Envoker Hot Take is Missing Something "Tanking"

[Greatbrae-dalaran]

@Frara-blood-furnace

Reason #7: Mail wearer can get the tinkerer with a tank spec.

Or a battle mage class (such as spell breakers) can fill that role too.

[Trapalicious-area-52]

didnt i already explain this to you in another thread, caster doesnt necessarily mean ranged.

@Greatbrae-dalaran

@Frara-blood-furnace

Reason #7: Mail wearer can get the tinkerer with a tank spec.

Or a battle mage class (such as spell breakers) can fill that role too.

or an evoker tank since evokers are what we are getting this xpac and we arent discussing a completely imaginary class that may or may not come out 2 expansions from now

[Trapalicious-area-52]

idiots be like
“Oh no a deep breathing, tail smashing, dragonraging evoker cant tank because I want a toy tank 5 years from now”
“i want a class that tanks with toys 5 years from now therefore evokers cant tank”
“i want to tank as a dracthyr but that means evokers cant tank”
-_-

[Aedred-stormrage]

Queue the En Vogue music:

“No ya nevah gonna get it … nevah nevah gonna get it”

Just kidding. Hope some day you all have your non-Evoker dragon tanks.

[Haiwan-area-52]

OMG yes, please give evokers a tank spec! I agree with Trap, everyone speaking against it is not affected by it being added and offers some pretty ridiculous reasoning why they dont want it

[Frara-blood-furnace]

Nice try with the same achievement score…
Next time use a classic toon Trap lol

[Kromkosh-thrall (Kromkosh)]

Probably the death knight, frankly.

[Ogeta-area-52]

Id love to see this and would pick it up in a heart beat, i think i saw a petition for it somewhere

[Mewnopoly-thrall]

LOL i think we just heal through it better not take the hit better lol. It would be pretty cool to tank with a dragon though

[Trapalicious-area-52]

Can you link it? does it show people for vs against?

[Ogeta-area-52]

I dont remember where i saw it but here is a link to a tank spec, looks really cool and doable.

‘https://www.reddit.com/r/wow/comments/w9w9eo/evoker_tank_tree/’

[Senpu-thrall]

@Awkward-frostmourne

I wouldn’t dislike Evokers having a tank spec, but it doesn’t really solve any issues beyond adding an extra flavour of tanks.

Adding a 3rd spec (or prefeably more class options) solves the issue of preventing part of the player base from being able to main the new race at all.

@Aedred-stormrage

@Trapalicious-area-52

im going to play devastation.they should still be able to tank and it fits.

they also want the next newest class in the game cause “dragons are tanky, mommy! whaaaaaaa! I wannem!”

Or maybe most of us want get to play the games new race, a race that fills out a fantasy some of us have wanted for years, playable dragonkin. We have ended up at Evoker tank because Blizz outright stated no other classes, and outright stated no tank evoker. But some people really seem to think new from scratch spec would be easier than adding 1-2 class options to the race, so they complain about the spec thinking it would be the better option.

[Trapalicious-area-52]

I agree with you on other classes. This can run congruent with adding an evoker tank spec though; which isnt as big as you make it seem. The tree would only add 3 new spells and a bunch of passives. You can have your prot dracthyr war and i can have my evoker tank, both will fulfill two different fantasies, win win. Plus Blizzard has already said that dracthyr will get other playable classes over time.

[Caelin-boulderfist (Caelin)]

@Vigilante-khadgar

confusing to me why Envokers don’t full become dragons like Aspects do…

I can already see it. You are engaged in a pitched battle and as the party starts to falter “George” (the evoker tank) decides to go all in and transforms into a massive Black Dragon. But failed to take into account the room was so small that his dragon form filled the entire room, thus crushing not only the enemy but his allies.

[Greatbrae-dalaran]

@Trapalicious-area-52

caster doesnt necessarily mean ranged.

Didn’t i explain to you in another thread what casting mechanics have?

And no blizz is not goong to create a class biased on the only 2 cast spells that includes mitigation, they even verbally stated they have no interest in that.

@Senpu-thrall

Adding a 3rd spec (or prefeably more class options) solves the issue of preventing part of the player base from being able to main the new race at all.

It also have to add base skills to the other tree’s, thus needing to redesign the whole class via removing skills or tweeking current ones.

[Trapalicious-area-52]

@Greatbrae-dalaran

Didn’t i explain to you in another thread what casting mechanics have?

I recall you failing miserably at trying to do so

@Greatbrae-dalaran

And no blizz is not goong to create a class biased on the only 2 cast spells that includes mitigation, they even verbally stated they have no interest in that.

Why not, you work for them?

@Greatbrae-dalaran

It also have to add base skills to the other tree’s, thus needing to redesign the whole class via removing skills or tweeking current ones.

Huge assumption

[Kromkosh-thrall (Kromkosh)]

But it adds the issue of people making groups made up strictly of that class. Which, with how strong Evoker utility appears to be, could be an actual issue when considering how strong hero classes have historically been on launch.

[Senpu-thrall]

Two things on this

1. I’m an advocate for Drathyr tanks and the best solution to that is opening up the race to other classes sooner rather than later.

2. Hopefully when M+ and raid gets some testing it will look better but right now beta testers aren’t seeing the usual Hero Class superpowers.

[Trapalicious-area-52]

or give evokers a tank spec since pally, dk, dh, and monk wouldn’t really be fitting for what dracthyr are. Let them tank as evokers on launch then add druid and war for tanking classes

[Shreds-wyrmrest-accord (Shreds)]

@anon28522937

My guess is they don’t want to see an expansion happen where the vast majority of people are the same race/class.

Then they should introduce more than one cool new race at a time.