Page 11 of 27 FirstFirst ...
9
10
11
12
13
21
... LastLast
  1. #201
    Quote Originally Posted by Warpten View Post
    As a hunter who played the infamous Melee Thunderfury Hunter in Vanilla, the only thing i can say now is that i'm very pleased !

    That being said, some artifact trait and a passive you have in the spec need you to kill an enemy to have a boon (Terms of Engagement, Hunter's Bounty, Survivalism) and i don't know if it mean last hiting or just being part of the killing of said mob and i don't even know if it will work in PVE ecounter, that's kinda annoying to say the least...
    I'm pretty sure it means at least tagging and being involved with the kill.

  2. #202
    Usually it means getting the killing blow. Which can be a pita when you're not the only one doing damage to a mob.

  3. #203
    Quote Originally Posted by Gemeril View Post
    So just wondering, most people say to like at least two of the specs a class offers... so what will people who hate ranged dps offspec with surv as their main? That seems kind of silly.
    Don't play hunter if you don't like playing ranged DPS and want to play at least two specs of your class?

    There are plenty of melee choices with multiple melee DPS specs already in the game - arguably too many even.

  4. #204
    Quote Originally Posted by Bodakane View Post
    Survival is boatloads of fun. Something the hunter class has missed for awhile.
    It really is! I love playing my hunter in the invasions.

    It's too bad the damage is so abysmal... Hunters overall are pretty bad right now (although that may change with Artifacts at 110), but Survival is the lowest of the three and is almost lowest overall.
    Cheerful lack of self-preservation

  5. #205
    Quote Originally Posted by Veredyn View Post
    It really is! I love playing my hunter in the invasions.

    It's too bad the damage is so abysmal... Hunters overall are pretty bad right now (although that may change with Artifacts at 110), but Survival is the lowest of the three and is almost lowest overall.
    The dps hasn't seemed that bad to me. I do lfd on mine and have been basically tops in boss dps on almost every fight with a 700-705 ilvl. I tried lfr just to try it out and was top 5 on pretty much every fight. Top 5 overall also.

  6. #206
    Quote Originally Posted by Veredyn View Post
    It really is! I love playing my hunter in the invasions.

    It's too bad the damage is so abysmal... Hunters overall are pretty bad right now (although that may change with Artifacts at 110), but Survival is the lowest of the three and is almost lowest overall.
    Yeah, that hasn't been my experience.
    "When Facism comes to America, it will be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross." - Unknown

  7. #207
    Deleted
    I like it a hell of a lot, that said, frankly invasions are a clusterfuck of melee/NPC's so BM/MM is quite preferable, though doing Timeless during the first couple of weeks was ridiculous. having a large pull, using Dragonsflare/Explosive/Carve, damn, the numbers. Single-target ain't bad but if you screw the window it's a major pain.

    deffo tempted to have it as an alternative to BM, but MM is stupid strong IMO.

  8. #208
    Elemental Lord clevin's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    The Other Side of Azeroth
    Posts
    8,981
    Quote Originally Posted by Rakaji View Post
    HA! Telling someone not to be silly if they want to have their argument taken seriously, then immediately calling everyone with an opinion other than your own an idiot. Classic.
    Anyone who rolled a class with 3 ranged specs and no melee specs and then whined that there were no melee specs IS an idiot.

    That's not really opinion... you have to be a special kind of stupid to do that. I mean, fuck, look at what a class gives you. "Oh, I like ranged but sometimes I want to melee. Let me look at hunter (pre-Legion)... oh no melee option. " That person should be looking either at leveling a melee alt or they should look at a druid which can both melee and DPS at range.

    It's like the people who rolled rogue but were annoyed that they couldn't DPS at range... uh, people, look at the class specs. Don't pick something, then complain it's not doing something it wasn't designed to do.

    You know what? I play melee sometimes... on my rogue. A melee class. I heal too... on my priest or Druid. I don't whine that the priest can't tank or the rogue can't heal or do ranged DPS... That would be, well, idiotic.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by kamuimac View Post
    there is no place in raiding for more melee - blizzard had good intentions but since most raid teams have 3-4 melee spots there is simply no place for survival hunters in there when they could be range hunters.
    Especially since some people want to play DH DPS and people playing DH cannot be ranged. If you even are open to adding a melee slot are you going to take the person who's a good raider and really wants to play DH or the hunter who can play ranged and do fine?
    Last edited by clevin; 2016-08-19 at 12:32 AM.

  9. #209
    I'm playing it as an alt, and love it.

