Ofcourse it does you little blue bear
Also: no they get 5% disrespect untill they share the kultirans with us. I want forsaken kultirans
could be worse, could been gender locked as many asian games.
Locks of any kind suck.
Hard disagree. When they are not meta nobody plays them? Have you been under a rock since DF? 
Look. If you mix and mash elements of all classes what you do is dilute class identity.
If I were to take Shaman as an example, and I said that it has totems… but 5 other classes also have totems (mechanically) even though they look different… well what happens is that you loose what is special about Shamans.
And I mentioned totems. But you could dissect every game-play, every weapon choice, everything. Give it to some other random classes and you dilute class identity so much that in the end, you are left with simply esthetics.
So I come back to my original statement:
If the new “tinker class” can only take mechanics from other classes to justify its existence, then it should be a skin. However. If you can make a class that is mechanically unique in every way, then it adds to the richness of class diversity, and it is not a skin any longer.
1 Like
Then accordingly to your argument, there shouldn’t be ahy classes in the game, and everything should be a skin.
Dk and Evoker use the same resource system, so lets delete those and combine the classes into one.
Hunters use disengage, so do DH’s, and DH uses charge, just like Warrior, so lets delete those and combine them into one class.
I could go on and on. There are more things in common than are different between classes, so there’s really little argument here that you’re making without it applying to the classes that exist.
The reason to use existing templates for a new class makes it 100 times easier to integrate into the game. But if you tear down classes and compare their abilities, a lot of them are the same in philosophy but are just visually represented differently. So, i really dont see the argument here at all.
Huh? You go from one extreme to the other my friend. And by doing so you missed the point.
You could go on. And indeed you should.
Which proves my point: Dont we have too many classes already? We are borderline diluting them so much already as it is to start adding new ones.
When there were only 6 classes there was no doubt that Warriors were unique. Or Rogues.
IMO we are already borderline loosing so much class identity that it’s almost as you say: What is the point of playing warrior, if its just a brown DK?
So a new “tinker” class would be like throwing gasoline to the fire and burning down the house. Unless, you can give it a unique mechanic nobody else has.
And its nothing against “tinker” class. My opinion remains the same regardless of what “new class” one can imagine. And indeed, I talked a lot about this when Evokers were announced.
I also go further, and also express my opinion that there are way too many races. Most of which are simply re-skings of existing ones. It dilutes the importance of choice and meaning if all that changes (in my case) is a skin tone from brown to green.
not warlocks right?..right? 0o
Well I switched Main from my warlock after 20 so…
Nah warlocks are cool I just don’t like how they play. The day they give me a meele lock or make on of the specs as mobile as BM I’m back
I think Blizzard should continue to add new classes, because it adds something new to the game for players to enjoy and experiment. That new class, is going to become someone’s favorite…
For players who want Vanilla and fit all their abilities on one bar, practically, they have that option. This is an evolution of a game, it can’t stay in one place offering players nothing new.
At the end of the day class identity is a visualization, gameplay, a sound file and animation. To a video game engine, it’s just code. So, you’re proving my point that people will associate identity where it doesn’t exist, as long as it feels right.
A warlocks dot, isn’t fundamentally different than a bleed from a rogue, warrior, feral druid, or moonbeam, etc. Lots of classes use that system of doing damage. Classes build a resource, then spend the resource, there’s not an inherent difference in them other than how they play out.
Classes in BFA were very diluted, where things did feel like a class had a similar answer to everything. I think Blizzard is working their way towards a feeling of class identity. I play all classes right now and although I understand the similarities in the systems they use, they are executed well and feel quite solid.
I think the “identity” for classes isn’t going to come from the game mechanics, but it has more to do with the fantasy that’s woven into the game for it.
You’re not going to get classes that perform so far from each other that they just don’t feel like anything else in the game. Everything is going to have a dot of some kind, or a slow, or a stun, or a speed boost, or a stealth mechanic, an AOE ability, a single target ability, and the more experience you have with different classes the more obvious that is.
tinkerer for horde and bard for ally. ftw.
all races.
faces will melt…
Why do you go from one side to the other? What does the amount of abilities have to do with the discussion?
You want more things to “play with”? I think the regular talent overhaul and tier sets achieve that in the context of seasonal gameplay. If you were to compare a Shaman in Cata with a Shaman today it’s night and day. But its still a shaman.
Last I heard rogues, warriors, feral druids and moonkin don’t have pets. Or have portals. Or summon health stones… ect…
Dont minimize the issue to its bare minimum to prove a point. Fact of the matter is that you want warlocks to be distinct from all other classes. If its just a purple mage, then what is the point of “fantasy”?
And as it stands, there is not much difference already between a Destro Lock and a Mage. And they are hard pressed to find “unique things” about them. And IMO, this is not good. AND more specs will absolutely not help with this.
And sure. There are some mechanics that are the same. Its the “how” that matters. For starters, Warlock dots are casted. Rogues are melee.
I said it before. Its both.
Esthetics (fantasy) and Gameplay. If you want a new class, you got to get them both right. Otherwise dont bother.
And I will say again and again. You can get the fantasy perfect, but with out the gameplay its useless.
Oh another tinker thread, so original!
That way, every class is the same, fill the bar and spend it.
Cant wait for them to make one spec a support spec and repeat the whole Aug fiasco.
This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.