4th spec would solve all class problems.

[klaps_05]

i think there shouldnt be any more classes or specs introduced into the game as it just makes it extremely hard to balance. game wise it may be good or interesting, but you arent looking at the big picture.

[Teriz]

Well , the Lich idea is okayish i think ,one plate healer or caster dps would be nice.

The Mage and Druid ideas are a no .

The hunter idea is pretty much the combat rogue , would be better to change combat a bit instead of giving this to hunters.
Rogues shamans and Warriors are a "meh" , not neccesary imo.

The warlock idea is okayish again . Would make sense and I could see that happening.

But , in my opinion , Paladins should get a "unholy"/"Bloodknight"/ generally "dark" dps spec. (Either that or give retribution a little more love.)
The pala spec could be a caster dps spec , using plate int gear. With a first look , its kinda stupid , but Blood Knights were bending the power of the light to their will , so giving some thought to a more "evilish" spec is compatible with the lore.

Also the paladin idea could work with priests , a holy based dps spec could happen . Something like an exorcist or something.

Keep in mind, these are just concepts based on WC3 heroes. Clearly 4th specs would be spread to every class in the game (except Druids who already have it).

Speaking of which, why do you dislike the Druid idea?

---------- Post added 2013-04-21 at 02:48 PM ----------

i think there shouldnt be any more classes or specs introduced into the game as it just makes it extremely hard to balance. game wise it may be good or interesting, but you arent looking at the big picture.

Correct me if I'm wrong; But isn't good and interesting the big picture? I don't think any game should be stifled creatively because of PvP balance.

[namelessone]

No, because it makes no sense. Lich for Death Knights? Liches were mages. Keepers of the Grove were a race. Demon Hunters absolutely do not fit into any warlock mechanic. Wardens a rogue spec? So I can be Undead Warden? How is this even... ?

No, it doesn't make any sense and it will be even more difficult to balance. Even if Blizzard decided to introduce new specs, I'd much rather have it be something NEW, original, than trying to cram WC3 classes.

[Krolikn]

Wouldn't really help but I like your ideas anyway.

[Seranthor]

They can manage. Blizzard is a big company with the capability to manage a big game. I pay them a monthly fee to ensure that they can manage making the game bigger and better. Don't you?

You pay them for access to their servers... you aren't paying them enough to do what you want.

[velde046]

Would solve all class problems? What problems are you thinking about?
Besides 4th spec would probably cause more problems than it would solve anyway... so a definite NO for me at the moment.

[Deleted]

If you want to discuss that, put it in the DH thread. Don't derail this discussion with your butthurt from the other thread.

Butthurt haha. You're the one who made a whole thread, first about why the Demon Hunter can't be a class and then one month later about how it should be a class and why every argument that you yourself made against it is meaningless. It's just baffling.

[Hyve]

So?
I'd like to play a game that has even more and more diversity of classes/specs/talents/ etc.. than actual is present in World of Warcraft.
Please remeber - we're paying for playing it,
And it seems they hire not proper people to do the work.

I'd love to see other int plates, more tanks (Shaman is a good example though), healers!

There is more diversity & choice today, then there was years ago because they've been clever about how they've done it. The new Talent Trees saw your choices expand a lot more then the older versions. I'm not against making the game diverse and fun, my point is that diversity breeds inequality (naturally), and there are some cases where that can be exacerbated by adding another class, with three talent trees, and all their new and unique spells.

Actually every class gets ability realignments, new talents, new glyphs, new spells, new stat adjustments, etc. Some classes are completely remade altogether. See Warlocks. My point is that classes are never static, they are constantly changed even when no new class is added to the game. Thus its silly to complain about a new addition throwing things off balance.

Not true. While there are fundamental changes to some classes, not every class, every expansion is totally reset. Although new abilites are added, some old ones removed and other changes are made, the classes don't always change out of recognition. Take the Holy Paladin for example. A few changes have been made in Mists of Pandaria, and I haven't played mine since the end of Catalcysm, but I could log in right now, re-read the tooltips and get straight back into Heroic Raiding with her.

