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

[Triceron]

A class concept that follows all of the guidelines of the previous three expansion classes actually. And if you combine Goblins, Gnomes, Mechagnomes and Vulpera (since we're concerned about population size) it's 8% of the current population. That's more than Monks, Rogues, Priests, Warlocks, and Shaman, and it's tied with Demon Hunters and DKs.

That's probably because Vulpera make up 4% of that number alone.

Since Tinker isn't ideally a Vulpera thing, I would say that the number you're looking at is closer to 3% of the population, considering Tinkers are not very much associated with Vulpera technology.

Even when you fudge the numbers with Vulpera, I would say it is not good enough.

Certainly, but obviously Blizzard disagrees, since they want a class that exactly matches the expansion theme.

Blizzard didn't add a class this expansion, period. I would say that it means Blizzard isn't confident in adding new classes period. That's why I think subclasses are the way to go.

And Pandaren martial arts isn't the same martial arts as the Scarlet Crusade Monks. We're not getting another Monk class.

No one is asking for another Monk class though. People are asking for Necromancers though, and the reskin idea seems to be pretty popular so far.

No, but they could still use metamorphosis. That's the difference.

So could Warlocks. Illidari showed nothing that Warlocks didn't already have.

NPCs lack everything that makes a Player class unique. Such as Vengeance and Eyebeams. That's why no NPC Dark Ranger uses Banshee abilities. It's simple, really.

[Teriz]

That's probably because Vulpera make up 4% of that number alone.

Since Tinker isn't ideally a Vulpera thing, I would say that the number you're looking at is closer to 3% of the population, considering Tinkers are not very much associated with Vulpera technology.

Actually it would be 5%, since Vulpera are only 3% of the current population.

Even when you fudge the numbers with Vulpera, I would say it is not good enough.

5% with a high chance of the number increasing. You could also add Dwarves into the mix, and we're right back into that previous range again.

Blizzard didn't add a class this expansion, period. I would say that it means Blizzard isn't confident in adding new classes period. That's why I think subclasses are the way to go.

Or it just means that they're not going to add Necromancers or Dark Rangers to the game since those are the classes that were the best fit for the theme of this expansion.

No one is asking for another Monk class though. People are asking for Necromancers though, and the reskin idea seems to be pretty popular so far.

Yet it's the same principle, and it sounds just as absurd.

So could Warlocks. Illidari showed nothing that Warlocks didn't already have.

Except melee abilities....

NPCs lack everything that makes a Player class unique. Such as Vengeance and Eyebeams. That's why no NPC Dark Ranger uses Banshee abilities. It's simple, really.

I'm just pointing out proof of concept. The Demon Hunters trained by Illidan showed that they were capable of achieving the same levels of power as Illidan himself, so that gives justification for a class like Illidan, because Illidan can reproduce Demon Hunters like himself.

The Lich King was shown to be able to produce Death Knights with Necromantic powers in WC3.

Pandaren Monks could obviously train anyone in the ways of Pandaren martial arts, and they were willing to do so due to their nature.


Sylvanas just raises undead MM Hunters. There ya go.

[Ielenia]

Which they do.

They don't.

If you insist they do, then please show me in the lore where it says that the dragons bestowed such abilities to those classes, and that this is not just a case of the abilities simply having the word 'dragon' in the name for the "cool" effect.

Okay, then name some dragon abilities.

I can't name what doesn't exist.

EDIT: Ok, let me add something to try to curb your attempts to weasel yourself out, Teriz: "dragon abilities" do not require the word "dragon" to be in the ability's name. Likewise, an ability with the word "dragon" in it does not mean it's an actual "dragon ability".

An example: the warlocks's ability "Eye of Kilrogg". It does NOT summon an actual eye of Kilrogg.

[Triceron]

Actually it would be 5%, since Vulpera are only 3% of the current population.

5% with a high chance of the number increasing. You could also add Dwarves into the mix, and we're right back into that previous range again.

Keep in mind, we are talking about the amount of people this would appeal to. The amount of people who would actually roll a Tinker would then be a fraction of this number. Not looking good, yo.

I'd also consider that many Gnome and Goblin fans likely have multiple alts which are Gnomes and Goblins. That skews things quite a bit.

Or it just means that they're not going to add Necromancers or Dark Rangers to the game since those are the classes that were the best fit for the theme of this expansion.

Class Reskins don't require themes at all, which is the best part about it. We could have Dark Rangers, Necromancers, Tinkers and Dragonsworn added all without needing to relate to a specific expansion theme.

Sylvanas just raises undead MM Hunters. There ya go.

