. So with Blizzard pushing this class heavily in the direction of being ranged, and them wanting all tanks to be heavily melee, they simply opted for 2 specs.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Gumble View Post
    Again, if you like it, I'm happy for you. I'm not and I don't think its fine.
    Call me crazy, but I think once you roll one, check out all the customizations, design your dragon the way you want to design it (within Blizzard's parameters), and actually get to play it, I think you're going to really enjoy the class.

  12. #192
    Field Marshal THC BANDIT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Location
    Underverse
    Posts
    57
    You have to understand Teriz is very ill.. he cannot see the truth and if he does.. HE MELTS AWAY

  13. #193
    Quote Originally Posted by Gumble View Post
    DHs having 2 specs made sense because healer makes no sense for them. They could be given a ranged dps spec (I made one awhile ago) where they throw glaives or cast using them, but it isn't required.

    A dragon class not having a black dragon influenced spec when they were MADE by THE black dragon, makes zero sense. They have Red,Blue,Bronze,Green..... but no black? Why not? Especially since they were made by a black dragon. It looks like they simply didn't want to do the work to make a tank black dragon spec work.

    And you keep saying my suggestion is "more lazy" than what Blizzard is doing without actually detailing how it would be.


    They are using a tiny subset of models to create the visage, I want them to use "almost" all the models to create visages.

    They are making 2 specs, I want 3 specs.

    They are making their race able to be 1 class, I want it to be able to be MANY classes.

    They are making the "dragon" aspect of the class a combat shift, which means they are just a skin on top of the worgen skeleton and mechanics. I wanted them to craft a dragon form (likely chromatic to make sense for all the different spec/flights) that the character could shift into like bear form or flight form or Meta form.


    You can argue that the last part is approximately similar work between either option, both are just retrofitting a new skin on top of existing game mechanics with new graphics and spells, but everything else is requesting more work from them than they are providing.


    So, I say again, choosing to limit the class/race in the ways they have feels lazy, and the "dragon" they are presenting feels like something not from the Warcraft universe that doesn't fit with the lore they are even establishing for it.

    - - - Updated - - -



    Again, if you like it, I'm happy for you. I'm not and I don't think its fine.
    In the end neither of us will know which path is truly more lazy... and in the end. It's actually irrelevant. If your example or mine is more "lazy" that won't change that you want it, right?

    Even if your ideas were 20x more work, I still wouldn't want it.
    Even if creating the Drachtyr takes 10x more time to create than some customization pieces and reusing dragon models and animations for certain abilities, you still wouldn't want Dracthyr.

    3rd spec though I agree on that they could have, but I also understand the argument they presented. I don't agree with 100% but I get it...
    Though they have said multiple times they aren't ruling out making a 3rd spec for them, because there is room for it. The entire background of them is enough to create 5 specs I would say.
    They've also said that they are looking into to unlock classes for Drachtyr later on, but not in DF...(or it was unlocking evoker for other races, or maybe both? Can't remember).
    Last edited by Kumorii; 2022-04-28 at 03:14 PM.

  14. #194
    I'm looking forward to it. I completely buy into the reasoning that the class is going to be about fighting *as* a dragon, so I don't mind the single race/class combo.

    Ideally it would have more visage forms, which would turn the class into a druid-like (ie it's primarily a class with a combat form), except for the background factor it's a dragonthingy that turns into an elf, and not an elf that turns into a bear. Fingers crossed that we get at least tauren and gnomes as the art team gets around to it. If it had more visage options it would really just be a class that "overwrites" your racials, because you're "secretly" a dragon.

  15. #195
    The Unstoppable Force Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Dragon Isles
    Posts
    23,123
    Quote Originally Posted by THC BANDIT View Post
    You have to understand Teriz is very ill.. he cannot see the truth and if he does.. HE MELTS AWAY
    Uh, what truth do you think I'm denying or ignoring here? I've made it quite clear that I wanted a dragon class that gives me access to visage forms and the powers of the dragonflights ala Alexstraza, Kalecgos and others. The Dracthyr being bipedal instead of quadrupedal isn't a big enough issue for me to deny Blizzard's achievement here, and the new and unique gameplay opportunity it can potentially provide. In short, I'm not going to miss the forest for a tree here and there.

  16. #196
    Quote Originally Posted by Gumble View Post
    A dragon class not having a black dragon influenced spec when they were MADE by THE black dragon, makes zero sense. They have Red,Blue,Bronze,Green..... but no black? Why not? Especially since they were made by a black dragon. It looks like they simply didn't want to do the work to make a tank black dragon spec work.
    They wanted to make an intellect class, you know the class type that has not received any new classes since release of the base game, its never going to be a tank or melee so everyone needs to accept that, the dps spec will likely have a few abilities covering the black flight and maybe the same for healing spec. Dragons are a magic class to the core, im thinking the black dragon spell with be like a large cd type, since there is only room for 1-2 spells focused on each flight before the bars would be covered.
    STAR-J4R9-YYK4 use this for 5000 credits in star citizen

  17. #197
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Call me crazy, but I think once you roll one, check out all the customizations, design your dragon the way you want to design it (within Blizzard's parameters), and actually get to play it, I think you're going to really enjoy the class.
    I play tanks, and a warlock. I'd be pretty happy to get a tank warlock

    As is, the new class just sounds like Priest to me, and it has never interested me. (I did marry one, so go figure)

  18. #198
    Quote Originally Posted by kenn9530 View Post
    They wanted to make an intellect class, you know the class type that has not received any new classes since release of the base game, its never going to be a tank or melee so everyone needs to accept that, the dps spec will likely have a few abilities covering the black flight and maybe the same for healing spec. Dragons are a magic class to the core, im thinking the black dragon spell with be like a large cd type, since there is only room for 1-2 spells focused on each flight before the bars would be covered.
    I mean, best we have from blizzard is that they are open to a 3rd spec, but PROBABLY not a tank due to the mobility motif the class is surrounding. Would be hell for melee to have a tank dance around the place, flying across the room and shit. Or they have to remove that concept, but that feels like it goes against the class fantasy they wanted to portray. So either melee or another ranged as 3rd spec. IF it happens.

    But saying never as of now is a bit early.

  19. #199
    My vote goes to yes because it's different from the usual dragons that we have seen, and as a class it's different from what we have. As someone who's got a toon of every class and my main gameplay is to experience the game with all these classes, it being different means a lot. The last thing I want is more of the same.
    Last edited by catalystical; 2022-04-28 at 03:41 PM.

  20. #200
    Quote Originally Posted by THC BANDIT View Post
    You have to understand Teriz is very ill.. he cannot see the truth and if he does.. HE MELTS AWAY
    No, he just knows that blizz wont change a thing about Dracthyr, so he atleast copes with what we have. As opposed to me :''GIVE ME QUADRUPEDAL DRAGONS YOU COWARDS''

Posting Permissions

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