SV and the future

[PaNick]

Ok, I was going to write another well-reasonsed post but I cba now because you're clearly just a troll who gets off on being rude to people on the internet.

If you take offense to constructive criticism so easily, or can't handle trolls, then why are you even on the internet?

"Stupid is as stupid does" - Forrest Gump

[Eapoe]

No you can't, because you don't have a real argument.



BM - Mobile ranged, focusing on the pet
MM - Immobile ranged, focusing on the archer (and burst damage)
SV - Mobile ranged, focusing on the archer (and DoT damage)

Exactly how it was before 7.0. And it worked. The only real issue was MM was significantly less popular than SV for most of that time (probably because people just liked SV's playstyle better). The solution to this would be to make MM just do more raw damage, period: as it should be with a less mobile spec.

The only reason you can't do it is because you're being wilfully ignorant.



Arguing for Blizzard's design decisions post 6.0 on the grounds of logic is a wasted effort.



Once again, just like every "class fantasy" nut on the forums, you ignore literally every difference between SV and MM that existed (which included almost their entire skillset) and just tout "THEY ARE BOTH ARCHERS". Well shit. All the mage specs are casters; does that mean we have to make one of them melee because there is 'no other way to differentiate them'?

MM and SV were very different before 7.0 already (and if you disagree with this, please eplain why Survival continued to be vastly more popular than MM throughout WoD's first tier, even in situations where MM was mechanically stronger). Hell, if they expanded on SV's pre-existing characteristics in 7.0 and changed MM as they did, they would be even more different. Homogenisation was absolutely not a problem. It has always been WoW's biggest non-issue.

Hunters shouldn't be melee because people picked hunters to play ranged, and you have 10 years of iterative design as a ranged class. The time to make hunter specs melee and stick with it was in Vanilla, not now. That trumps any nonsense about homogenisation and "class fantasy".

- - - Updated - - -



Do you think that's because it's melee or because Blizzard spent more time on it to try to make it more appealing (which just screams "shoehorning")? This isn't an argument for melee survival.

Not trying to pick a fight but, trying to keep it short, Hunter specs were the same yet different. Just going from when I started in Naxx, every spec had the same opener of RF with the same simple priority of a rotation based spec. The only main difference was the spec flavored abilities of ES or AiS or KC with BM having a CD with BW. Just going by the most recent last xpacs, each class still had RF with KS, until WoR when SV lost both. Other than that, they have played almost identical for years, with the same spam focus builder, the same execute phase, and just a different signature move or 2.
Comparing that to mages where 1 spec is a pet spec focusing on control with a standard steady stream of damage (frost), a 2nd spec focusing on management of mana for high burst windows of damage, and a 3rd spec that focuses on standard damage and managing procs/crits for high burst damage, is kind of moot. I'm not going to sit here and say all 3 Hunter specs are identical (they aren't), but there was never really enough difference between them to feel like 1 spec played much, if any, differently than the other, especially once SV applied SS on their normal rotation.
People can still pick hunters to be a ranged clad but now with the bonus of playing melee if the mood hits them. I, for one, am sad to see SV go completely as it always felt more fun to me (the ES explosions were much more interesting than just firing an arrow into someone) and wish they would have just made a 4th spec since deciding to make a melee Hunter. I'm not going to dwell on it though and just see how things play out.
In all honesty to your last question, it's probably a bit of both. Blizzard spent quite a bit of time designing it (I'd assume), but no more or less than they did for MM (just look at all the changes they've done since beta to MM/BM vs SV). They aren't shoehorning anyone into it as much as making it appealing to play as an alternative to the other 2 specs. Shoehorning would imply that the other 2 specs wouldn't be comparable to SV as far as damage or utility to where people would HAVE to play SV for mythic raids/dungeons.

[bloodmoth13]

BM - Mobile ranged, focusing on the pet
MM - Immobile ranged, focusing on the archer (and burst damage)
SV - Mobile ranged, focusing on the archer (and DoT damage)

Exactly how it was before 7.0. And it worked. The only real issue was MM was significantly less popular than SV for most of that time (probably because people just liked SV's playstyle better). The solution to this would be to make MM just do more raw damage, period: as it should be with a less mobile spec.

Once again, just like every "class fantasy" nut on the forums, you ignore literally every difference between SV and MM that existed (which included almost their entire skillset) and just tout "THEY ARE BOTH ARCHERS". Well shit. All the mage specs are casters; does that mean we have to make one of them melee because there is 'no other way to differentiate them'?

MM and SV were very different before 7.0 already (and if you disagree with this, please eplain why Survival continued to be vastly more popular than MM throughout WoD's first tier, even in situations where MM was mechanically stronger). Hell, if they expanded on SV's pre-existing characteristics in 7.0 and changed MM as they did, they would be even more different. Homogenisation was absolutely not a problem. It has always been WoW's biggest non-issue.

Hunters shouldn't be melee because people picked hunters to play ranged, and you have 10 years of iterative design as a ranged class. The time to make hunter specs melee and stick with it was in Vanilla, not now. That trumps any nonsense about homogenisation and "class fantasy".