Sure, she could raise MM Hunters into the Dark Ranger class. I could see that happening.

Arthas raised a whole bunch of Paladins and other classes into Death Knights after all.

[Teriz]

They don't.

If you insist they do, then please show me in the lore where it says that the dragons bestowed such abilities to those classes, and that this is not just a case of the abilities simply having the word 'dragon' in the name for the "cool" effect.
I can't name what doesn't exist.

Yeah, we'll simply have to agree to disagree on this one. IMO anything with "dragon" in it constitutes a Dragon ability in WoW.

[Triceron]

Yeah, we'll simply have to agree to disagree on this one. IMO anything with "dragon" in it constitutes a Dragon ability in WoW.

But you don't have a class with 3 specs using that theme. That means there is room for one in the game.

You even have a concept linked in your sig, mind you.

[Teriz]

Keep in mind, we are talking about the amount of people this would appeal to. The amount of people who would actually roll a Tinker would then be a fraction of this number. Not looking good, yo.

Well that's an unknown quantity. Considering that it's something new, is an unused theme, has original and interesting abilities, has a popular aesthetic (Mechs), and ticks all the boxes for various groups (new ranged spec, new healing spec that might not require mana, possible pseudo ranged tank, etc.) I could imagine that it would be quite popular.

Class Reskins don't require themes at all, which is the best part about it. We could have Dark Rangers, Necromancers, Tinkers and Dragonsworn added all without needing to relate to a specific expansion theme.

Yeah, I don't see class reskins happening. I think the most likely scenario is that they give DKs a glyph that allows Unholy to be fully ranged. If you think about it, with Clawing Shadows, all the DK needs is a ranged method to burst festering wounds, and they're there.

Sure, she could raise MM Hunters into the Dark Ranger class. I could see that happening.

But Forsaken MM Hunter are already Dark Rangers....

- - - Updated - - -

But you don't have a class with 3 specs using that theme. That means there is room for one in the game.

You even have a concept linked in your sig, mind you.

I do, and I really enjoyed brainstorming it.

[Triceron]

Well that's an unknown quantity. Considering that it's something new, is an unused theme, has original and interesting abilities, has a popular aesthetic (Mechs), and ticks all the boxes for various groups (new ranged spec, new healing spec that might not require mana, possible pseudo ranged tank, etc.) I could imagine that it would be quite popular.

Actually, any class that uses Engineering can already throw bombs and shoot rockets since Vanilla. We don't really have a huge outcry for wanting more of that in a class. I think the Mech is the only interesting aesthetic about the Tinker, honestly. It doesn't really tick any other box since Ranged tank would never happen unless they made all tanks Ranged capable.

Yeah, I don't see class reskins happening.

Funny thing, you didn't see Demon Hunter happening either.

But Forsaken MM Hunter are already Dark Rangers....

Howso? They don't even have Black Arrow, Life Drains or any Mind Control/Charm/Possession ability whatsoever.

[Ielenia]

Yeah, we'll simply have to agree to disagree on this one.

There is no "agreeing to disagree", here. It's truth vs falsehood. You are in the wrong, here, objectively. Just because an ability has "dragon" in the name doesn't mean it actually came from a dragon.

I'll repeat some facts:

EDIT: Ok, let me add something to try to curb your attempts to weasel yourself out, Teriz: "dragon abilities" do not require the word "dragon" to be in the ability's name. Likewise, an ability with the word "dragon" in it does not mean it's an actual "dragon ability".

An example: the warlocks's ability "Eye of Kilrogg". It does NOT summon an actual eye of Kilrogg.

IMO anything with "dragon" in it constitutes a Dragon ability in WoW.

The fact you believe such, though, only indicates that you might struggle at basic logic. And I already suspected as much, considering your arguments regarding class design.

[Teriz]

Actually, any class that uses Engineering can already throw bombs and shoot rockets since Vanilla. We don't really have a huge outcry for wanting more of that in a class. I think the Mech is the only interesting aesthetic about the Tinker, honestly. It doesn't really tick any other box since Ranged tank would never happen unless they made all tanks Ranged capable.

Really? The polls here beg to differ.

And I said Pseudo ranged tank. In other words, a tank that uses ranged abilities at 10yds max.

Funny thing, you didn't see Demon Hunter happening either.

As long as Warlocks had metamorphosis, no.

Howso? They don't even have Black Arrow, Life Drains or any Mind Control/Charm/Possession ability whatsoever.

Neither does Nathan Blightcaller.

[Shiza]

Not good enough.

I'm pretty sure thats more than your Tinker polls got though.

