Its incredible that there hasn't been a new ranged class added to the game.

[Teriz]

You just end up with a class even less played than Monks, then. Demon Hunters could get away with it because people like elves. People don't like gnomes and goblins, and most players are casuals who select races based on looks above all, and aren't going to switch to a shorty even if Tinkers are OP.

Well why do people not like Gnomes or Goblins? Because they're short? Mechs make them the same size as fully armored male Tauren or male Draenei. Because they look silly? The mechs don't look silly, and will hide about 90% of the character. Because Goblins and Gnomes look out of place? Mechs and technology coincide perfectly with their racial thematics and lore.

Furthermore, the archetype is too broad to be limited to three races. Draenei, Forsaken, Dwarves and Orcs have proven that they can build gadgets and mech suits as well, and the class having different skins per race to an extent would help the fantasy a lot more than pigeonholding them into gnomish or goblin aesthetics, neither of which are especially popular.

Unfortunately Mech-based concept doesn't align itself with the other races. Out of that group, only the Draenei pilot mechs, and they don't use mechanical technology, and they're already large, so that means they would be squished, which looks silly in combat. Also the Tinker is based on Goblin tech, and the Gnomes utilized Goblin tech via Blackfuse to create mechs like Mekkatorque's mech.

I say keep it among the Goblins and the Gnomes.

[Aresk]

Demon Hunters could get away with it because people like elves.

I stopped playing my orc and my demon hunter because my orc warlock lost Metamorphosis and I got sick of the blood elf aesthetic. While this an argument against this particular line, it just further supports your other statements that aesthetic is important and expanding a class to more races tends to be better (though I would argue mag'har make more sense than orcs based on their assistance with goblin engineering in the Mechagon questline, and lightforged make more sense than draenei since they're the ones with the lightforged warframes).

[Ielenia]

Yeah, what happened with Shadowlands is pretty irrelevant to what we're talking about here.

Once again: it's amazing how you're such a stickler for the "rules" when they suit you, but then promptly ignore them when they go against what you want. MoP should've come with just a class, came with one extra race. WoD should have had at least 3 raid tiers. Only got 2. New classes should be open for a lot of races, Legion introduced one available to only 2. Etc, etc. Which is why saying "this is how Blizzard has done in the past, hence why they're going to continue doing in the future" is absolutely meaningless especially in a game that Blizzard constantly iterates and innovates in every single expansion.

In the case of Shadowlands, no new class concept matched the theme of the expansion, so no new class was introduced.

This is objectively false because you know a necromancer concept would've fit just fine, and you've been championing the tinker as a "solution against fighting death".

I'm talking about Blizzard sticking to their franchises and concepts with their new class inclusions, and typically that comes from WC3 and increasingly HotS.

And I'm asking: why should they, considering they have a much richer well to pull ideas from with all the other different fantasy universes? Sounds rather short-sighted to intentionally limit themselves. And, I'll remind you once again: the monk class was... roughly 80% (if not more) based on external sources.

Yet MoP is now considered one of the best expansions in the history of WoW.

Not in everyone's eyes. And regardless of that, one can still like the expansion and still think the more whimsical-looking aspect of MoP was very different than the rest of what WoW had to offer before that: Azeroth is being invaded by demons right at the start of TBC, Azeroth is being overrun by the undead right at the start of Wrath. Azeroth was being broken by Deathwing right at the start. And then... whimsical little land, full of joy and pandaren, talking about 'slowing down' and 'life is to be savored', at the start.

If Hunters didn't negate your made up rule, why were Hunters a completely ranged class for 12/15 years of WoW,

Survival could easily be turned into a melee spec until MoP when the new talent trees arrived. If memory serves, all active abilities in the Survival tree were either about the traps, or melee attacks.

and why is the spec based on Rexxar (BM) still a ranged spec?

You do know that units don't have to be one-hundred percent represented, right? The WC3 Beastmaster is represented by its most iconic feature: mastery over beasts.

You're comparing your made up rule to actual laws. It's laughable.

Laws are nothing more, and nothing less, than rules.