Actually Cataclysm was more unbalanced than MoP, and no new classes were added in Cataclysm. PvP was worse than it is now with a new class, and a redesigned Warlock class. So new class and spec introduction has little to do with how a expansion will end up balanced wise.

Personally, I am finding the two to be a little similar, but I am finding the Crowd Control & Teleportation to be more extreme this expansion then in previous expansions. I don't play high-end PvP, nor often enough to make a comment on which expansion was worse, but with my little experience of Arena & Battlegrounds across MoP & Cata, I'm finding MoP far more frustrating.

And seriously, PvP players are never happy in any expansion.

Because of the sheer imbalance in the game. PvP is a much more fluid, and aggressive section of WoW so when your unable to be as powerful as you could be, because the developers are being lazy, or are stressed for time, then of course you'll be a little annoyed. The problem is simply maths. More classes or talent trees means more time in testing and developing both PvE & PvP content.

Now, combined with their new ethos of faster patches and content, I'm going to guess that either the content quality will get sloppy or content will become even slower. Either way, they've a limited cap on staff, funds, resources and time. Add more requirements into those caps, and corners have to be cut!

They can manage. Blizzard is a big company with the capability to manage a big game. I pay them a monthly fee to ensure that they can manage making the game bigger and better. Don't you?

I'm aware their a big company, I'm aware of what it takes to manage a project on the scale of World of Warcraft, (I run a very successful international publishing company) so I know that they can't be having an easy time keeping up, and pushing through the changes that they need or want.

Lets take a quick look at the Crowd Control situation. The simple and easy answer would be to make all CC share a Diminishing Return. It would have little to no impact on PvE (as CC is rarely used these days in PvE) and the PvP CC issues would almost be resolved over night!

Your payment to them a month allows you access to their servers, their character, and allows them to continue developing WoW. That doesn't mean that the WoW they'll develop is of good enough quality, when you add in even more work!

[Nitsuj]

Voted no because Blizz has trouble balancing the specs it has now in pvp. In pve it would be cool even if I dont agree with some of your suggestions. I would enjoy a few additional options though. Mages with a healing spec.. water spec or something. Rogues that could tank with dodges and parries.... kinda not so special anymore with monks around. Tanking earth shamans. Lock tanks. I'd like to see a petless hunter.... a sharpshooter or maybe more nature based ranger/trapper with better expanded traps snares and bombs. A caster DK is probably my favorite of your suggestions.. int plate needs somewhere to go. Druids already have 4 specs. Can't think of anything for priests, monks or paladins. I've been thinking about warrior and the only thing that comes to mind that I would enjoy would be to make a Beastmaster spec out of them. That would be more akin to Rexxar really... a big melee warrior who summons pets but I guess hunters could do it too.

[Teriz]

No, because it makes no sense. Lich for Death Knights? Liches were mages.

Death Knights already have Death and Decay and ranged frost spells.

Keepers of the Grove were a race.

So are Moonkin/Owlbears.

Demon Hunters absolutely do not fit into any warlock mechanic.

Metamorphosis? Apotheosis?

Wardens a rogue spec? So I can be Undead Warden? How is this even... ?

I'm pretty sure I mentioned in the OP that lore-wise there would be an issue.

No, it doesn't make any sense and it will be even more difficult to balance. Even if Blizzard decided to introduce new specs, I'd much rather have it be something NEW, original, than trying to cram WC3 classes.

That's fine. I can largely agree with that attitude.

[Zeek Daniels]

Each spec is basically adding another class to the game. So each class right now represents 3 different classes. Thats 33 classes blizzard has to balance. Each time blizz adds a class its 3 more classes that need to be balanced with the rest, now you want to add a 4th spec to each class? Thats 11 new classes that need to be balanced with all the rest of the classes. Its not going to help the game its gonna hurt it.

