SV and the future

[Dracodraco]

I agree with your points, but the correlation will still exist. SV can still have a place in mythic raids (like Ferals) but there will be less of them than MM/BM, just like boomkins. SV will also bring ranged slows/snares. While not beneficial to every fight, they still will probably see time on any fight like Gorefiend to slow adds or fights like Garrosh for tank kiting.

Ferals have brought things to the table that Boomkins haven't, though, in terms of raw singletarget damage usually (that's how they survived most of MOP, due to RoRo shenanigans and snapshotting). In legion they're going to have the exclusive stampeding roar which is only really confronted by the shaman movement speed totem as well, further giving them an actual use.

Meanwhile, the best people can sell surv hunters are "they have good singletarget damage and burst", which is also 100% true for Marksmanship hunters - especially when we start seeing more special-effect gear.

As for bringing ranged slows/snares, that's not really unique utility enough that they'll be worth bringing. DK, monk and Warrior tanks all have "passive" slows that triggers from their AOE which are far more versatile (not confined to a 8yard radius area), DKs in general can cause the exact same effect as the Tar Trap with Death and Decay (and deal damage, and not rely on triggering the trap beforehand), Shamans also still have Earthgrab totem, and the other two hunter specs brings concussive shot as a ranged slow anyway.

As Tehterokkar said - Surv just doesn't bring *anything* to the table that would ever make it a better choice than Marksmanship. Being allowed to go surv and benefitting the raid by going surv are two entirely different things - and I'd argue that any hunter taking up a melee spot just to be contrary is doing their guild a disservice when they could employ far stronger melee, with better utility that isn't already covered by tons of other classes (such as, say, Death grips from DKs who also gets the "target area slow"). It's different from Enh or Feral versus Elemental / Boomkin, because what Surv brings just isn't different enough or superior enough to be a better choice than MM. If Surv gets played, it will be because *the player* is performing above the average in his guild, meaning he could play *any class, any spec* and still perform at the top end of his team.

[Eapoe]

Ferals have brought things to the table that Boomkins haven't, though, in terms of raw singletarget damage usually (that's how they survived most of MOP, due to RoRo shenanigans and snapshotting). In legion they're going to have the exclusive stampeding roar which is only really confronted by the shaman movement speed totem as well, further giving them an actual use.

Meanwhile, the best people can sell surv hunters are "they have good singletarget damage and burst", which is also 100% true for Marksmanship hunters - especially when we start seeing more special-effect gear.

As for bringing ranged slows/snares, that's not really unique utility enough that they'll be worth bringing. DK, monk and Warrior tanks all have "passive" slows that triggers from their AOE which are far more versatile (not confined to a 8yard radius area), DKs in general can cause the exact same effect as the Tar Trap with Death and Decay (and deal damage, and not rely on triggering the trap beforehand), Shamans also still have Earthgrab totem, and the other two hunter specs brings concussive shot as a ranged slow anyway.

As Tehterokkar said - Surv just doesn't bring *anything* to the table that would ever make it a better choice than Marksmanship. Being allowed to go surv and benefitting the raid by going surv are two entirely different things - and I'd argue that any hunter taking up a melee spot just to be contrary is doing their guild a disservice when they could employ far stronger melee, with better utility that isn't already covered by tons of other classes (such as, say, Death grips from DKs who also gets the "target area slow"). It's different from Enh or Feral versus Elemental / Boomkin, because what Surv brings just isn't different enough or superior enough to be a better choice than MM. If Surv gets played, it will be because *the player* is performing above the average in his guild, meaning he could play *any class, any spec* and still perform at the top end of his team.

