This has already be talk about 100 times and your not going to get the class as a Tank this xpac the race might get to lean some thing later down the line what the devs have said
lol, further proof you are just here to argue? It is a supporting argument for adding the spec, period. What is your argument against?
Not true and never stated. Of all the specs in the game tanks have the least, a supporting argument for a tanking spec, what is your argument against?
is a fact regarding increasing options for group composition, what is your argument against? More options = more combinations.
It offers a playstyle that is unique…yes exactly, what is your argument against?
No one knows the future for certain, duh. But so far 2 classes in a row are released with two specs and a trend is forming, this would stop that trend.
Cool…was a side not for the related thread that came out of…so what? what is your argument against?
How so, please explain exactly how a class designed around using all the dragon aspects does not fit the theme or lore by using black gold red and green aspects to tank, even blue. so again what is your argument against?
the spec trees add 3 spells and various passives, in addition various iterations of tanking trees for evokers already exist. Its as simple as giving 3 unique tank spells and voila you have a spec to then tune like all the other specs. What is your argument against?
That is your interpretation, they would still use their base toolkit and other spells because the entire class revolves around using all the aspects but it would definitely add more representation to the black aspect
alas youre actually right, this is my opinion, and now I’m asking for yours…which you dont seem to have one. so not only are you wasting my time you are also wasting yours to just talk and bicker about anything but the subject of evoker tanks.
Do what you like, at what point did i give the impression i am trying to convince you? But please mr know it all…you are yet to give any kind of argument for or against which is the whole point of this thread. Instead you continue to argue nothing and offer no arguments of your own be it for or against the idea, which begs the question why did you even respond other than to bicker?
Cmon big boy, lets see your arguments for or against.
2 Likes
The devs have all ready said the class we’ll remain the same the race might get to learn other class but not this xpac just like dh and dk have no caster or healers
Ever since I started playing wow I have noticed how toxic the community actually is, the dude legit asked a yes or no question and why and you degenerates cant even respond to it.
I for one would love to see them tank, and the caster tank thing sounds pretty sick
4 Likes
How does a caster based tank take away from casters? By your logic doesnt that give casters something new? Other than that do you have supporting arguments or evidence of why you do not think evokers should get a tank spec?
Cool, devs have stated things then went back on what they said based on community feed back. They said so isn’t your reason reason for or against
And honestly just like with conduit power and meaningful choice for covenents, we need to raise the flags now that we don’t approve of locking a new race out of roles. The class is fine as is but the race shouldn’t be restricted out of half of the games roles.
2 Likes
The class is for caster and healers not for tanks just get use to it and I agree with them caster and healers only
If you would like evoker tanks state why and how would you like the spec to play
If you don’t state why and how it affects you if they do get a tank spec
These promts don’t sound like a Yes or No question to me.
1 Like
Nope, if anything it’s proof that I actually know the difference between a claim / an assertion vs. an argument vs. evidence / an example
It’s a “claim” just like you are now making the incorrect claim that it is an “argument”.
I don’t have to present an argument against a non-argument 
If the underlying premise of a ratio to be kept isn’t there and not stated then your claim becomes a trivial tautology with no relation to your main assertion.
So?
No, in order the be an “argument” you’d have to present why the spec count should matter in the first place
It’s still just a claim not a fact. You won’t be able to prove it until that which is your original assertion has come true and players then have chosen to do what you predict.
I still don’t have to provide arguments against a claim that didn’t present arguments either.
Trivial tautology
So you claim
So I don’t have to make an argument against.
And thus no amount of conjecture about said future can constitute a valid “argument”.
Care to provide proof that this trend will continue and / or how that alleged trend is “bad”?
So it’s useless and unrelated to your assertion?!
There’s no sense in arguing a fact. But here’s the “problem”: That fact is still useless in terms of supporting your original assertion.
I don’t have to deliver such an explaination for your claim
Nor have I have to present arguments against that
Where did you pull that number of 3 from? How many spells would come from talents?
What has the spell count to do with animation implemetation?
By now you should know the answer to that
No, YOU made a claim about how it woudl be set up.
An opinion that isn’t based on evidence or arguments.
And you’re asking in vein
I’m of the opinion that I don’t need to present my opinion on a topic that is badly presented and leads nowhere.
Let’s just say that it’s my decision what I “waste” my time on
Did I say you do?
Ah finally the “attempt insults” phase has commenced
I gave what you deserved
You were already informed why you’re not getting to see what you seemingly desire so much.
That question was ansered before.
2 Likes
ah frara, just who i was waiting for
read that last part for me out loud please
i think something broke in your reply
Cool, do you have anything to add regarding why evokers should or shouldn’t get tank specs or are you going to continue lecturing on the arts of arguing. I want to see what other people actually have to say regarding the matter and you don’t want to address the topic
I’m afraid that is not what you want …
you want to disprove other peoples opinions as seen everywhere…
1 Like
Well this is a new fresh take eh?
LOL I say that change looks like you were responding to your self maybe?
1 Like
Indeed … somehow the “reply”-button was triggered. But the edit function came to the rescue ~laugh~
3 Likes
DUH! and i am still yet to see a valid argument against evoker tanks. I actually do want to see them so I make sure i can debunk most of them in my final pitch to blizz.
2 Likes
That question get’s the same answer that your binary choice about Evoker tanks “yes” or “no” got: A definite “maybe”
I’m not even giving you a lecture (I would certainly demand payment for doing such a thing). By now I’m merely entertaining myself … probably at your expense.
So far there don’t seem to be many takers … maybe refer back to my first posting to understand why?!
I’m addressing the chosen topic constantly
1 Like
Should evokers get it? No i dont think it would really be a benefit or gain to the game. DH only got 2 specs as well.
Also seems their design for the spec in general is ranged and caster both won’t work for a tank, but doesn’t mean they can’t come up with 10 spells that are melee based for them to use either
1 Like
Amamonk, thank you…it really is that simple. I obviously disagree with you but im not here to argue with you as much as take a tally of all the different points that come up. BUT fyi there is a response to both those points already made and waiting.