According to Blizzard, Pandaren were one of the most requested races leading up to their release in MoP.

https://wow.gamepedia.com/History_of...en_in_Warcraft

Yeah. I'm gonna call BS on Kosak on that. Pandarens being "by far the most requested feature" is full-on BS, considering high elf requests existed since vanilla, and I've kept seeing threads and threads about HEs in both the official forums and here for years, but I never saw anything even remotely asking for pandaren.

- - - Updated - - -

I disagree. I think the concept of the Tinker is so strong that it would lead to an explosion in the popularity of the Gnome and Goblin (and Mechagnome) races. Keep in mind, we're talking about the ability to pilot mechs, which is a very popular concept in of itself. Allowing these races to pilot mechs eliminates the majority of the reasons people dislike playing those classes. Of course a lot of that depends on if Blizzard implements the class correctly.

No, it doesn't. It does absolutely nothing to "eliminate the majority of reasons" people dislike playing those races. You have been proven wrong on that regard:

[Shiza]

Chen Stormstout was actually a very popular and iconic Warcraft figure before MoP. I'm pretty sure he still is. The problem with Monks was they weren't OP when they were released, and you had to start them at level. DKs and DHs benefit from having inherent level boosts, so you don't have to start at level 1 to play them. The Dark Ranger would add nothing to the game. Hunters fulfill any niche they would bring into the game.

He wasn't, though. He was a fun gimmick character, but not an iconic character people would want to play as. These characters are Sylvanas, Illidan or Arthas. And guess what, the classes where you can basically play as Arthas or Illidan are the more popular additions to the games.

It's important to note that Gnomes and Goblins aren't played much because there is no class that matches their racial lore or aesthetics. It's quite jarring to start a mage in an irradiated factory full of robots, or as a Hunter in leather with a pet crab in a sprawling city complete with highways and cars.

Which is something you love to claim but never back up with any proof. It is just your obsession with your favorite race secretly being more popular than human and elves, when this is simply not true. People prefer pretty races and afterwards races which are somehow cool. Gimmick races like the gnomes who are neither that cute nore cool or pretty are simply always the least popular option. Having its own class won't change this, especially since World of Warcraft advertized Gnomes through mages and rogues. Yet guess what, people prefered to have a night elf or undead rogue, because those are cooler.

The difference being that NONE of the Tinker's WC3 or HotS abilities exist in the Hunter class or Engineering. ALL of the Necromancer's WC3 abilities exist in the Death Knight and Warlock classes.

Which shouldn't matter in terms of what panders more to the fanbase.

I disagree. I think the concept of the Tinker is so strong that it would lead to an explosion in the popularity of the Gnome and Goblin (and Mechagnome) races. Keep in mind, we're talking about the ability to pilot mechs, which is a very popular concept in of itself. Allowing these races to pilot mechs eliminates the majority of the reasons people dislike playing those classes. Of course a lot of that depends on if Blizzard implements the class correctly.

Which is outright delusional. Is it that important to you that you were secretly always the cool guy and that the elf fans, the dark ranger and the necromancer fans were secretly just out of touch? Pandaren had a class specifically tailored to them. It neither made the class nor the race popular, despite the fact that Brewmaster was for the longest time the best tank and Mistweaver had the most unique and fun playstyle. Tailoring the class specifically to Pandaren just dragged the class down, when a more neutral design maybe would have made it more popular. And Pandaren are more popular than Gnomes. Even if Tinker would be available to all races, tailoring it towards gnomes would dampen their popularity instead of increasing the popularity of gnomes. Races like gnomes are just unpopular in any MMO. The way to salvage them would at best be to rewamp their model and make them more cute, like Lalafells in FF14 which are more popular than gnomes.

[Teriz]

Once again: it's amazing how you're such a stickler for the "rules" when they suit you, but then promptly ignore them when they go against what you want. MoP should've come with just a class, came with one extra race. WoD should have had at least 3 raid tiers. Only got 2. New classes should be open for a lot of races, Legion introduced one available to only 2. Etc, etc. Which is why saying "this is how Blizzard has done in the past, hence why they're going to continue doing in the future" is absolutely meaningless especially in a game that Blizzard constantly iterates and innovates in every single expansion.