Ferals are devalued by Gaurdians having a 1 min CD on roar (barring needing to use 1 after another). SV also brings more to the table than Ferals on any council fights/HFA fights where you get AoE/cleave doing your normal rotation.
On fights like Gorefiend the mobs are too spread and spawn on different timers to put your melee on the priority of trying to follow and AoE them for a slow. Fights like Garrosh/Tortoise where you don't even kill adds makes even less sense to try and have a melee follow with the mobs to provide slows.
Not all DKs have a slow to their DnD, and not all have a grip/mass grip combo anymore.
Concussive Shot is also a ST ability that only lets you slow 1 enemy at a time, which again, going to a Gore style fight, is problematic when there are 3+ adds up chasing your rdps around.
The problem with Tehterrokar's post is that it doesn't have to beat MM/BM, it has to bring enough to be a melee, and as such needs to bring what other melee bring. Just like the difference of Boomkin/Feral is that with any number of other classes Feral isn't needed or even made that majorly desirable outside of a straight single target fight (yes, they will do great damage to the boss but offer little on priority add switching). (Anecdotal) We have a feral Druid in our guild, and on Arch does amazing damage to the boss himself, but falls very short on any add that spawns, and sometimes didn't even contribute to any add damage during the fight. In a nutshell, comparing SV to the other 2 is the equivalent of comparing any melee class to a ranged. It's not so much a difference between 3 ranged specs as it is comparing a melee to ranged dps. Instead of asking is SV viable over MM/BM, people need to look at it as "is SV viable compared to all the other melee?" If that still remains to be a no, then that has more merit compared to other debates on the topic.

[satimy]

Survival should've been a spear thrower, or demon hunters should've been a ranged dps class. Adding 2 melee to what was already crowded scene seems silly

[Haram]

Adding more melee in a game that is already flooded with melees means that there are even less raid spots available for existing melees. And for a ranged dps class to want to play melee, they won't have a spot in mythic progression guilds.

Since launch, Blizz have only added in melee specializations. DK, Monk, DH are all melee classes, and now Survival is another melee spec. I'm not sure why they haven't introduced a single ranged class or spec into the game.

[Eapoe]

Adding more melee in a game that is already flooded with melees means that there are even less raid spots available for existing melees. And for a ranged dps class to want to play melee, they won't have a spot in mythic progression guilds.

Since launch, Blizz have only added in melee specializations. DK, Monk, DH are all melee classes, and now Survival is another melee spec. I'm not sure why they haven't introduced a single ranged class or spec into the game.

Yet again, feral says hi. What about Paladins? Should they stick to heals or tank only?
I get what you are saying, but it's been added, and classes have multiple specs to them.
I happen to be in a mythic progression guild, and I will be playing SV, as will some other people as they have stated; however, if it's the weakest melee class (and by that I mean 10+% damage lower than the 2nd lowest melee) I will switch over to a MM/BM Hunter. As it stands, quite a few of our melee are switching to ranged, which means some melee spots opened up.
As my last post stated, we need to stop looking at SV vs MM/BM and now start looking at SV vs all other melee specs.

[clevin]

Doesn't really matter to me if it's a hunter or not. Just saying it's not a bad spec and there are people playing it.
The fact that you don't like the ranged hunter specs doesn't really have anything to do with SV being melee. If it was ranged, who knows, maybe it'd be mediocre as well.

Of course you like it. You like melee and you've not been a hunter before. With due respect, I don't want Blizzard to cater to you vs people who've played hunter for years

[Dadwen]

On the plus side after playing SV for over 8 years and having them throw those that liked SV under the buss it was just the push I needed to stay away (quit the first march after WOD launched because I though the class design was crap), and at the risk of sounding a bit bitter I hope legion falls flat on it's face more so than WOD
*(still come here for the off topic forums but figured I'd check on how the hunter things were going today).

[spinner981]

I feel like the only reason SV actually has an ok designed spec right now is because whoever took over the hunter design team flat out doesn't know how to design hunters but does know how to design warriors.

Personally, I hate that it is melee now. What was wrong with old survival? Nothing was wrong with it. For all the talk about the 'vocal minority' they sure did listen to the tiny number of hunters who actually wanted a melee hunter spec.