A class concept that follows all of the guidelines of the previous three expansion classes actually. And if you combine Goblins, Gnomes, Mechagnomes and Vulpera (since we're concerned about population size) it's 8% of the current population. That's more than Monks, Rogues, Priests, Warlocks, and Shaman, and it's tied with Demon Hunters and DKs.

Not bad.

Which is assuming that just all the Vulpera, Goblin and Gnome players would change to Tinker, which isn't likely. I mean, you can't imagine it and I'm sure in your mind that makes it an objective fact, but many people just like their Gnomes, Goblins and Vulpera? Hell, I knew a guy who always just wanted to play a Gnome Paladin and nothing else. And many people just would want to keep their Gnome mages and warlocks. Which currently make up around 45% of the races class population. Sure, limiting the Tinker class to gnomes would screw that number quite a bit because it would add plenty of people who have to play the race for the class even if they are not interested and may even dislike it. I mean, if we look at Demon Hunters and Death Knights, they make up 8-9 percent of all players and they are available for popular races. Which shows us that not everyone is simply willing to change their main and actually, quite a minority of people is. Then there is the percentage of people who are just not interested in the class and those who may creat one and only play them as twinks. So the number would probably be quite lower.

And again, you fail to explain why it is so incredibly important and why it would be even reasonable for Blizz to restrict this class? They did it once and they it was in favor of an elf based class, with elves or elf-like creatures normally being the most popular choice or among the most popular choices in any mmo, especially in those where the alternatives include small, ugly or beastlike races. And in this case, we are speaking of the class with the tightest backstory ever. Otherwise, classes were made available to nearly all playable races. And it didn't change the setting of the races in the slightest. Gnomes and Tauren could become Death Knights, yet the races didn't suddenly turned into highly scourge-connected cultures. Humans and Blood Elves got Monks, yet the races didn't suddenly turned asian-centered.

So you fail to make a reasonable and rational argument against Tinkers being open to any race. Everyone can learn how to build and operate machines which is the core concept of a Tinker and Tinkers are not some closed off group in the world, Gnomes and Goblins interacted with Alliance and Horde since classic and we saw other races actually interacting with machines as engineer npcs. Other races also have their own spin on tech and science which could be incorperated into the class as spec identities, which you just refuse to acknowledge, as in your head Tinker has to be basically like a classic class, just a generic concepts with little to no spec flavor.

I mean, again, besides the Mech riding spec, there can be a techno-magic one. Which actually is a concept which fits closely to Gnomes and Goblins as well. Hell, if I would play a gnome, I'd probably rather be a Techno-Mage of the Kirin Tor than just some generic tinker. And there is the potential for a chemist based healer or if we go with four specs as a dps, which could draw inspiration from the Forsaken Apothecaries. Based on the Apothecary, it could also lend potential to an actually darker healing spec, kinda like Putress who cured the plague just to unleash his own one against the living. A Mad Scientist basically, this would be awesome.

So yeah, you lack the argument in favor of restricting the races, a coherent and rational one, not what your subjective and rather rare opinion on the matter is. Actually, like I pointed it out, it sounds rather authoritarian and mean-spirited, as if you just want to force people to play your favorite races no matter if they actually enjoy them and want to play one or as if you have to force yourself to play a gnome or goblin despite you obviously not enjoying these races. As otherwise, you would be just play one, especially since they still fit neatly into rogues, hunter and the casters and have both heritage armors and weapons available to them for transmog.

[Triceron]

Really? The polls here beg to differ.

And I said Pseudo ranged tank. In other words, a tank that uses ranged abilities at 10yds max.

You mean like Guardian Druids with Moonfire (40yd), Paladins and DK's?

Neither does Nathan Blightcaller.

Right, but he doesn't have any MM Hunter abilities either. He's an NPC, in fact.

[Teriz]

You mean like Guardian Druids with Moonfire (40yd), Paladins and DK's?

Nah, not really.

Right, but he doesn't have any MM Hunter abilities either. He's an NPC, in fact.

Eh, he has multishot and a variation of Serpent Sting. That's close enough. I would like to see MM Hunters get Wailing Arrow though.

[Triceron]

Eh, he has multishot and a variation of Serpent Sting. That's close enough. I would like to see MM Hunters get Wailing Arrow though.

Nah, not really.

He's still an NPC. I don't see him doing anything Dark Ranger related that makes me want to play a Dark Ranger. He doesn't do anything that makes me want to play a Marksmanship Hunter for that matter.

Sylvanas, on the other hand, is what the Dark Ranger class would definitely be based on.

[Ishayu]

While tallying it like this is nice and all, we all have to remember that this implies choice, not how many are being brought into a raid.

