Potential Class Hype

[arkanon]

I did say it would punish the group, just not overly punishing the group to the point where bringing a Tinker to a raid would make people pull their hair out. Also what do you think of the healer's heals lowering the cooldown on resummoning the mech?

Here is the thing though - why bring a tinker if they in any way "punish" the group? Sure, in low level very casual play, they would be fine, but there is NO WAY blizzard would intentionally introduce a class that is fundamentally inferior at its given role compared to the alternatives.

I think the healing idea is flawed as well, as it would encourage healers to 'waste' mana just to get their tank back to being effective, when they could be simply healing someone who needs healing. And if the argument is that the tinker would need that mech back and need the healing, then we are back to point one - why bring a tinker?

At this point, it feels like people are describing a feral druid who is swapping in and out of bear form to off tank, rather than a full time tank.

i can hear it now "hey guys, since its an alt run, mind if i bring my tinker? *loud sighs*"

[Salvager23]

But here's the thing: why would anyone want to bring a class that would only make things much harder for them than any other class would? Like I said: the tank dies. It's a warrior? Battle-rez. A death knight? Battle rez. A paladin? Battle rez. A druid? Battle rez. A monk? Battle rez. A tinker? Gotta heal-heal-heal-heal and likely use healing cooldowns to keep it from dying to it can summon its mech again.

I thought we were working under the assumption that the pilot can still tank? If the pilot can still tank, why would the healer go crazy with the heals to keep the pilot alive? Why would a Tinker need a battle rez if it isn't dead (yet)?

It's still a pointless mechanic because the healers that would have to constantly overheal the tinker to bring the mech back, could instead be working on keeping the rest of the group alive, especially the other tank who would likely be taking extra damage due to tank debuffs.

"Losing the mech" simply has to matter, or not matter at all. The former makes the tinker tank a liability (explained above). The latter makes the mechanic pointless. So the tinker would either be skipped over by almost everyone, especially on progression fights, or it becomes basically mandatory to have your two main tanks be tinkers.

No no, overhealing wouldn't work towards bringing the mech back, it would have to be actual healing. If the Tinker in pilot form is doing their job and tanking correctly, the healers can still heal the group.

- - - Updated - - -

Here is the thing though - why bring a tinker if they in any way "punish" the group? Sure, in low level very casual play, they would be fine, but there is NO WAY blizzard would intentionally introduce a class that is fundamentally inferior at its given role compared to the alternatives.

I think the healing idea is flawed as well, as it would encourage healers to 'waste' mana just to get their tank back to being effective, when they could be simply healing someone who needs healing. And if the argument is that the tinker would need that mech back and need the healing, then we are back to point one - why bring a tinker?

At this point, it feels like people are describing a feral druid who is swapping in and out of bear form to off tank, rather than a full time tank.

i can hear it now "hey guys, since its an alt run, mind if i bring my tinker? *loud sighs*"

In any tank meta there are easy tanks and harder tanks. This would only punish the group by swapping an easy tank for a hard tank, and force the Tinker player to learn two different tank styles to be effective.

[Ielenia]

I thought we were working under the assumption that the pilot can still tank? If the pilot can still tank, why would the healer go crazy with the heals to keep the pilot alive? Why would a Tinker need a battle rez if it isn't dead (yet)?

I'm going by the assumption that the tinker is greatly diminished without his mech. After all, his mech is both his armor and (most of) his weapon. Comparably speaking, it'd be like a Guardian druid in night elf form, the way I see it.

No no, overhealing wouldn't work towards bringing the mech back, it would have to be actual healing. If the Tinker in pilot form is doing their job and tanking correctly, the healers can still heal the group.

Ok. Then you just proved why the "mech eject" mechanic is entirely pointless if it can just be mostly ignored, like this.

In any tank meta there are easy tanks and harder tanks.

But all would be within a given parameter. No tank would be "avoid at all costs for progression" like this version of the tinker.

This would only punish the group by swapping an easy tank for a hard tank, and force the Tinker player to learn two different tank styles to be effective.

But here's the thing: if the "mech eject" mechanic can still be largely ignored, the mechanic is pointless at best, on top of making the class harder to play since the player would have to learn two play styles and shift between them... just to perform a single role.

If the tinker can still "tank effectively" or even "just as effectively" (as Teriz claims) outside of a mech, then the entire mechanic is pointless. Mechanics have to matter.