This has already been addressed. I see no need to address it further.

This is objectively false because you know a necromancer concept would've fit just fine..

Blizzard disagrees. Blizzard views the Death Knight as the Necromancer class in WoW.

And I'm asking: why should they, considering they have a much richer well to pull ideas from with all the other different fantasy universes? Sounds rather short-sighted to intentionally limit themselves. And, I'll remind you once again: the monk class was... roughly 80% (if not more) based on external sources.

That's your opinion. I can imagine that Blizzard views their own fantasy universe as rich enough given their success. Also their expansion classes back that up because those expansion classes are directly from WC3 and HotS.

Not in everyone's eyes. And regardless of that, one can still like the expansion and still think the more whimsical-looking aspect of MoP was very different than the rest of what WoW had to offer before that: Azeroth is being invaded by demons right at the start of TBC, Azeroth is being overrun by the undead right at the start of Wrath. Azeroth was being broken by Deathwing right at the start. And then... whimsical little land, full of joy and pandaren, talking about 'slowing down' and 'life is to be savored', at the start.

Uh, I do believe that me saying that MoP is considered ONE of the best expansions in WoW's history means that it isn't viewed that way in "everyone's eyes".

Survival could easily be turned into a melee spec until MoP when the new talent trees arrived. If memory serves, all active abilities in the Survival tree were either about the traps, or melee attacks.

Let's not be silly please. No one played Survival seriously in melee.

You do know that units don't have to be one-hundred percent represented, right? The WC3 Beastmaster is represented by its most iconic feature: mastery over beasts.

And it's ultimate ability Stampede, which is only available in the BM spec.

Laws are nothing more, and nothing less, than rules.

And the point is that speeding laws exist, your "rule" that a WoW class' specs must all match the auto attack range of the WC3 or HotS hero does not exist.

Yeah. I'm gonna call BS on Kosak on that. Pandarens being "by far the most requested feature" is full-on BS, considering high elf requests existed since vanilla, and I've kept seeing threads and threads about HEs in both the official forums and here for years, but I never saw anything even remotely asking for pandaren.

Metzen said it as well. Why am I not surprised that you think you know more background information about WoW than the creators of the game.

- - - Updated - - -

He wasn't, though. He was a fun gimmick character, but not an iconic character people would want to play as. These characters are Sylvanas, Illidan or Arthas. And guess what, the classes where you can basically play as Arthas or Illidan are the more popular additions to the games.

Like I told another poster, Pandaren were one of the most requested races leading up to MoP. That's largely because of Chen Stormstout.

Which is something you love to claim but never back up with any proof. It is just your obsession with your favorite race secretly being more popular than human and elves, when this is simply not true. People prefer pretty races and afterwards races which are somehow cool. Gimmick races like the gnomes who are neither that cute nore cool or pretty are simply always the least popular option. Having its own class won't change this, especially since World of Warcraft advertized Gnomes through mages and rogues. Yet guess what, people prefered to have a night elf or undead rogue, because those are cooler.

My evidence is the popularity of the Tinker concept against the apparent unpopularity of Goblins and Gnomes in terms of players rolling those races. I know that I have no Goblin or Gnome characters in WoW because none of the classes fit those races. Further when I see either race in a prominent role in fan art or lore, they're almost always piloting mechs or using high end tech. Hell, now both Gnome and Goblin faction leaders pilot mechs, which makes a bizarre juxtaposition to a Goblin or Gnome playing a medieval RPG class.

Which shouldn't matter in terms of what panders more to the fanbase.

That wasn't the point of that statement. The point is that for all intents and purposes the Necromancer is in the class lineup, the Tinker is not.

Which is outright delusional. Is it that important to you that you were secretly always the cool guy and that the elf fans, the dark ranger and the necromancer fans were secretly just out of touch? Pandaren had a class specifically tailored to them. It neither made the class nor the race popular, despite the fact that Brewmaster was for the longest time the best tank and Mistweaver had the most unique and fun playstyle. Tailoring the class specifically to Pandaren just dragged the class down, when a more neutral design maybe would have made it more popular. And Pandaren are more popular than Gnomes. Even if Tinker would be available to all races, tailoring it towards gnomes would dampen their popularity instead of increasing the popularity of gnomes. Races like gnomes are just unpopular in any MMO. The way to salvage them would at best be to rewamp their model and make them more cute, like Lalafells in FF14 which are more popular than gnomes.

The difference being that Monks could be played by almost every race, and there was nothing unique about the class. In fact it became rather generic, because there was no real difference between a Pandaren Monk and BE monk, so why would you play the Pandaren?

The Tinker on the other hand should have models and animations for exclusive for each race just like the Druid class. Goblins, Gnomes, and Mechagnomes should have unique mech and robotic summon models for each race, and that would give the class more flavor, and gives the player more reason to choose one race over another. Again, a situation nothing like what happened with Pandaren and Monks.

[jellmoo]

Just gonna thorw out that if they were to implement Tinkers in the game and I couldn't play as a Dwarf, I'd riot. Ever since I first logged into WoW on launch, the coolest thing to me was that Dwarven rifle and mortar team, along with those Dwarven tanks.

Also, I'd have no real interest in a mech. I'd like to be running and gunning, dropping turrets and using tech gizmos.

[Ielenia]

This has already been addressed. I see no need to address it further.

You don't get to unilaterally say "it's been addressed" when it clearly wasn't.

Blizzard disagrees. Blizzard views the Death Knight as the Necromancer class in WoW.

Just like Blizzard viewed the warlock class as the 'playable demon hunter' before Legion?

That's your opinion.

Meaningless statement, since what you're saying it also an opinion, therefore just as valid.

can imagine that Blizzard views their own fantasy universe as rich enough given their success. Also their expansion classes back that up because those expansion classes are directly from WC3 and HotS.

Except they don't, because the monk is at least 80% based on sources outside Warcraft.

Uh, I do believe that me saying that MoP is considered ONE of the best expansions in WoW's history means that it isn't viewed that way in "everyone's eyes".

That's not what I wrote. Again, Teriz: read what other people write. What I actually wrote was that not everyone looks at Mists of Pandaria in the same way.

Let's not be silly please. No one played Survival seriously in melee.

No one? Really? Do you have proof of this? Not that it matters any, either way. The point is that the option was there since the beginning, kinda like the Feral spec for druids could be both melee dps and tank.

And it's ultimate ability Stampede, which is only available in the BM spec.

... Which is basically what I just wrote, dude. Read what people write!

And the point is that speeding laws exist, your "rule" that a WoW class' specs must all match the auto attack range of the WC3 or HotS hero does not exist.

Much like your rule about WoW classes having to be based off lore figures and/or WC3 units. Gee! Imagine that!

Metzen said it as well. Why am I not surprised that you think you know more background information about WoW than the creators of the game.

Makes me wonder where they were looking for that information, because it surely wasn't their own official forums.

[FelPlague]

Just gonna thorw out that if they were to implement Tinkers in the game and I couldn't play as a Dwarf, I'd riot. Ever since I first logged into WoW on launch, the coolest thing to me was that Dwarven rifle and mortar team, along with those Dwarven tanks.

Also, I'd have no real interest in a mech. I'd like to be running and gunning, dropping turrets and using tech gizmos.

Dwarf Human Gnome Mechagnome- maybe draenei
Undead Orc Goblin maghar orc- maybe belves
also mech would b e tank, turrets and gizmos dps, healer be doing potions and stuff, bassically an alchemist.

[Teriz]

Just gonna thorw out that if they were to implement Tinkers in the game and I couldn't play as a Dwarf, I'd riot. Ever since I first logged into WoW on launch, the coolest thing to me was that Dwarven rifle and mortar team, along with those Dwarven tanks.

Also, I'd have no real interest in a mech. I'd like to be running and gunning, dropping turrets and using tech gizmos.

Well you sort of have the Dwarven Riflemen within the Hunter class.

That said, I wouldn't be vehemently opposed to Dwarves also being tinkers and piloting mechs. I do like Gnome/Dwarf hybrid tech. Siege Tanks were awesome in WC3, and I love the Skybreaker design.

My only thing would be for them to make sure that each race gets tech that represents their race. Goblins get shredder-like mechs, Gnomes get Mekkatorque like mechs, and Dwarves get their mechs. Kind of like a combination of Paladins, Druids, and Shaman getting unique stuff based on their playable races.

- - - Updated - - -

Dwarf Human Gnome Mechagnome- maybe draenei
Undead Orc Goblin maghar orc- maybe belves
also mech would b e tank, turrets and gizmos dps, healer be doing potions and stuff, bassically an alchemist.

Again, that only works if every single race has its own set of art assets (ala Druid forms).

[Kpmk]

You mean Mistweaver? Yeah that is kinda in a middle ground between ranged and melee but it is a monk so it is not as ranged as saaay a mage or a warlock.

- - - Updated - - -



Like Wow with 36 specs? :P

No, classes.

[jellmoo]

Well you sort of have the Dwarven Riflemen within the Hunter class.

True. Though it wasn't doable at launch as a petless Hunter wasn't a thing.

That said, I wouldn't be vehemently opposed to Dwarves also being tinkers and piloting mechs. I do like Gnome/Dwarf hybrid tech. Siege Tanks were awesome in WC3, and I love the Skybreaker design.

My only thing would be for them to make sure that each race gets tech that represents their race. Goblins get shredder-like mechs, Gnomes get Mekkatorque like mechs, and Dwarves get their mechs. Kind of like a combination of Paladins, Druids, and Shaman getting unique stuff based on their playable races.

To get around the size issue for larger races, I could the mech be used only as a cooldown ability. Call a mech drop, for example, with different abilities depending on whether you're in a DPS or Tank spec. That way, even if you're a larger race it wouldn't be terribly obnoxious to be in a mech as it would be for a limited time.

[shoegazing]

Yes, they have changed a lot in some cases, but their over arching concept has remained the same. Probably the biggest reworks that come to mind are demonology warlock and maybe druids. Everything else, for the most part, have been somewhat modernization/improvements on specs but very little that has fundamentally changed specs on the level that say, the demonology rework did.

Outlaw and Subtlety Rogues would like a word with you.

[Teriz]

True. Though it wasn't doable at launch as a petless Hunter wasn't a thing.

True.

To get around the size issue for larger races, I could the mech be used only as a cooldown ability. Call a mech drop, for example, with different abilities depending on whether you're in a DPS or Tank spec. That way, even if you're a larger race it wouldn't be terribly obnoxious to be in a mech as it would be for a limited time.

I'd rather not trade permanent mech just because of Draenei or orcs. I think a permanent mech should be the main selling point of the class.

It also harkens back to the original WC3 Tinker which had a permanent mech form, and Gazlowe and Mekkatorque who can also permanently pilot mechs.

[jellmoo]

I'd rather not trade permanent mech just because of Draenei or orcs. I think a permanent mech should be the main selling point of the class.

It also harkens back to the original WC3 Tinker which had a permanent mech form, and Gazlowe and Mekkatorque who can also permanently pilot mechs.

Not suggesting it so much as I'm thinking it could be Blizzard's approach. NPCs often have feats and abilities that PCs either do not have, or have in a more limited capacity.

[Teriz]

Not suggesting it so much as I'm thinking it could be Blizzard's approach. NPCs often have feats and abilities that PCs either do not have, or have in a more limited capacity.

Yeah, I don't see Blizzard going that route. They've made it pretty clear that mechs are a major aspect of the concept, and I can't see that just being a cooldown. Also it makes a tanking spec far easier to create. I don't think Blizzard views Gnomes and Goblins the same way most people here do (utter disdain), so a class with just Gnomes, Goblins, and Mechagnomes is very possible. I think if Blizzard wants to broaden the appeal, they'll add Vulpeira and Dwarves, but that's it.