  10. #210
    Quote Originally Posted by MrTharne View Post
    MM without sidewinders is suboptimal by a good margin. Edit : Other ranged classes don't need a specific talent build to not have downtime.
    Fun is subjective.
    Large fixes are going out for the marksmanship module in simC. Including large bugs affecting Trick Shot.
    Quite a few are going out for AMR too, though mainly for Sidewinders.
    All data being presented from every simulator should not be presented as fact: it is far more important to be combing over these programs for consistency with in-game variables. Make sure your comments are not solely based on simulators still in development (and which will still be in development well into the expansion), unless you're sure about its verification for the particular mechanics.
    [Sims are still good for testing, of course; the more sims are done the more inconsistencies crop up and can be tracked down]
    You can read more on the fixes being done here:
    https://trueshotlodge.ca/forums/inde....msg331#msg331
    Last edited by Nakauri; 2016-08-19 at 04:28 AM.

  11. #211
    Quote Originally Posted by Nakauri View Post
    Large fixes are going out for the marksmanship module in simC. Including large bugs affecting Trick Shot.
    Quite a few are going out for AMR too, though mainly for Sidewinders.
    All data being presented from every simulator should not be presented as fact: it is far more important to be combing over these programs for consistency with in-game variables. Make sure your comments are not solely based on simulators still in development (and which will still be in development well into the expansion), unless you're sure about its verification for the particular mechanics.
    [Sims are still good for testing, of course; the more sims are done the more inconsistencies crop up and can be tracked down]
    You can read more on the fixes being done here:
    https://trueshotlodge.ca/forums/inde....msg331#msg331
    Sorry, should have wrote "as of our current knowledge."

    Rest of the post is still true though.

  12. #212
    Quote Originally Posted by clevin View Post
    Anyone who rolled a class with 3 ranged specs and no melee specs and then whined that there were no melee specs IS an idiot.

    That's not really opinion... you have to be a special kind of stupid to do that. I mean, fuck, look at what a class gives you. "Oh, I like ranged but sometimes I want to melee. Let me look at hunter (pre-Legion)... oh no melee option. " That person should be looking either at leveling a melee alt or they should look at a druid which can both melee and DPS at range.

    It's like the people who rolled rogue but were annoyed that they couldn't DPS at range... uh, people, look at the class specs. Don't pick something, then complain it's not doing something it wasn't designed to do.

    You know what? I play melee sometimes... on my rogue. A melee class. I heal too... on my priest or Druid. I don't whine that the priest can't tank or the rogue can't heal or do ranged DPS... That would be, well, idiotic.

    - - - Updated - - -



    Especially since some people want to play DH DPS and people playing DH cannot be ranged. If you even are open to adding a melee slot are you going to take the person who's a good raider and really wants to play DH or the hunter who can play ranged and do fine?
    There are a few factors that contribute to why people may want a melee spec as a hunter. Back in vanilla the Hunter has a few melee abilities because they had a "dead zone" where if a mob was too close to you, you couldn't shoot them. So when leveling (and before you got your pet, in vanilla with was lvl 10 or 20 I think) you had to melee. I have played this game since release and I can tell you that there was always a minority of people who wanted to play a melee hunter. It may not have been this huge overwhelming vocal group but it was there.

    So why would they want to? Well back then, and now, some players come from a Fantasy RPG background. If you played EQ you had the Ranger, who did well at range and in melee. If you played DnD around the 3.5 revision you had the Ranger who could focus on archery or two weapon fighting. Even in other games now like Guild Wars 2 the archer class usually starts out using the bow and then switches to dual wield or 2 hander. LOTRO, Elves and Aragorn could fuck shit up in melee and they did quite often. Drizzt!

    No before you say, those are RANGERS, not HUNTERS, we all know it doesn't matter what you call them because at their core they are all based off of the Tolkein esque fantasy genre stuff. Dude with a bow, a sword, and a pet.

    Saying that people are not free to desire a spec that fits their fantasy archetype is just plain dumb. I can remember back in vanilla that because mages could use swords people thought they might introduce some sort of melee battlemage spec.

    I like that I have a choice now, you essentially have the trifecta that ranger/hunter classes have typically had in the fantasy genre. You have the archer, the pet master, and the melee fighter.

    If whining that were wasn't a melee spec before was idiotic then whining that there is one now is too. Its there, and if you don't like it, play another spec that has 3 ranged specs.

  13. #213
    High Overlord
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Twin Cities, USA
    Posts
    120
    Quote Originally Posted by clevin View Post
    Anyone who rolled a class with 3 ranged specs and no melee specs and then whined that there were no melee specs IS an idiot.