[Wolfrick]

Something that will happen for sure is that we will get a NECROMANCER in 10.0


Just think about it... after most of every important world of warcraft character have been in the land of the dead... they would all be more acceptable to have necromancers among their ranks...

and with no more Lich King.... the undead in the world need people who can hold them in control...

so BAM.... 10.0 must have Necromacers and it would be the best time for a world revamp and adding a new... much wanted class.... since 2004 people have been asking for it!

BLIZZARD WE LOVE YOU... and we have faith in you, come on ^^

[Salvager23]

I'm going by the assumption that the tinker is greatly diminished without his mech. After all, his mech is both his armor and (most of) his weapon. Comparably speaking, it'd be like a Guardian druid in night elf form, the way I see it.

I agree with your overall assessment, but in practice a tank could never lose that much ability that quickly or they're going to wipe the raid. I think if you just swap the tank styles from easy, armored tank to harder, squishy tank (like going from a Warrior to a Brewmaster), that can give you the sense of diminished power without sacrificing the entire raid.

Ok. Then you just proved why the "mech eject" mechanic is entirely pointless if it can just be mostly ignored, like this.

I disagree. I don't think any player would want to go from easy mode to hard mode in the middle of a fight. You'd do anything in your power to avoid that from happening.

But all would be within a given parameter. No tank would be "avoid at all costs for progression" like this version of the tinker.

I don't think it needs to be "avoid at all costs", just very difficult. It would definitely require some balancing, but i believe it's doable.

[arkanon]

If the Tinker in pilot form is doing their job and tanking correctly, the healers can still heal the group.

Good stuff - you just proved my point perfectly. If the "pilot" is able to "do their job and tank correctly", then the mech is completely redundant.

[Salvager23]

Good stuff - you just proved my point perfectly. If the "pilot" is able to "do their job and tank correctly", then the mech is completely redundant.

I think you're look at this the wrong way. Think of it like a Knight in armor who with 25% of life left loses their armor, making them more vulnerable, but still able to do the job. If they survive long enough, they get their armor back.

[Ielenia]

I agree with your overall assessment, but in practice a tank could never lose that much ability that quickly or they're going to wipe the raid.

That's precisely why the ability proposed is a liability. If the tinker loses his mech, then that mechanic has to matter, by making him weaker, like a Guardian druid shifting into his humanoid form.

I think if you just swap the tank styles from easy, armored tank to harder, squishy tank (like going from a Warrior to a Brewmaster), that can give you the sense of diminished power without sacrificing the entire raid.

What you're forgetting here is that the brewmaster monk, despite having lower armor, is not a "harder, squishy tank". Hell, brewmaster monk has almost consistently being one of, if not THE best tank around.

I disagree. I don't think any player would want to go from easy mode to hard mode in the middle of a fight. You'd do anything in your power to avoid that from happening.

People clamoring for "Ulduar Hard Modes" would like to have a word with you. But anyways: not many players would want to die in the middle of a fight, but death happens regardless, eventually. Look, the point is: if the tinker, outside its mech, can still tank "effectively" or "just as effectively", then that makes the mechanic pointless. But if the tinker becomes greatly diminished, like a tank druid shifting back to humanoid form, then the mechanic (and the tinker) becomes a liability.

No 'ifs' or 'buts' about it.

I don't think it needs to be "avoid at all costs", just very difficult. It would definitely require some balancing, but i believe it's doable.

Hence "avoid at all costs". Why would they take a tinker if the class has the potential of royally screwing up your run if it loses its mech?

[HateTrain]

This thread has become...readable all of a sudden.

[arkanon]

I think you're look at this the wrong way. Think of it like a Knight in armor who with 25% of life left loses their armor, making them more vulnerable, but still able to do the job. If they survive long enough, they get their armor back.

Now think of it this way - NO OTHER TANK HAS THIS WEAKNESS

[Salvager23]

That's precisely why the ability proposed is a liability. If the tinker loses his mech, then that mechanic has to matter, by making him weaker, like a Guardian druid shifting into his humanoid form.

Why do you keep using this example? A Guardian Druid swishing to human form would wipe the raid. Isn't there a middle ground between assured death and meaningless mechanic? There has to be.

What you're forgetting here is that the brewmaster monk, despite having lower armor, is not a "harder, squishy tank". Hell, brewmaster monk has almost consistently being one of, if not THE best tank around.