[jellmoo]

Yeah, I don't see Blizzard going that route. They've made it pretty clear that mechs are a major aspect of the concept, and I can't see that just being a cooldown. Also it makes a tanking spec far easier to create. I don't think Blizzard views Gnomes and Goblins the same way most people here do (utter disdain), so a class with just Gnomes, Goblins, and Mechagnomes is very possible. I think if Blizzard wants to broaden the appeal, they'll add Vulpeira and Dwarves, but that's it.

I think the biggest danger to that line of thinking is their most recent class example. With people wanting to play "Illidan", the limitations of Metamorphosis could be seen as Blizzard's attempt to keeping the popular NPC unique. They could take a similar approach with Tinkers, keeping the Mech as a cooldown, and possibly adding some mechlike abilities that very quickly add a transformative effect (think eye beam).

Blizzard has been very careful about keeping their big name NPCs pretty unique.

[Teriz]

I think the biggest danger to that line of thinking is their most recent class example. With people wanting to play "Illidan", the limitations of Metamorphosis could be seen as Blizzard's attempt to keeping the popular NPC unique. They could take a similar approach with Tinkers, keeping the Mech as a cooldown, and possibly adding some mechlike abilities that very quickly add a transformative effect (think eye beam).

Blizzard has been very careful about keeping their big name NPCs pretty unique.

The difference is that the demon hunter form is the general combat form of the concept. Metamorphosis is always depicted as a short term cool down in nearly every incarnation. On the flip side, the Tinker (in WoW at least) is always seen fighting inside a mech if it has one. Gazlowe and Mekkatorque since Legion are in permanent mech form. The Tinker hero in WC3 had a permanent mech form. Never has it been shown as a short term power-up like Metamorphosis.

Further, IMO it will provide better gameplay opportunities because the player can spend time inside the mech, and that gives Blizzard the opportunity to provide utility and QoL options that only that theme can provide. For example, Blizzard could allow Tinkers to “park” their mechs out of combat, and walk around without them, or pose with them. They could provide a “garage” option where you can customize or add to your mech. There could be abilities like Gazlowe’s Turboboost that increases movement speed while inside the mech and out of combat. There could be an Eject or self destruct ability that allows you to escape a bad situation. Finally there could be talents that can further augment the mech like transforming it into a tank for a short time, or allow your minions to connect to it to give you extra firepower.

In short, I don’t want to give that up just so Orcs and Draenei can make this class more generic.

[Shiza]

Like I told another poster, Pandaren were one of the most requested races leading up to MoP. That's largely because of Chen Stormstout.

Doesn't his invalidate your argument that Tinkers are often requested in the MMO-C Forums? Considering that Pandaren were largely requested and afterwards nobody ended up playing one? Isn't this more of an argument to tailor new classes towards popular races which are tried and tested? Humans, Elves, dark and edgy themes?

My evidence is the popularity of the Tinker concept against the apparent unpopularity of Goblins and Gnomes in terms of players rolling those races. I know that I have no Goblin or Gnome characters in WoW because none of the classes fit those races. Further when I see either race in a prominent role in fan art or lore, they're almost always piloting mechs or using high end tech. Hell, now both Gnome and Goblin faction leaders pilot mechs, which makes a bizarre juxtaposition to a Goblin or Gnome playing a medieval RPG class.

This isn't an evidence, its called a delusion. Numbers don't lie, gnomes are among the least played races period and considering the Pandaren, it is more likely that a class restricted to gnomes would fail than anything else. Requests don't matter because the Pandaren have proven, that those kind of demands come from minorities and nobody likes this kinds of races and classes. The successful races so far where the cool and pretty looking ones, the successful classes the dark ones, which are more styled after serious aspects of the WoW Lore instead of the meme content.

That wasn't the point of that statement. The point is that for all intents and purposes the Necromancer is in the class lineup, the Tinker is not.