- - - Updated - - -



Do you think that's because it's melee or because Blizzard spent more time on it to try to make it more appealing (which just screams "shoehorning")? This isn't an argument for melee survival.

All specs some flavor of archer with pet, all use the same weapons, differences are INCREDIBLY minor, not impressed with the diversity there, on top of that, if done correctly the new talent system can offer the choice between a more dot oriented spec, more bursty or whathaveyou, there was just no real justification for keeping 3 specs that had the same identity.

You seem to mistake class idenity with gameplay, literally doesnt matter, gameplay can be dictated by talents, with 3 specs using the same fantasy it became incredibly difficult to create subniches for each spec, trimming off one spec was the right decision, and survival was the right candidate. the specs now feel very different, the class fantasy is there, just the gameplay is falling behind a little, the direction is correct though.

LOL survivals talents in vanilla were mostly melee, get educated man, nobody played it and they didnt have the tech to remove a ton of abilities between specs what with all the baseline shot abilities, so they just turned it into ranged for a few expansions, turning it back into melee was long overdue tbh.

How is that not an argument for melee hunters survival? im beginning to wonder if you understand what the term argument even means, your understanding seems to be lacking, its a well designed spec, im sure if more huntards werent quite so precious as you they would embrace it. Doesnt seem like shoehorning at all, they had alot of flavor to use with it, the fantasy was strong and unique, the spec just wrote itself, the fertility of the spec identity meant that it could be a great spec.

What exactly are your arguments against melee hunters exactly?

[Deleted]

Idk for OP opinion but i think to start SVV
First its have best rotation from all 3 specs
Second have much beter CC
And third you havent seen what fists of fu...amm fury of the eagle doing
The last argument for me is that we are 6 hunters in the guild
Only problem for Survival hunters atm now is the missing of Misdirection...It makes me slow when doing quests to 110

[lmaoboat]

I could give you a very long-winded answer but it is much easier to put it this way.

Give me a brief design concept for 3 substantially different hunter specs with them all ranged.

Three? I can do at least four.

Stealthy sniper with relatively slow casting abilities that hit like a truck

Classic BM with roided up pet doing most of the damage

SV based on all the gadgeteer elements like grenades and traps with medium range but high mobility.

Spooky Sylvanis hunter with lots of magic damage and dots

I mean, if Blizzard can think up of 20 or so melee specs, I don't see why three ranged is so hard. Maybe people would have an easier time swallowing melee if Blizz put the slightest bit of effort into more than just the one spec with the playstyle they could have gotten from half the other classes.

[Tehterokkar]

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.

[Eapoe]

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.

This goes back to the question of "isn't this the exact correlation of feral vs boomkin?"
The hotfix also helps make the mastery not be shit, so not sure that saying something that had a hotfix to make it better makes a good arguement. MM/BM are still going thru hotfixes as well, and most classes will have buffs/nerfs thru the xpac.
Again, like my last post stated, not picking a fight as much as asking a direct question.

[Aldare]

This goes back to the question of "isn't this the exact correlation of feral vs boomkin?"
The hotfix also helps make the mastery not be shit, so not sure that saying something that had a hotfix to make it better makes a good arguement. MM/BM are still going thru hotfixes as well, and most classes will have buffs/nerfs thru the xpac.
Again, like my last post stated, not picking a fight as much as asking a direct question.

I'm not saying this is true for every raid group, but for us at least we've typically had a feral druid because of the flexibility of him being able to tank or DPS depending on what we needed.

[Deleted]

Hey.

I have been a melee player since vanilla. In fact, I always play melee, because 90% of the time, I find ranged combat boring.
That being said, after testing basically all of the melee specs on live and PTR for about 2 months, I find survival hunter to be the most fun melee spec in the game.

I think that is mostly because I like the mongoose bite gimmick quite a lot. But it's not limited to just that, we also got quite an arsenal of ranged stuff (grenades, axes, a cool charge, a pet), have to keep track of multiple things while also being quite mobile.
It's sort of complicated, but not overly. He's a bit squishy ... but many melee seem to be.

So I am very happy they gave us a melee hunter, otherwise I probably would never have played one ...
And I think one more or less melee spec won't change much. If a player wants to play melee, he'll play melee, whats another spec option change about that?
Honestly though, I wish it was a tank spec

[Devilyaki]

It was a stupid idea to begin with and should be replace by a true hunter spec at range. It like if they made fire mages a melee spec cause people want a spell sword class, stupid.

[Dracodraco]

This goes back to the question of "isn't this the exact correlation of feral vs boomkin?"
The hotfix also helps make the mastery not be shit, so not sure that saying something that had a hotfix to make it better makes a good arguement. MM/BM are still going thru hotfixes as well, and most classes will have buffs/nerfs thru the xpac.
Again, like my last post stated, not picking a fight as much as asking a direct question.

It is. You'll also notice how insanely common boomkins are compared to feral druids. This expansion, at least, there is a distinct advantage to taking a feral - it brings stampeding roar. Boomkins and resto druids no longer do (they have other utility).

[lmaoboat]

Hey.