I was only using an example. In every meta there is the easy tank and the harder tank, so the mech mode would be easy, and the pilot mode would be tougher.

People clamoring for "Ulduar Hard Modes" would like to have a word with you. But anyways: not many players would want to die in the middle of a fight, but death happens regardless, eventually. Look, the point is: if the tinker, outside its mech, can still tank "effectively" or "just as effectively", then that makes the mechanic pointless. But if the tinker becomes greatly diminished, like a tank druid shifting back to humanoid form, then the mechanic (and the tinker) becomes a liability.

No 'ifs' or 'buts' about it.

There's a middle ground in there somewhere man.

Hence "avoid at all costs". Why would they take a tinker if the class has the potential of royally screwing up your run if it loses its mech?

Any tank that doesn't know what they're doing can royally screw up your run. A highly skilled Tinker tank should be able to survive just like any other tank even if it loses its mech. If Blizzard ever introduced a mechanic like this, it would definitely make the Tinker tank the toughest one to use, but I think a LOT of players would be up for the challenge, and for some they would view it as a refreshing change of pace.

[jellmoo]

The idea I posited to Teriz, long ago, about "exiting the mech" would be by making the mech a temporary cooldown, like Metamorphosis and Ascendance. But since it doesn't fit his "mechs are a permanent form" idea of the tinkers, he rejected it.

I mean... don't you think it'd be rather unique for the mech to be temporary, and at the end of its duration, it "malfunctions" and explodes, dealing damage to all mobs around him as the pilot ejects? It's similar-ish to the DH mechanic, only dealing damage at the end instead of at the beginning. Another mechanic that could be added is the option to exit the mech and trigger the explosion prematurely, dealing more damage according to the amount of time left in the ability, explained by the "remaining fuel" being used to make the explosion more powerful? It could even eject the player like the hunter's Disengage ability does.

I'm mostly looking at this in a devil's advocate sort of way, since I'm not particularly fond of the mech concept at all. But if we're going to talk about a game mechanic I am interested in seeing if it's possible to balance it.

I think another tactic could be to treat it almost like the Shadow Priest and Void Form. Have the Tinker build up resources in combat and then be able to "call down" a mech to use in combat. Maybe make it last a little longer than Void Form, but the general idea is that it would give a spike in damage and survivability (extra life, extra armor, etc...). Make it a mechanic that needs to be managed, rather than just a generic cooldown.

[Salvager23]

Now think of it this way - NO OTHER TANK HAS THIS WEAKNESS

Don't all tanks have their own unique set of weaknesses?

[Jujudrood]

Something that will happen for sure is that we will get a NECROMANCER in 10.0


Just think about it... after most of every important world of warcraft character have been in the land of the dead... they would all be more acceptable to have necromancers among their ranks...

and with no more Lich King.... the undead in the world need people who can hold them in control...

so BAM.... 10.0 must have Necromacers and it would be the best time for a world revamp and adding a new... much wanted class.... since 2004 people have been asking for it!

BLIZZARD WE LOVE YOU... and we have faith in you, come on ^^

I think that if Necros do happen, they come post-Shadowlands as well.
I'm not nearly as confident as you, but it would make sense.

We go into the Shadowlands, meet all the covenants, play out the story, and in the process get a deeper understanding of the realm of death.
With the helm broken, the dead do need to be held in check, so it would fall to those who study the dark arts of necromancy to control it.
It could even be written in that those who used it before, such as KT, were corrupted by it for not fully understanding it, which is why they lost their souls and were twisted abominations and whatnot.
The player would have agency over their necromancy from the training and understanding they gain in Shadowlands that solidifies their mind with increased fortitude and resilience against the corruption or whatever.

Though, part of my hopes we get Tinkers instead.
Not that I particularly care for them; they would be a throw-away alt at best, unless they are super fun to play.
No, I would like to see them just to see the rage that would follow by those so adamant against their concept.
That would be quality entertainment.

[jellmoo]

It just doesn't work. It effectively means, the tank has 2 hp bars, which will mean that the class is either absolutely overpowered or that he has to make up for it by being too squishy. I mean, would you even have a tank with you who just randomly will shoot aggro at dps or healers and who you have to cater towards fully in terms of your playstyle just so that he can survive when you could just as well have a Paladin, Warrior, DK or Monk who can tank the dungeon with the dps players having to do nothing but the regular crowd control in mythic+ dungeons? I know certainly that I would reject any such Tinker Tank.