    That's not really opinion... you have to be a special kind of stupid to do that. I mean, fuck, look at what a class gives you. "Oh, I like ranged but sometimes I want to melee. Let me look at hunter (pre-Legion)... oh no melee option. " That person should be looking either at leveling a melee alt or they should look at a druid which can both melee and DPS at range.

    It's like the people who rolled rogue but were annoyed that they couldn't DPS at range... uh, people, look at the class specs. Don't pick something, then complain it's not doing something it wasn't designed to do.

    You know what? I play melee sometimes... on my rogue. A melee class. I heal too... on my priest or Druid. I don't whine that the priest can't tank or the rogue can't heal or do ranged DPS... That would be, well, idiotic.

    - - - Updated - - -



    Especially since some people want to play DH DPS and people playing DH cannot be ranged. If you even are open to adding a melee slot are you going to take the person who's a good raider and really wants to play DH or the hunter who can play ranged and do fine?
    This. So much this.

    I would be willing to compromise and let melee hunters be a thing provided that it was optional. Lone Wolf was optional. I wanted my bear by my side, so I chose Focusing Shot (in before "you hurt your raid": I still topped my raid's meters). SV could have a similar talent. You want to melee even though you picked a ranged class? Okay, window-licker, here, take this talent and go eff yourself and your dps.

    I've tried being happy for those who are enjoying melee SV. I just can't. As others on this thread have stated--shout out to FpicEail--there's so much wrong with melee SV. Yes, people asked for melee hunters. No one asked for ranged SV because we were already ranged. The numbers are showing and will show that melee hunters are a niche. Instead of being equal to the other two specs, melee SV will be a distant third, far less a percentage than SV ever was. Yes, hunters fantasy includes melee weapons. They're backup weapons; smart combatants keep their enemies at range. Ask the French at Agincourt or Poitiers how their knights fared against English archers.

    A lot of rage, I know. Melee SV feels like Blizzard removed my spec, the one and only spec I played from Kara through BRF. It's melee now. Okay. How about BM? Mindless. Stupid. I could take up another hobby between button presses. MM? RNG is not fun. Not getting Marking Targets procs for the duration of heroism or ring uses tanks my dps. I can top the meters on one pull then be at the bottom on the next simply due to RNG. So yes, I hate hunters right now and Im not playing them. It's not easy walking away from the one and only class I've played since installing WoW. So, ya, lots of rage.

  14. #214
    IMO the melee spec ripped us off one very viable range option. By no means was the class in need for a total overhaul. Now we got one, both range specs are as far away from fun gamplay as it gets. SV is completely useless and no option at the moment because there are far too many melees in the first place. And then there's the problem with completely differing stat weight sbetween the specs. You really couldn't break the overall flexibility more than that, not even if you tried to.
    We are NOW in need of a complete overhaul if ever in the history of the game, that is my opinion on the matter. I'm even considering permanently unsubbing over this since I won't main anything other than the hunter I've always been playing and the class is just not fun at all in this state.

  15. #215
    Quote Originally Posted by Lyraat View Post
    MM? RNG is not fun. Not getting Marking Targets procs for the duration of heroism or ring uses tanks my dps. I can top the meters on one pull then be at the bottom on the next simply due to RNG. So yes, I hate hunters right now and Im not playing them. It's not easy walking away from the one and only class I've played since installing WoW. So, ya, lots of rage.
    This was Arcane Mage for over a year - and it required 2 trinkets from Manny and Archie, and transitioning from Mastery to Haste mid progression. Having to fish for 2-3 Arcane Missiles, waiting for Prophecy to proc, and hope you get more Arcane Missiles within your Arcane Power window made for disastrous or glorious DPS. Progressing through M HFC with this play style wasn't the end of the world and was a net positive in my experience.

    MM will see good pulls and bad pulls. Overall most classes are relying on proc fishing, with some having better mechanics than others. This is one of the ways that Blizzard can lower the skill ceiling by introducing random elements to gameplay. This also allows more classes to be at the top versus Mage, Rogue, Warlock, then everyone else muddled in.

    It will work out for the best.

  16. #216
    Quote Originally Posted by Heltoray View Post
    IMO the melee spec ripped us off one very viable range option. By no means was the class in need for a total overhaul. Now we got one, both range specs are as far away from fun gamplay as it gets. SV is completely useless and no option at the moment because there are far too many melees in the first place. And then there's the problem with completely differing stat weight sbetween the specs. You really couldn't break the overall flexibility more than that, not even if you tried to.
    We are NOW in need of a complete overhaul if ever in the history of the game, that is my opinion on the matter. I'm even considering permanently unsubbing over this since I won't main anything other than the hunter I've always been playing and the class is just not fun at all in this state.
    Its hard to make the claim that we were ripped off of a viable spec because had survival been ranged, we have no idea how they would have pruned/reworked that one. It could have been a terrible ranged spec for all we know.

