I dont think its "bananas" to say that if you have not reached or come close to a specs full potential, its not entirely fair to blame the spec on your inability to obtain a spot in a group.
I see some examples of extremely high performing individuals, who have extensive evidence of their ability to complete said content on said spec, and then suddenly between tiers they are unable to perform at the same level, and their drop in performance is so substantial that their guildmates and friends say "sorry bob, you cant bring you X to this content, their performance just isnt up to standard". It happens, but i firmly believe that is a tiny minority of players, at the pointed tip of content progression.
There is no class representation for them because they're the only ones who do that. Illidan created more DHs, Arthas helped create more Death knights, Chen ( MoP ) Created more monks.
Is that to say Mekk and Gaz can't create more tinkers? No. But if we've learned anything from gnomes or goblins, only the "leaders" get to be at the top of the food chain. They would never allow everyone else, to be equals in regards to them. Tinkers are the pinnacle of intelligence and the engineering skill trade, which is why they're so few. And why it will never be a class in wow.
... By that logic, the Cataclysm expansion also "added a new class" because it, just like TBC, allowed more races to pick certain classes (humans could be hunters, gnomes could be priests, trolls could be druids, night elves could be mages, etc).
Which throws your little 'pattern' off whack.
It curious that Blizzard wanted to try to be creative with Covenants, but did not try a Necromancer class.
Not really . Cataclysm was fun af. its just toxic wrath newcomers who were crying . it was fun 100% . WOD was going to be the best expansion but blizzard cut almost 60% of the plans , and made the team work on the gay Overwatch . MOP has a class and it was rubbish , almost half playerbase from catacylsm quitted . so i dont know what are you talking about . the way you measure the expansion is bad
PVP balance and gearing for it was fun but very punishing for the average players.
Challenge Modes, just as proving ground or the mage tower were never liked by the average players at its time.
Basicly everything that made MoP appealing for the regular players looking for a mild challange, made casual gamers dislike the game.
Its the same with class balance as soon as you have close to ideal class balance and people cant just REROLL for some OP new class, the game is seen as "boring" or even "in a bad state".
You have to read WoW criticism from the PoV of the gamers it comes from.
A new class would very fast backfire, even if its 100% balanced, with challenging mechanics, because thats not what most people want. They want a broken new simple class that casuses issues in PVP and PVE balance and ideally for a whole expansion just as it was with DK / WotLK or DH / Legion and way into BfA.
-
I don't even think a new class needs all new mechanics, so I'm all for a new class. I think the visuals are just as important if not more. Take Chaos bolt and Pyroblast for example, at several points in the game they've pretty much been the same spell, but I always enjoyed the Chaos bolt animation, and I know others prefer the pyro one.
Just making up a random example here, but lets say they added dark caster, and it was a mix between warlock spells and mage spells, but with brand new spell animations that look high impact, I think a lot of people would like it, not everyone of course, but enough to make it worthwhile.
TBC wasn't crap and neither was Cataclysm. WoD, BfA and Shadowlands are though. I do not think it's a surprise that the expansions without new classes (minus TBC) are considered to be the low point of WoW, there is truth to it. But overall I think not having a new class works when the rest of the expansion is exceptionally good, which wasn't the case for WoD (lack of content), BfA (horrible gameplay loop, subpar writing) and Shadowlands (horrible gameplay loop, abysmal writing).
MAGA - Make Alliance Great Again
Theres so few of Demon Hunters and Monks in the world that surely they wouldn't be playable either then?
I mean what really constitutes as so few that they're not playable if we had em as neutral tavern heroes in WC3? Does rarity really matter then?
Void Elves are exceedingly rare too if you get down to the nitty gritty.
I mean you could say players don't know what they want but that is also an excuse to imply that Blizzard not doing anything is a better alternative, and where does that get us exactly? No new classes period. Because players don't know what new class they actually want.
All you're outlining is a broadly applicable excuse that applies to any new feature to the game.
If you think all those specs would be ruined by adding a Necro, and you don't want it to happen, then you're also a player who doesn't know what players want. Simple logic, no? If those specs aren't affected in one way, eventually they will be affected in another. I mean at the end of the say, only the most effective specs of each class are ever considered legitimate. Why did Demo suffer so badly from being gutted? Because the replacement underperformed against other specs where Metamorphosis Demo was top tier prior to being removed. Its really that simple.
Last edited by Triceron; 2021-09-06 at 10:53 AM.
The day they add Tinker is the day wow dies. Please dont.
Hi