The thing is, is the party actually worse off? If the Paladin, DK, Monk or Druid drops and dies, then they are boned anyway. If the Tinker drops to 0, and ejects, maybe they aren't. If the mechanic at play is that at this point the Tinker can ping pong aggro around long enough for his mech to... re-mech, I dunno the wording for this... and then pop back into the fight, is that not a net positive for the group?

[LemonDemonGirl]

Necromancy tends to be black and dark green. Void tends to be dark purple and dark blue. The death knight's Death Coil ability, for example, is a flying black skull with green trail. A void-based class would not have, for example, a "flying skull with green trail". It wouldn't even use skulls, since it's not a death-themed concept. To imply that void effects are nigh-indistinguishable from necromancy effects such that it is "so hard" to make them different is just dishonest.

Bwonsamdi himself uses Necromantic magic that's a dark green, so this defiantly checks out, except that it seems to be different than the rest of the Death magic we've seen before. It even uses new icons in the Dazar'alor raid

Also a Void class would likely have tentacles and space/star effects too. None of the spell effect icons I see use skulls, so even if they did it would look weird and out of place. Stars/astral effects would fit much better

Hmm maybe Necromancers could have the ability to 'tame' undead, like how Hunters can tame beasts?
Then you'd have a 'stable' (they'd probably call it something else) of minions to summon right?

[Trazzle]

I’m sorry but has anyone else talking about tanking actually tanked? Mechanically there’s NOTHING overpowered about a tank having ‘2 health pools’. We have 2 tanks with specable cheat deaths, another that can... MAKE THEMSELVES IMMUNE TO ALL DAMAGE... Brewmasters enter and leave combat when needed if they run out of brew so that they can let stagger chill out because it alone cannot kill them. Health pools are nearly meaningless, the tanks mitigation tools are what’s relevant.

[Ielenia]

Also a Void class would likely have tentacles and space/star effects too, not skulls like you said.

Take a second look. I never said "void would use skulls":

A void-based class would not have, for example, a "flying skull with green trail". It wouldn't even use skulls, since it's not a death-themed concept.

Hmm maybe Necromancers could have the ability to 'tame' undead, like how Hunters can tame beasts?
Then you'd have a 'stable' (they'd probably call it something else) of minions to summon right?

Ehh, doesn't really fit what a necromancer should do. They don't "tame" undead, they create them.

[LemonDemonGirl]

Take a second look. I never said "void would use skulls":

Ohh sorry. I fixed the wording now. I tend to type really fast, and didn't notice until after I posted it

Ehh, doesn't really fit what a necromancer should do. They don't "tame" undead, they create them.

I mean, it wouldn't be similar to a Warlock or DK right? But then the Hunters would start getting mad lol

[Ielenia]

Why do you keep using this example? A Guardian Druid swishing to human form would wipe the raid.

I already explained why:

I'm going by the assumption that the tinker is greatly diminished without his mech. After all, his mech is both his armor and (most of) his weapon. Comparably speaking, it'd be like a Guardian druid in night elf form, the way I see it.

Isn't there a middle ground between assured death and meaningless mechanic? There has to be.

There isn't. At least none that I can see. It's a dichotomy, here: either the mechanic (ejecting from mech) matters, or it doesn't. The first one causes the tinker to become a liability, and I explained several times why I think it'd be the case. The second one makes the mechanic pointless.

I was only using an example. In every meta there is the easy tank and the harder tank, so the mech mode would be easy, and the pilot mode would be tougher.

First, let's get the terminology right: they're not "harder" or "easier". They're "better" or "worse". That said, "worse" tanks would still be better than the tinker, since the "worse" part of the tinker would cripple the raid.

There's a middle ground in there somewhere man.

You keep saying that, but I haven't seen any viable examples, from anyone.

Any tank that doesn't know what they're doing can royally screw up your run.

And even a highly skilled tinker can royally screw up your run if they lose their mech.

A highly skilled Tinker tank should be able to survive just like any other tank even if it loses its mech.

What you're describing them is a pointless mechanic, since the tinker can survive "just like any other tank". If the tinker loses its mech, which just happen to be its armor and most, if not all of its weaponry, then it should not be able to survive "just like any other tank", regardless of skill.