  17. #217
    Elemental Lord clevin's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    The Other Side of Azeroth
    Posts
    8,981
    Quote Originally Posted by teverin View Post
    There are a few factors that contribute to why people may want a melee spec as a hunter. Back in vanilla the Hunter has a few melee abilities because they had a "dead zone" where if a mob was too close to you, you couldn't shoot them. So when leveling (and before you got your pet, in vanilla with was lvl 10 or 20 I think) you had to melee. I have played this game since release and I can tell you that there was always a minority of people who wanted to play a melee hunter. It may not have been this huge overwhelming vocal group but it was there.
    Yeah, I remember hearing this. I started in late vanilla but my hunter's from LK, so I never played during the time when melee was at all a real thing. I remember the abilities but by time I was raining a hunter the phrase 'melee hunter' was one of ridicule. However, my point is that most of the hunters today almost certainly did not roll one back in Vanilla so they consciously chose a class that does ranged DPS. To do that and then say "but I want melee" is nonsensical. Speaking of that...
    So why would they want to? Well back then, and now, some players come from a Fantasy RPG background. If you played EQ you had the Ranger, who did well at range and in melee. If you played DnD around the 3.5 revision you had the Ranger who could focus on archery or two weapon fighting. Even in other games now like Guild Wars 2 the archer class usually starts out using the bow and then switches to dual wield or 2 hander. LOTRO, Elves and Aragorn could fuck shit up in melee and they did quite often. Drizzt!
    Sure, but that way lies "I want X because it exists in fantasy universe Z!" People still need to deal with the fact that a) they're playing in the WoW universe, not another and b) that hunters were ranged when they rolled.

    Saying that people are not free to desire a spec that fits their fantasy archetype is just plain dumb. I can remember back in vanilla that because mages could use swords people thought they might introduce some sort of melee battlemage spec.
    And here we'll mostly disagree. I can see why people might desire it, but really complaining about it to the degree that some people do is, IMO, silly. It's another example of people not wanting to take responsibility for themselves and their choices. Want a melee class? Roll one. It's not like you're limited to a single class in WoW. Oh right, that's extra work and you're not then a hunter.
    I like that I have a choice now, you essentially have the trifecta that ranger/hunter classes have typically had in the fantasy genre. You have the archer, the pet master, and the melee fighter.

    If whining that were wasn't a melee spec before was idiotic then whining that there is one now is too. Its there, and if you don't like it, play another spec that has 3 ranged specs.
    First, I am switching classes. Second, your NEW option FORCES a lot of us to switch because they not only took one of our spec choices away from us, but in doing so fucked up the implementation badly. If I want to play ranged with a pet I have ONE choice, not 3 as I did prior to this. If I want traps, I have to play SV and melee because my ranged specs all of a sudden have lost a key ability, to be able to deploy traps.

    All of us who never wanted a melee hunter have been screwed over because your camp was to lazy to go roll a melee alt. You ALWAYS had the choice to play melee. You just never got off your ass and actually did anything about it.

  18. #218
    Quote Originally Posted by FpicEail View Post
    Pretty sure approximately 0 people were asking for melee hunters.
    Quote Originally Posted by Sencha View Post
    Fully agree.
    I did...went from my Fury Warrior to my Survival Hunter.

  19. #219
    Quote Originally Posted by dbabendererde View Post
    I did...went from my Fury Warrior to my Survival Hunter.
    Yet more proof that Legion's hunter changes as a whole, including changing Survival to melee, were made for the sake of people who didn't play hunters.

  20. #220
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by FpicEail View Post
    Yet more proof that Legion's hunter changes as a whole, including changing Survival to melee, were made for the sake of people who didn't play hunters.


    Melee hunter was something people wanted ever since vanilla.. just because you didn't want it, doesn't mean no one wanted it and just because they wanted it doesn't mean everyone wanted it.
    I'm still getting "complaints" from my flist that they'd love to have a melee-arcane mage, it's cool and unique and I'd probably start a mage if they'd ever get one.
    The pet+melee combat is probably the most sought out hunter fantasy since WoW release. Rexxar is liked by these people for a reason.


    I can't believe it's so hard for people to understand that a melee Hunter+pet is different from (for example) a DK+pet... "play X instead of Y then" doesn't help, it's not the same, it never will be the same and it doesn't play the same - it's not a valid substitute
    Last edited by mmoc96d9238e4b; 2016-08-20 at 12:52 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •