Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst
1
2
3
LastLast
  1. #21
    Bloodsail Admiral Kissthebaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,012
    No dumb, will never happen

    kissthebaby#1726

  2. #22
    Brewmaster MrKnubbles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    1,470
    Quote Originally Posted by Simulatio View Post
    Why would I pick hunter if I wanted a melee class?
    You don't want diversity? Tank and healer classes are quite different in their own specs. At least switching to melee would offer a completely different Hunter play style. I like it.

    Nothing can hold me back!

  3. #23
    Bloodsail Admiral Kissthebaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,012
    Quote Originally Posted by MrKnubbles View Post
    You don't want diversity? Tank and healer classes are quite different in their own specs. At least switching to melee would offer a completely different Hunter play style. I like it.
    Lets give rogues a ranged spec by that logic.

    kissthebaby#1726

  4. #24
    Question for everyone wanting a BM melee spec.

    Why the hell would you willingly want to be melee? To willingly give up your ranged for melee is gimping yourself. Melee are terrible in raid content, keep what you have a stay ranged, stay smart.

  5. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by derpkitteh View Post
    unholy sucks massive cock. DoT specs in general suck massive cock, but unholy is just clunky and terrible. if i'm playing melee, i want straight up, facefucking damage right then and there.
    What would a Beastmaster do in melee? I imagine some bleeds, maybe some beast-like abilities like a venom, fire breath like a chimaera... Oh wait, those are all DoTs.

    It'd play almost exactly like Unholy. At least, the way I see it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    If a building's about to collapse, you can debate whether it's better to demolish it or repair it, and you can make political-agenda arguments either way. Disputing gravity itself to claim it won't fall down is not a political position, it's just ignorance.

  6. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by Okay View Post
    Question for everyone wanting a BM melee spec.

    Why the hell would you willingly want to be melee? To willingly give up your ranged for melee is gimping yourself. Melee are terrible in raid content, keep what you have a stay ranged, stay smart.
    To be fair, the most iconic Beast Master Hunter in the lore is Rexxar who can use a bow but is primarily a melee brawler who jumps in next to his pets. Beast Masters in most fantasy universes and games are melee combatants as well.

    We're just too far into the game's life to make that jump.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fleugen View Post
    What would a Beastmaster do in melee? I imagine some bleeds, maybe some beast-like abilities like a venom, fire breath like a chimaera... Oh wait, those are all DoTs.

    It'd play almost exactly like Unholy. At least, the way I see it.
    It honestly wouldn't take much to build one if the game were new, but that's not the case.
    Last edited by Bullettime; 2014-03-07 at 05:42 AM.

  7. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by KiwiDragon91 View Post
    Nice , Trolling mate...
    Care to explain the troll there?

    Mages never had a pet, then frost got a "guardian" then it became a permanent pet. If you're going to quote me (and "edit" the quote at that), then you could atleast explain your stance.

    Hunters might never have had a melee spec (although they did have a few melee abilities), but my point was that classes often get re-designed and not always to the agreement of those playing them.

  8. #28
    It's dumb and they would never do it as they would have to bring in a whole new set of abilities
    Quote Originally Posted by Count Zero View Post
    I think MMO-C should be renamed "HJTC-C" - Hyperbolic Jumping To Conclusions Champion.

  9. #29
    I think it could be really great, as many people have Quoted "the most iconic Beast Master Hunter in the lore is Rexxar" I mean diving into battle chopping and chomping in a flurry of Claws, Paws and Blades, it could be EPIC!

    Those saying “It's dumb”, No it’s not, the concept could be dam cool. But it’s ok, you can relax your panties because it WILL NEVER HAPPEN!!! They will never remove the current BM Model, way too popular as it is, it’s pretty balanced, unique and plays better than it ever has before, oh that and too many people would complain and say intelligent things like “Nar, That’s dumb!”

  10. #30
    Pit Lord Poppincaps's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Post-Apocalyptic America
    Posts
    2,324
    While I think it would make sense it is just too big of a change to a long established spec. Many people who chose the hunter chose it because of it being a ranged class and it being a pet class. Removing those things messes with the core of the class itself.

    Petless hunter is one thing because it is more of a cosmetic change (although one I think that is very important) but melee hunter would be completely changing the role. They would anger too many people, me being one of them. The class and spec have been around for far too long for them to make such a drastic change. Same reason why they'll never make Enhancement a tanking spec.

  11. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by rickhunterr View Post
    After seeing the trailer for warlords, how cool would it be for BM to be a Melee class instead of a range. It already fits since most of the damage is from your pet.
    NO! I love Bm as it is!

    Maybe make melle frost mages, melle holy priests etc.. or ranged fury warriors..! Why would anyone want such things? We already chose our classes for a reason, don't mess with us!
    I could agree with 4th spec for every class, but ruining existing ones - NO!

  12. #32
    whoever wants melee BM, plz roll enh. shaman. It has everything u dream of as a melee BM.

  13. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by Simulatio View Post
    Why would I pick hunter if I wanted a melee class?
    Basically this.

    Azortharion#2528 - Skype: azortharion - Stream - Hunter F.A.Q - YT - Hunter IRC - Twitter

  14. #34
    High Overlord
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Waco, Tx, USA
    Posts
    111
    Wait...why BM?

    I'm sure this is has been said already, but Surv would make more sense for a melee/Ranger spec. In Vanilla/Beta, it was intended as one, and I think before they redid the spellbooks in Cata, all the melee abilities that Hunters had (like Wing Clip and Raptor Strike) were under the Survival tab.

    Right now, the three Hunter specs are too similar. Making BM focus more on active abilities that have your pet do things (like Kill Command) would differentiate it, but Surv and MM are still going to be similar. Surv being a melee spec would make it rather different.

    The problem, though, is all in abilities. Classes tend to share a lot of abilities, at least, baseline abilities. Hunters have shots. Well, since there's no longer a ranged weapon slot, a melee Surv would have buttons they don't use (Steady Shot, for instance) when they have a melee weapon equipped. And while you can swap weapons in combat, having that as a component of the gameplay, with the way WoW is built and weapon swapping works (it's not an ability, it's a macro/character sheet action), it wouldn't work well as a gameplay function.

    But yes, if it was going to happen, Surv would make more sense.

    And I do agree with the poster that pointed out how rigid class structures are. There are no melee pet classes really (Undead DKs, maybe?) For the most part, class structures ARE rather rigid. And just moreso over time due to the homogenization and the way they make encounter mechanics force things on the classes (each tanking class has the same basic kit now, likewise healers with the small/medium/large heals, etc.)

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Kissthebaby View Post
    Lets give rogues a ranged spec by that logic.
    What's wrong with that?

    I've advocated for a while for a Rogue "dual wielding pistol" spec. Gunslinger. And, likewise, for a Warrior ranged spec that uses two handers. Rifleman.

    I'd be fine with any of these things happening. So it's not bad logic to everyone.

  15. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by Renathras View Post
    What's wrong with that?

    I've advocated for a while for a Rogue "dual wielding pistol" spec. Gunslinger. And, likewise, for a Warrior ranged spec that uses two handers. Rifleman.

    I'd be fine with any of these things happening. So it's not bad logic to everyone.
    The point is if every class starts getting melee and ranged. all will tend to become more and more alike.

  16. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by Simulatio View Post
    Why would I pick hunter if I wanted a melee class?
    Because Rexxar...

    Changing BM to be mele spec - wrong. Too many players are attached to their spec and playstyle.

    Adding 4th, mele, spec - that could be neat. Rexxar wannabie!
    Quote Originally Posted by Archaeon View Post
    In tbc everyone wished they were playing vanilla. In cataclysm everyone will wish they were playing wotlk.
    ^------True story!!

  17. #37
    playing as a Rexxar type character would be awesome

    but i think there was some twitter post recently how they won't change bm to be a melee type class

  18. #38
    No matter how much people complain, the truth is that Hunters are this game's most unique class compared to everybody else. You've got ranged casters and melee fighters so whatever you chose you're either casting spells from distance or looking the boss in the ass and hurting him with weapons.

    With hunters you are actually the only one not casting spells or wielding your sword but you have a bow, a gun or a crossbow. So why would you want to be another guy standing behind the boss and looking him in the ass?

    I don't get it why people complain and delude themselves with stuff that hunter speccs should and could feel different from one another? You're a ranged sniper first so whether you're pressing explosive shot or kill command doesn't and can't make any difference. It's just a different skill while you're still shooting your bow/gun/xbow so no, hunters specs should never really feel different.

    I'll go as far as to say Hunters should really only have one specc since our primary thing is ranged damage and trying to make people feel like we're anything else just because we have a different spec is stupid. Most Hunters are BM/SV anyway because those are the two highest performing specs so basically SV is only a better version of MM and BM is for those who prefer their pets do more damage than them but still want to fire a ranged weapon.

    Different hunter specs will never feel the way a druid feels when he goes from melee feral damage to casting in balance spec. We will never know what it feels like to go from DPSing with shadow spells to healing with holy spells like a priest. Or being a DOT warlock with shadow spells or high casting damage with fire spells. We trade our unique play style for having not much different specs from three choices. I'd rather play my hunter that way than being a kind of mage with bow who has one spec for high burst, the other is a CC spec and the other is a raiding spec. That would mean a huge workaround and at least 2 specs would lose most of the traps and other abilities that make you awesome as a hunter in any specc almost.

  19. #39
    I don't understand the knee jerk resistance to the Idea of a BM as a Melee Spec. If you think all the specs play the same then making BM a melee spec, since 50% of you damage is in melee range any way, only makes sense. Saying that making BM melee will make us UHDk's is like saying survival makes us Affliction Warlock. Plus the change would make all three specs different thematically BM Melee hunter MM weapon/nature damage Surv dot/fire damage.
    Last edited by rickhunterr; 2014-03-07 at 09:45 PM.

  20. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by rickhunterr View Post
    I don't understand the knee jerk resistance to the Idea of a BM as a Melee Spec. If you think all the specs play the same then making BM a melee spec, since 50% of you damage is in melee range any way, only makes sense. Saying that making BM melee will make us UHDk's is like saying survival makes us Affliction Warlock. Plus the change would make all three specs different thematically BM Melee hunter MM weapon/nature damage Surv dot/fire damage.
    the reason i choose hunter because it was a ranged physical DPS. if wanted a melee agi class, i would go enh. shaman.

Posting Permissions

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