I have been a melee player since vanilla. In fact, I always play melee, because 90% of the time, I find ranged combat boring.
That being said, after testing basically all of the melee specs on live and PTR for about 2 months, I find survival hunter to be the most fun melee spec in the game.

I think that is mostly because I like the mongoose bite gimmick quite a lot. But it's not limited to just that, we also got quite an arsenal of ranged stuff (grenades, axes, a cool charge, a pet), have to keep track of multiple things while also being quite mobile.
It's sort of complicated, but not overly. He's a bit squishy ... but many melee seem to be.

So I am very happy they gave us a melee hunter, otherwise I probably would never have played one ...
And I think one more or less melee spec won't change much. If a player wants to play melee, he'll play melee, whats another spec option change about that?
Honestly though, I wish it was a tank spec

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.

[Deleted]

It was a stupid idea to begin with and should be replace by a true hunter spec at range. It like if they made fire mages a melee spec cause people want a spell sword class, stupid.

So what I understand from your message is that you have the monopoly of class fantasy definitions and what is a "true" hunter? Get off your high horse

If you have never seen a battle mage before, then you might need to expand your knowledge of fantasy games and stop being such a closed minded whiner

They could literally create any type of archetype, even a healing warlock and it would not be a problem, just some people's thick mind that cannot conceive anything new

[Firebyrd]

So what I understand from your message is that you have the monopoly of class fantasy definitions and what is a "true" hunter? Get off your high horse

If you have never seen a battle mage before, then you might need to expand your knowledge of fantasy games and stop being such a closed minded whiner

They could literally create any type of archetype, even a healing warlock and it would not be a problem, just some people's thick mind that cannot conceive anything new

The problem isn't that they came up with something new. The problem is that Blizz deliberately broke a popular spec and then changed it so completely it doesn't even have the same role. If it was just about having something new, they could have made melee hunter a fourth spec and I bet the only problem would have been whining that such and such a class deserves a fourth spec too.

[Deleted]

The lesser we are, the higher are my chances to make a World 1st in MM raiding as a SV Hunter :3

[Deleted]

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.

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.

[threads]

melee hunter is a meme spec on the same level of a warlock tank.

SV will probably only exist in LFR or normal pug raids.

people probably won't even pvp as them because their survivability is garbage. aren't they still missing some of the melee pvp talents too?

8.0 will probably make 3rd spec ranged again after this failure.

[Mad_Murdock]

"Stupid is as stupid does" - Forrest Gump

That's what his momma used to say, shouldn't she get credit?

[Tokee]

melee hunter is a meme spec on the same level of a warlock tank.

SV will probably only exist in LFR or normal pug raids.

people probably won't even pvp as them because their survivability is garbage. aren't they still missing some of the melee pvp talents too?

8.0 will probably make 3rd spec ranged again after this failure.

I am in a Mythic raiding guild and I got authorization to raid as Survival in Legion.

PvP they are fine in 3v3, similar to enhancement shaman, they will do well with WW, DH, Feral, Arms for burst. Survival scale very well in PvP gear, because Versatility and Critical Strike are top stats. Casual BGs they are scary for most casters with the plethora of snares and slows. In RBGs they suffer if they are targeted.

Survival will be fine. They are designed around single-target bursting. Their toolkit, legendary items, and artifact talents support that notion.

It's a niche role and some guilds may find them useful, others not so much. I predict that Survival will do well to average this expansion and we will learn a lot about it over the next 2 years Legion is active.

- - - Updated - - -

melee hunter is a meme spec on the same level of a warlock tank.

SV will probably only exist in LFR or normal pug raids.

people probably won't even pvp as them because their survivability is garbage. aren't they still missing some of the melee pvp talents too?

8.0 will probably make 3rd spec ranged again after this failure.

I am in a Mythic raiding guild and I got authorization to raid as Survival in Legion.

PvP they are fine in 3v3. Similar to enhancement shaman, they will do well with WW, DH, Feral, Arms for burst. Survival scale very well in PvP gear, because Versatility and Critical Strike are top stats. Casual BGs they are scary for most casters with the plethora of snares and slows. In RBGs they suffer if they are targeted.

Survival will be fine. They are designed around single-target bursting. Their toolkit, legendary items, and artifact talents support that notion.

It's a niche role and some guilds may find them useful, others not so much. I predict that Survival will do well to average this expansion and we will learn a lot about it over the next 2 years Legion is active.

[Eapoe]

It is. You'll also notice how insanely common boomkins are compared to feral druids. This expansion, at least, there is a distinct advantage to taking a feral - it brings stampeding roar. Boomkins and resto druids no longer do (they have other utility).

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.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm not saying this is true for every raid group, but for us at least we've typically had a feral druid because of the flexibility of him being able to tank or DPS depending on what we needed.

With the way classes have changed (even in WoD) it has been easy to switch from 1 role to the next regardless. As long as they get the appropriate gear (tank trinkets/off pieces) a boomkin could switch to tank just as easily as a feral. (Anecdotal) We actually had this happen in our guild when a tank left and one of our boomkins went full time tank for progression in BRF, and then would swap from boomkin to guardian for 3 tank fights or if a tank couldn't show for progression in HFC.