Blizz already has problems with classes that are 3 dps types and getting it so that each is viable in PvE and PvP. Some patches 2 are good, some only 1 is good and the others are trash. Some players dont like switching specs all the time to be viable. Some like switching specs because they like the different playstyles. But the whiners out there are going to cry because they dont want to play frost because they like arcane, and combat doesnt want to play sub because they like combat.

4 specs is going to make balance even worse. This is a stupid idea.

[BananaHandsB]

I'm not sure it would solve more problems than it would create.

Regardless, those ideas were really cool. Found myself very entertained reading about them. I'd love to see them in game, they'd be a blast, but I definitely think it'd just be a nightmare to balance.

[Romeothecat]

While I didn't agree with most of these, I must admit that if warlocks had a melee spec I might actually play one.

[Matt0193]

I voted no purely on the basis that it would balancing even harder for Blizzard. Also gief mages a frost tanking spec.... yeah?? yeah... ????

This. PvP is already a nightmare and adding even more specs without changing the current design philosophy of "every spec should be viable", which doesn't work as it is, would just leave PvP in an even greater clusterfuck than it is now.

[Deleted]

Yes, let's make the game even harder to balance.

[Deleted]

How would a 4th spec 'solve all class problems'?



Oh, never mind then.

The lore of a class and the current balance of a class in game are different things.

Yes, let's make the game even harder to balance.

In cata the pretty much changed every class , and in mop they gave us monks and again changed many things. Putting a few more specs wouldn't make it "even harder".

[Lothrik]

I'm not opposed to the idea of all classes getting a 4th spec. What I'm opposed to is vapid ideas actually getting measurable support. Most of the stuff you're posting Teriz consists of "Name of Class -> Mention how cool they sound -> Name a ridiculously overpowered ability -> Teriz best poster 2013, I would totally play this class I haven't described in any meaningful manner."

I'm not saying this to be mean either, you really need to put more effort into this if you want to be taken seriously.

[Teriz]

Not true. While there are fundamental changes to some classes, not every class, every expansion is totally reset. Although new abilites are added, some old ones removed and other changes are made, the classes don't always change out of recognition. Take the Holy Paladin for example. A few changes have been made in Mists of Pandaria, and I haven't played mine since the end of Catalcysm, but I could log in right now, re-read the tooltips and get straight back into Heroic Raiding with her.

I wouldn't recommend doing that unless you wanted to help your raid wipe. Holy Paladin has changed significantly since the end of Cataclysm.

Because of the sheer imbalance in the game. PvP is a much more fluid, and aggressive section of WoW so when your unable to be as powerful as you could be, because the developers are being lazy, or are stressed for time, then of course you'll be a little annoyed. The problem is simply maths. More classes or talent trees means more time in testing and developing both PvE & PvP content.

Or the simple fact that people who PvP like to whine if their class of choice isn't the top dog in the game. Every expansion PvPers complain. They will complain if Blizzard stopped bringing out expansions and just kept tweaking the game. That's just what they do.

I'm aware their a big company, I'm aware of what it takes to manage a project on the scale of World of Warcraft, (I run a very successful international publishing company) so I know that they can't be having an easy time keeping up, and pushing through the changes that they need or want.

Isn't that just you projecting? If they're not having an easy time keeping up, why are they ramping up patch releases?

---------- Post added 2013-04-21 at 03:11 PM ----------

I'm not saying this to be mean either, you really need to put more effort into this if you want to be taken seriously.

My goal isn't to be taken seriously. My goal is to just post up an idea floating in my head, and see how the community responds. I don't feel that a class idea from someone who doesn't even work at Blizzard, or is a game designer should be taken seriously.

This is all for fun.

[Deleted]

I love each idea and gives blizzard a chance to bring back a lot of iconic classes that were completely ignored/forgotten.

[Julian Rayne]

Your threads are so tiresome, Teriz.

That's not quite true. he created this thread.