It will probably be reverted to ranged at some point in the future, hopefully. Not only because I want old survival back, but because now we only have two specs in the entire game to divide the 'uses a ranged weapon' fantasies between, and somehow they reduced the amount of fantasy for both MM and BM anyway. Can we please get somebody on the blizzard dev team to actually play and care about the hunter class? Heck, the dude they sent to the hunter forums to 'gather feedback' even admitted that he is ignorant about the hunter class (not bashing his honesty, just sayin). That plus the known fact that we went like 2 years with bestial wrath still dispelling CC effects on the hunter, which blizzard didn't intend, and they had to be told about it before they realized it still worked that way only for them to 'fix' it shortly after, because BM hunter was totally dominating PvP. Forget playing a hunter, it made it sound like no blizzard dev had even encountered a hunter.

[Spiral Mage]

I've mostly heard SV praised but not because it's viable, or that people even wanna play melee. It's just the only playable spec. MM and BM are broken to hell and back and BLIZ never showed any desire to fix them. I went SV with my Hunter, not because I wanted to but because BM is dead to me and I won't play MM, so what am I left with? Atleast my Pet and I can still work together with this spec. Can't say the same for BM with this Hati pet, and the barrage of summoned beasts. BM is just fuck awful, from a forced second pet, to zero interaction or depth to playing. We're basically a stripped down Rogue with nothing to even remotely consider or care about. Then, you have the annoying whistle spam that summons a ton of other pets. Atleast with SV, it's ME, my Pet and NO ONE ELSE. So I went with it. All I fucking wanted, as for BM to have Chimera Shot baseline and be almost exactly like WOD and I would have been happy but out of all the classes who got completely destroyed in LGN, Hunter unquestionably got it the worst.

[Triggered Fridgekin]

I like melee SV but it could definitely use more time in the oven. It feels unconventional and half-baked which makes the overall flow awkward but in a satisfying way if you want a completely alternate playstyle. This is why I'm picking Hunter as my main over Mage because BM/MM can fulfill their roles in raiding and mythic+ content whereas SV can provide a breath of fresh air without having to grind another class or really miss being melee.

As a whole, I like Hunter which I cannot say the same about nearly all other classes and that will go a long way in holding my interest.

[Dracodraco]

Ferals are devalued by Gaurdians having a 1 min CD on roar (barring needing to use 1 after another). SV also brings more to the table than Ferals on any council fights/HFA fights where you get AoE/cleave doing your normal rotation.

Doesn't matter if guardians devalue ferals - it still provides more utility than surv hunters do. If you wanted AOE/Cleave, you'd NEVER go surv. You'd go MM where all your damage is cleave and 100% free.

On fights like Gorefiend the mobs are too spread and spawn on different timers to put your melee on the priority of trying to follow and AoE them for a slow. Fights like Garrosh/Tortoise where you don't even kill adds makes even less sense to try and have a melee follow with the mobs to provide slows.
Not all DKs have a slow to their DnD, and not all have a grip/mass grip combo anymore.

First off - melee were assigned to adds on early progression. Spec or class didn't matter, killing the boss did. That said, the classes with AOE slows are the tank, who were free to do W/E as soon as their big add died. I personally spent a lot of time AOE slowing after my add died during progress.
Secondly - all DKs have a slow with their DnD if spec'd into tightening grasp IIRC, which they might as well as that talent tier is largely useless.

Concussive Shot is also a ST ability that only lets you slow 1 enemy at a time, which again, going to a Gore style fight, is problematic when there are 3+ adds up chasing your rdps around.

And pray tell, apart from the "triggered in a 8yd radius" slow trap, which ranged slows do Surv hunters have again? Point was that the other hunter specs provide slows as well, but in a better form than Surv.