But it is dark and fits well with races like humans, elves and Zandalari Trolls. So it is more likely to successful in the real game outside of your headcanon. So why shouldn't Blizz rather design classes which will be played? A Tinker, especially a gnome restricted one, would be only played by a minority of people because they enjoy the aesthetic. The majority of players would hate both the aesthetics and the races they are forced to play according to you and only be compelled to do so either due to an unique playstyle which literally could be given any aesthetically more pleasing class in terms of mechanics or because its meta.

The difference being that Monks could be played by almost every race, and there was nothing unique about the class. In fact it became rather generic, because there was no real difference between a Pandaren Monk and BE monk, so why would you play the Pandaren?

The Tinker on the other hand should have models and animations for exclusive for each race just like the Druid class. Goblins, Gnomes, and Mechagnomes should have unique mech and robotic summon models for each race, and that would give the class more flavor, and gives the player more reason to choose one race over another. Again, a situation nothing like what happened with Pandaren and Monks.

Not really. Monks are extensively styled towards Pandaren and Pandaren alone, with many abilities being connected to their celestials, not the demigods, loa, light, void or any more widespread force. They are designed to fit Pandaren lore and Pandaren Lore only and they failed to make Pandarens successful, while the Pandaren focus dragged the class down despite being able to play them with actually popular races. Facts don't care about your feelings dude and you are the biggest minority in the entire WoW Fandom. Not to forget that you spread your fanfiction as facts how Blizzard would operate. If they introduce tinkers, it is more likely than not that they would get exactly the same style for any race and that if there is a mecha, the difference would be at most differently colored skins, not entirely different models.

Having to creat new skins for Druids is likely already a major pain in Blizzards ass which prevents them from giving the class to more races, so they won't do it again. If you are lucky and you get Tinker, it will be absolutely open für any playable race. And if you are lucky, you get a blue mecha while the Horde gets a red one. Just look at Demon Hunters, Blood Elves and Night elves didn't get unique demon forms either.

[Teriz]

Doesn't his invalidate your argument that Tinkers are often requested in the MMO-C Forums? Considering that Pandaren were largely requested and afterwards nobody ended up playing one? Isn't this more of an argument to tailor new classes towards popular races which are tried and tested? Humans, Elves, dark and edgy themes?

No, because that leads to homogenization and a rather boring class and racial lineup. The game is better for having the Monk class and the Pandaren race, not worse. Not everyone enjoys dark and edgy themes, and if you want to make your game as appealing to the masses as possible, you should find a balance.

This isn't an evidence, its called a delusion. Numbers don't lie, gnomes are among the least played races period and considering the Pandaren, it is more likely that a class restricted to gnomes would fail than anything else. Requests don't matter because the Pandaren have proven, that those kind of demands come from minorities and nobody likes this kinds of races and classes. The successful races so far where the cool and pretty looking ones, the successful classes the dark ones, which are more styled after serious aspects of the WoW Lore instead of the meme content.

Except Monks aren't restricted to Pandaren, so that comparison is invalid. Also if Blizzard is worried about popularity, they can simply expand the Tinker class to related races. The tech models are for the most part already in game. A class that can be played by 9 races should be just fine in the popularity department.

But it is dark and fits well with races like humans, elves and Zandalari Trolls. So it is more likely to successful in the real game outside of your headcanon. So why shouldn't Blizz rather design classes which will be played? A Tinker, especially a gnome restricted one, would be only played by a minority of people because they enjoy the aesthetic. The majority of players would hate both the aesthetics and the races they are forced to play according to you and only be compelled to do so either due to an unique playstyle which literally could be given any aesthetically more pleasing class in terms of mechanics or because its meta.

Because in order to bring a valid Necromancer into the game you have to restructure Death Knight and Warlock classes. That will damage the existing player base, and cause people to leave the game. I disagree that it would be more successful, because it will play pretty much exactly like the existing Warlock class and people will wonder why Blizzard bothered in the first place, and again cause people to leave the game. A Tinker class would be something new and different within the class lineup, and only work to increase it since it won't affect any existing classes. It will also fill in some current gaps in the class lineup (like Hunters being the only ones who use guns for DPS), and provide much needed lore for playable races who don't really have a class that fits their lore. You should really try to keep your personal opinion out of this analysis.