At the end of the day, having more Tank options are gonna be welcomed to the game, even if at most you will be bringing 3 tanks to a Raid, if even.

One of the reasons why we have so many Tank and Melee options is to give more incentive to bringing them to the Raid. Tanks especially are always in need, so giving more options is a way to open up options. That's one reason why every new hero we've gotten is able to Tank.

I'm going to be forthcoming on this:
We don't need more tanks and we certainly don't need more melee.

People should not be encouraged to roll more of these specs because they are now overrepresented to the point where I, as a raid leader, have to entirely deselect 2/3rds of them. That's how it ends up even if I just want to bring one of each. We have people lining up in a massive queue to join as melee or tank.

Meanwhile on ranged, I have to pick two of some of them.

Encouraging more people to try melee or tank will only make the situation worse. Do not add any more of them.

And yes, I know there's a dire lack of tanks in the PuG world. No, I don't care. Tanks have been assigned the role of leaders and herders by the community, and PuG's are full of cats. Nobody wants to herd cats. It's as simple as that. Even if you were to add another 10 tanking classes, there would still be no tanks in the PuG world. It has nothing to do with the variety of choices.

[Teriz]

I'm going to be forthcoming on this:
We don't need more tanks and we certainly don't need more melee.

People should not be encouraged to roll more of these specs because they are now overrepresented to the point where I, as a raid leader, have to entirely deselect 2/3rds of them. That's how it ends up even if I just want to bring one of each. We have people lining up in a massive queue to join as melee or tank.

Meanwhile on ranged, I have to pick two of some of them.

Encouraging more people to try melee or tank will only make the situation worse. Do not add any more of them.

And yes, I know there's a dire lack of tanks in the PuG world. No, I don't care. Tanks have been assigned the role of leaders and herders by the community, and PuG's are full of cats. Nobody wants to herd cats. It's as simple as that. Even if you were to add another 10 tanking classes, there would still be no tanks in the PuG world. It has nothing to do with the variety of choices.

What if Blizzard brought in a pseudo ranged Tank spec like SWTOR or Wildstar? I think a short ranged tank spec would excite a lot of players into the role.

[Ielenia]

What if Blizzard brought in a pseudo ranged Tank spec like SWTOR or Wildstar? I think a short ranged tank spec would excite a lot of players into the role.

It wouldn't work, at all, because WoW is not SWTOR or Wildstar. The mechanics are too different.

[Teriz]

It wouldn't work, at all, because WoW is not SWTOR or Wildstar. The mechanics are too different.

Of course you'd say that. SWTOR and Wildstar had melee tanks as well, and they were balanced just fine with the ranged tanks. If those companies can do it, Blizzard can as well. Heck, the Demonology tank from MoP was almost a viable tank, and it had nothing to do with its abilities (all ranged), it was because Blizzard didn't want a spec encased inside a glyph.

[Ielenia]

Of course you'd say that. SWTOR and Wildstar had melee tanks as well, and they were balanced just fine with the ranged tanks.

It. Wouldn't. Work.

Because those games have different mechanics than WoW. SWTOR and Wildstar are not literal copies of WoW's game engine with just a different coat of paint. They have different mechanics and different codes. A ranged tank is useless in WoW, for one reason only: raid bosses are taunt-immune from pets and companions, and they'll either run to the tank if they're mobile, or start one-shotting the melee, one by one.

If those companies can do it, Blizzard can as well.

Only if they scrap WoW and start from scratch with a different engine.

Heck, the Demonology tank from MoP was almost a viable tank, and it had nothing to do with its abilities (all ranged), it was because Blizzard didn't want a spec encased inside a glyph.

Demonology only showcased why a "ranged tank" doesn't work in WoW, for all the reasons written above.

[Teriz]

It. Wouldn't. Work.

Because those games have different mechanics than WoW. SWTOR and Wildstar are not literal copies of WoW's game engine with just a different coat of paint. They have different mechanics and different codes. A ranged tank is useless in WoW, for one reason only: raid bosses are taunt-immune from pets and companions, and they'll either run to the tank if they're mobile, or start one-shotting the melee, one by one.

And bosses would run up to those ranged tanks as well, and they still performed just fine. It should also be noted that those games also had melee tanks as well.

Only if they scrap WoW and start from scratch with a different engine.

Or if they purposely design raid bosses for that expansion's content with ranged tanks in mind. The only relevant content would be the current raid bosses.

Demonology only showcased why a "ranged tank" doesn't work in WoW, for all the reasons written above.

The Demonology tank worked out just fine. Its only issue was that it wasn't crit immune and couldn't generate enough threat. That was done on purpose.