The problem with Tehterrokar's post is that it doesn't have to beat MM/BM, it has to bring enough to be a melee, and as such needs to bring what other melee bring. Just like the difference of Boomkin/Feral is that with any number of other classes Feral isn't needed or even made that majorly desirable outside of a straight single target fight (yes, they will do great damage to the boss but offer little on priority add switching). (Anecdotal) We have a feral Druid in our guild, and on Arch does amazing damage to the boss himself, but falls very short on any add that spawns, and sometimes didn't even contribute to any add damage during the fight. In a nutshell, comparing SV to the other 2 is the equivalent of comparing any melee class to a ranged. It's not so much a difference between 3 ranged specs as it is comparing a melee to ranged dps. Instead of asking is SV viable over MM/BM, people need to look at it as "is SV viable compared to all the other melee?" If that still remains to be a no, then that has more merit compared to other debates on the topic.

And that's where you're wrong. Your surv hunter COULD be a MM hunter pretty much instantly. The only thing he needs is a weapon, and as we use artifacts, that's easily solved. Comparing Surv to other melee is a fallacy - you're playing a pure DPS class, you need to be viable with all specs.

Also, your anecdotal evidence is just that; Our feral is always doing fairly well on adds and she's ranked among the very top of the spec. But that's entirely beside your point - these are the two PoVs essentially presented:

1: You think Surv should only be compared to other melee and be held up against them (but even for melee Surv falls short because all the "utility" surv brings can be brought by a DK, along with extra stuff like Deathgrips).

2: I think a hunter should be compared to all the possible specs. It's nothing like a boomkin vs feral situation because they use the exact same gear, so it's not like he's locked into the choice.

[Eapoe]

Doesn't matter if guardians devalue ferals - it still provides more utility than surv hunters do. If you wanted AOE/Cleave, you'd NEVER go surv. You'd go MM where all your damage is cleave and 100% free.



First off - melee were assigned to adds on early progression. Spec or class didn't matter, killing the boss did. That said, the classes with AOE slows are the tank, who were free to do W/E as soon as their big add died. I personally spent a lot of time AOE slowing after my add died during progress.
Secondly - all DKs have a slow with their DnD if spec'd into tightening grasp IIRC, which they might as well as that talent tier is largely useless.



And pray tell, apart from the "triggered in a 8yd radius" slow trap, which ranged slows do Surv hunters have again? Point was that the other hunter specs provide slows as well, but in a better form than Surv.



And that's where you're wrong. Your surv hunter COULD be a MM hunter pretty much instantly. The only thing he needs is a weapon, and as we use artifacts, that's easily solved. Comparing Surv to other melee is a fallacy - you're playing a pure DPS class, you need to be viable with all specs.

Also, your anecdotal evidence is just that; Our feral is always doing fairly well on adds and she's ranked among the very top of the spec. But that's entirely beside your point - these are the two PoVs essentially presented:

1: You think Surv should only be compared to other melee and be held up against them (but even for melee Surv falls short because all the "utility" surv brings can be brought by a DK, along with extra stuff like Deathgrips).

2: I think a hunter should be compared to all the possible specs. It's nothing like a boomkin vs feral situation because they use the exact same gear, so it's not like he's locked into the choice.

1). DK's were mostly used for mass grip, not the solo one. They no longer have mass grip except tanks, so unless you have a Blood DK, you will be hard pressed to grip in multiple adds at a time, let alone get them to the spot you want for a targeted slow since they will grip to themselves and not q target they pick. This is also besides the point because now they place a targeted slow that, while it does damage, becomes useless if adds aren't kited over the spot and can waste a GCD losing damage 100% of the damage from it.
2). This applies to everyone, so not sure how the feral vs boomkin doesn't hold up with you. Primary stats switch on gear per spec, and last I knew off pieces don't even have primary anymore (this might have changed). Also, not all specs amongst a class use the exact same gear as secondary values are different for all. If you are going to compare SV to all specs then all specs need to be compared to each other, which is along the lines of just filling your raid with the highest possible dps classes/specs and forgoing all others. If a melee is behind any rdps, why would you just not have that melee switch to a rdps and forgo melee completely?