Not really. Monks are extensively styled towards Pandaren and Pandaren alone, with many abilities being connected to their celestials, not the demigods, loa, light, void or any more widespread force. They are designed to fit Pandaren lore and Pandaren Lore only and they failed to make Pandarens successful, while the Pandaren focus dragged the class down despite being able to play them with actually popular races. Facts don't care about your feelings dude and you are the biggest minority in the entire WoW Fandom. Not to forget that you spread your fanfiction as facts how Blizzard would operate. If they introduce tinkers, it is more likely than not that they would get exactly the same style for any race and that if there is a mecha, the difference would be at most differently colored skins, not entirely different models.

Again, you're seeming to forget that nearly all races can play a Monk, and Pandaren don't get any special bonus for playing as one. That leads the Monk class to not feel very unique and special, but actually rather generic. Part of the Druid's popularity is that each race gets its own unique Druid forms. So if I want to play as a dinosaur, I HAVE to roll a Zalandari Troll. If I want a Paladin Raptor Mount, I HAVE to roll a Zalandari troll. These exclusive perks are part of the reason Zalandari Trolls are one of the most popular allied race. What's by far the most popular Z. Troll class? Druids.

Also if Blizzard is REALLY worried about Tinker popularity, they'll just expand the class to Draenei, Vulpeira, Dwarves, and/or Orcs. The Draenei already have their own mech and tech designs, and the Orcs can just use Iron Horde aesthetics.

Having to creat new skins for Druids is likely already a major pain in Blizzards ass which prevents them from giving the class to more races, so they won't do it again. If you are lucky and you get Tinker, it will be absolutely open für any playable race. And if you are lucky, you get a blue mecha while the Horde gets a red one. Just look at Demon Hunters, Blood Elves and Night elves didn't get unique demon forms either.

This is completely your opinion. You have no idea what Blizzard will or won't do. If Blizzard were as lazy as you believe them to be, they wouldn't have created so many allied races, and give Z.Trolls their own unique Druid forms. Further, the models for individual racial mechs already exist. If Blizzard wants to be lazy, they can just give Gnomes Mekkatorque's mech, give Goblins Gazlowe's Shredder, give Orcs a variation on the Fel annihilator, give Draenei (if applicable) the Lightforged Warframe, and make up something new for Mechagnomes and Vulpeira.

Simple.

[Ielenia]

This isn't an evidence, its called a delusion. Numbers don't lie, gnomes are among the least played races period and considering the Pandaren, it is more likely that a class restricted to gnomes would fail than anything else.

Teriz loves to claim that the reason goblins and gnomes aren't popular is because of "they don't have a class to represent them", despite having been proven wrong, already:


As we can see, the overwhelming majority of people that don't play gnomes cited the aesthetics of the race. In fact, nearly three times as many people chose "I don't like the aesthetics" than people who chose "there is no class for them". So, yeah, I would say I agree with you, there.

Not really. Monks are extensively styled towards Pandaren and Pandaren alone, with many abilities being connected to their celestials, not the demigods, loa, light, void or any more widespread force. They are designed to fit Pandaren lore and Pandaren Lore only and they failed to make Pandarens successful, while the Pandaren focus dragged the class down despite being able to play them with actually popular races. Facts don't care about your feelings dude and you are the biggest minority in the entire WoW Fandom. Not to forget that you spread your fanfiction as facts how Blizzard would operate. If they introduce tinkers, it is more likely than not that they would get exactly the same style for any race and that if there is a mecha, the difference would be at most differently colored skins, not entirely different models.

I agree one-hundred percent with what you said. It's downright amazing how Teriz says his strategy to make gnomes and goblins more popular will work, when we have that exact same strategy implemented for the monks and pandaren, and it did not work.

- - - Updated - - -

Except Monks aren't restricted to Pandaren,

If they were, they would have roughly 30% the population we have, today.