Comparing a ST slow vs an AoE ground effect slow doesn't hold up. Yes, MM/BM bring a slow, but how does that help when a tank is kiting 6+ adds around (or any other kiting situation with multiple adds that would require a melee to pull off boss)?
Again, we are discussing anecdotal things on Gorefiend. Your guild pulled adds off the boss, mine didn't. We handled them with all ranged classes killing them and melee only stopping on the boss to run the debuff out. We also did not prioritize the big add, which left him alive for a long time, usually until just before the 2nd tank went down.

[Okacz]

Survival should've been a spear thrower, or demon hunters should've been a ranged dps class. Adding 2 melee to what was already crowded scene seems silly

DH should have been given a ranged spec, as a third one. Perhaps that would kind of halt the "SV sucks because melee" uproar. And would give some more variety to new class.

[Dracodraco]

1). DK's were mostly used for mass grip, not the solo one. They no longer have mass grip except tanks, so unless you have a Blood DK, you will be hard pressed to grip in multiple adds at a time, let alone get them to the spot you want for a targeted slow since they will grip to themselves and not q target they pick. This is also besides the point because now they place a targeted slow that, while it does damage, becomes useless if adds aren't kited over the spot and can waste a GCD losing damage 100% of the damage from it.

Untrue. Singletarget grips were used widely throughout every tier I can think of so far, heck, even in HFC;

Singlegrip adds on Kilrogg into melee for cleave / away from pool.
Singlegrip caster add on Socrethar in for cleave.
Singlegrip imps on xhul if you've got 2x DKS (in combination with 2x aoe grips to cover every wave). Even 1 DK made it a shitton easier due to singlegrip-aoegrip-singlegrip for 3 of 4 waves to stack them.
Singlegrip infernals on Mannoroth to stack them for AOE / stray imps on ranged far out.
Singlegrip infernals on Archimonde to split them quickly and precisely.

You seem to think that my "targetted slow" has something to do with the grips. It does not.

Likewise, Death and Decay is the exact same mechanic as tar trap. How in hell can you say "Surv has ranged slows/snares", then go on to say that, and I quote:

they place a targeted slow that, while it does damage, becomes useless if adds aren't kited over the spot and can waste a GCD

When surv hunters Tar trap is argueably the exact same effect (useless if the adds aren't kited over the spot) - and is argueably WORSE because of the following reasons:
1: Doesn't do damage.
2: Requires enemies to walk over it to trigger it.
Heck, the DnD slow is for blood DK - the slow for Unh dks aren't even targetted, it's just a straight up AOE ranged slow.


[/quote]2). This applies to everyone, so not sure how the feral vs boomkin doesn't hold up with you. Primary stats switch on gear per spec, and last I knew off pieces don't even have primary anymore (this might have changed). Also, not all specs amongst a class use the exact same gear as secondary values are different for all. If you are going to compare SV to all specs then all specs need to be compared to each other, which is along the lines of just filling your raid with the highest possible dps classes/specs and forgoing all others. If a melee is behind any rdps, why would you just not have that melee switch to a rdps and forgo melee completely? [/quote]

And now you seem to understand it. I raid to progress. I optimise. If melee is shit for a fight I don't bring melee. If melee wants spots, they can learn to play ranged.
Likewise, the reason I mention Enhancement, Feral, Elemental and Boomkin is because they were brought up earlier as a comparison - "You don't expect an enh shaman to go elemental", or something in that line. I totally do expect that in this expansion because the only thing that the different specs have to get are trinkets; I didn't expect them to do it in WOTLK/Cata/MOP/WOD because in these expansions, there were half a gearset (weapons, jewellery, trnkets and legendary ring most recently) to gather to start being viable as an OS. I sort-of assumed that when you said "you wouldn't expect XYZ to go ZYX" you were referring to how it USED to be. Because you must be very naive if you don't think high end guilds require bi-spec capabilities when you're no longer severely disadvantaged when switching spc.

Comparing a ST slow vs an AoE ground effect slow doesn't hold up. Yes, MM/BM bring a slow, but how does that help when a tank is kiting 6+ adds around (or any other kiting situation with multiple adds that would require a melee to pull off boss)?
Again, we are discussing anecdotal things on Gorefiend. Your guild pulled adds off the boss, mine didn't. We handled them with all ranged classes killing them and melee only stopping on the boss to run the debuff out. We also did not prioritize the big add, which left him alive for a long time, usually until just before the 2nd tank went down.

Tanks provide their own AOE slow. How is yours going to help the tanks? Best case scenario it does nothing. Worst case scenario, because the ground effect is an "infinite duration"-slow, it might just override their "set duration" slow, and cause adds to speed up as they leave your tar patch. We had that happen on Maloriak back in the day; The 50% slow with infinite duration took priority over the 50% slow with a 12 sec duration so as soon as they stepped on the trap, the finite duration debuff was cleared. As soon as they stepped off the patch, they were no longer slowed. Tank gibbed. GG.

As for comparing ST slow vs an AoE ground effect, I'll refer you back to the fact that I've already presented DKs as a melee that brings the same utility (but better) and more utility on top. The reason I mentioned hunters singletarget slows is that BECAUSE THEY DON'T OVERWRITE LONGER DURATION SLOWS, THEY ARE USEFULL FOR STUFF LIKE GOREFIEND - there's a reason absolutely no hunter plopped traps down on Gorefiend to slow adds. Have you stopped to consider why?

(also, your melee weren't assigned to the small adds, nor were they assigned to the big one? Nice tunneling there, did you kill it first week, or even first month?).

[Deleted]

SV is shit because it does not offer anything to the table that MM/BM already can't do, while being melee. Also doesn't help that its Mastery is so shit, it had to be literally doubled in a hotfix.

Apart from traps. Only surv can do that now... #justsayin

- - - Updated - - -

And if a player wants to play non-caster ranged, he'll play... one of the what is now only two mediocre specs left. But hey, at least Blizzard solved that problem of people ranged classes being too ranged for melee people.

I suppose technically MM is now caster class is its main damage is immobile. Not in the mage sense but that it is now a more immobile spec than it used to be. Or at least i think so. Survival is fun. Im playing it. Its a choice not a compulsary. I just wish we would have v9tten twin axes like rexxar for artifact.

- - - Updated - - -

I feel like the only reason SV actually has an ok designed spec right now is because whoever took over the hunter design team flat out doesn't know how to design hunters but does know how to design warriors.

Personally, I hate that it is melee now. What was wrong with old survival? Nothing was wrong with it. For all the talk about the 'vocal minority' they sure did listen to the tiny number of hunters who actually wanted a melee hunter spec.

It will probably be reverted to ranged at some point in the future, hopefully. Not only because I want old survival back, but because now we only have two specs in the entire game to divide the 'uses a ranged weapon' fantasies between, and somehow they reduced the amount of fantasy for both MM and BM anyway. Can we please get somebody on the blizzard dev team to actually play and care about the hunter class? Heck, the dude they sent to the hunter forums to 'gather feedback' even admitted that he is ignorant about the hunter class (not bashing his honesty, just sayin). That plus the known fact that we went like 2 years with bestial wrath still dispelling CC effects on the hunter, which blizzard didn't intend, and they had to be told about it before they realized it still worked that way only for them to 'fix' it shortly after, because BM hunter was totally dominating PvP. Forget playing a hunter, it made it sound like no blizzard dev had even encountered a hunter.

Ot to sound rude or stupid. But your point about weapons is moot. We will probably have these artifacts for several xpacs to come there will be no weapon drops. I dont see what your complaining about one uses a bow the other a gun. And it will be that way for a very long time i suspect. I cant see blizz implementing these legendary lore weapons and then saying hey next xpac. They are usless.

I may be wrong or have misunderstood your post. If so i apologise.