Is Blizzard getting ready to delete survival in the next expansion?

[Geran]

Funny fact. Survival was originally melee. Back in vanilla/bc. It became ranged i believe when cata came out (or a little before that.) Im sure you can find some old patch 1.x talent trees somewhere on the net to see that.

Funny fact, research before posting such tremendous nonsense. Back in vanilla (and through expansions to cataclysm) hunter had SOME melee capabilities, every spec had them, it is true that survival had one or two more (cause talents) and the spec strengthened some of them (again talents) (More in older iterations of game, vanilla>BC>Lich King).

This was cause back then hunter COULDN'T use ranged skills at melee range (hell, they couldn't use any skill at all in the dead zone (5-8y)) and those called melee skills were designed primarily as get away resources, not damage ones.

They should have made Beast Master the melee spec, and survival the "tinker" spec, right now the hunter is a mess in terms of class fantasy, I think the only one that makes sense right now is Marksman with the Farstrider/Dark Ranger theme.

Why do you people keep enforcing hunters NEED to be melee (be it SV,BM or just a 4th spec)? Don't you have enough melee classes to choose? Why don't you try to do it the other way, choose a melee class, and beg them to make it ranged?

[Bepples]

Why do you people keep enforcing hunters NEED to be melee (be it SV,BM or just a 4th spec)? Don't you have enough melee classes to choose? Why don't you try to do it the other way, choose a melee class, and beg them to make it ranged?

Yep. The core problem isn't Survival being melee; it's ANY of the Hunter specs being melee. If they made BM melee, we would be dealing with the exact same problems (i.e. zero appeal to Hunters, screwing over current Hunter mains) but just for a different spec. Personally I would probably be a little less vehement over it because Survival was my favourite, but I would still be strongly opposed to it.

People need to accept that the time to settle on one of the Hunter specs being melee was back in Vanilla, not 12 years in when we have a wealth of melee specs from the added classes (DK, Monk, DH) and Hunters have already settled into three ranged specs. There is simply no way to make this work without breaking game balance and making SV so overpowered that Hunters can't ignore it. Most hunters simply do not want to play a melee spec and Blizzard needs to stop trying to force melee on hunters; ESPECIALLY at the expense of one of their current specs.

- - - Updated - - -

Actually people always toss ideas around. Those include melee hunters (because 3 ranged speccs are boring), ranged rogues (because 3 melee speccs are boring), Shaman and warlock tanks, mage healers, yada yada yada.

It is only when they get their wishes that apparently it was "the worst idea evah and nobody wanted it"

Revisionist history. It's legitimately difficult to find a good number of people on the forums voicing support for the idea of a melee hunter before Legion was announced. Seriously; do a simple google search within the timeframe of [November 2004, July 2015]. You will find people playing it jokingly on a dummy/bossfight and seeing what DPS they can pull, or one person making a thread asking for it with most of the rest of the thread (which, mind you, is usually 2-3 pages tops) calling it a stupid idea.

As a former Survival main, I certainly wasn't asking for a melee spec and I sure as hell wasn't asking for my favourite spec to be outright deleted from the game, so it's absurd that you would pretend that people like me were asking for this to happen and then changing our minds once it did happen. I would say this situation was actually my worst nightmare, but I legitimately never considered the possibility of it happening because it was such a foolish idea that surely Blizzard wouldn't be delusional and stupid enough to try it, but hey; they consistently outdo themselves in this area so I guess that was a bad assumption.

[Bepples]

Yeah sure..should have been clearer. It is sometimes a different group of people, and sometimes indeed people who wished for something to be changed or added - "but not in that way"

This just means Blizzard needs to be better at objectively evaluating their design directions. Survival is the perfect example of what not to do; making a huge design shift without actually concerning how it would be received by the playerbase. They probably thought the concept of a melee hunter was amazing and innovative, but that's clearly not what people wanted for the class and now they've put themselves in a pretty tough situation where whatever decision they make now is guaranteed to piss off a group of people and result in a lot of wasted effort. Change Survival back to ranged? The people who adopted it this expansion will be furious and all the effort they put into it this expansion was for nothing. Keep it melee? All the people who played it as ranged will (still) be furious and they will be pumping a lot of effort into polishing a spec that not many people are ever going to want to play.

This is why they need to base their design decisions in more objective, measurable aspects rather than ill-defined, subjective concepts like "theme" and "class fantasy". Remember, Hunters were one of the most revamped classes this expansion, and the entire point was "to further distinguish the three hunter specs". Look at how people have received the class since 7.0; can anyone really argue that it was worth it? Dissatisfaction with the class is rampant these days, and I think many people would have much rather sacrificed a bit of spec distinction if it meant having a more enjoyable class.

[BadguyNotBadGuy]

yeah man, they are going to replace it with a new spec called "Artfully Dying" which will focus around dying in the most dramatic yet spectacular way possible

[Bepples]

yeah man, they are going to replace it with a new spec called "Artfully Dying" which will focus around dying in the most dramatic yet spectacular way possible

I am a Goblin with a Crane pet. With these animations I feel I'm already playing this spec.

[nToxik]

SV is here to stay as melee. Anyone thinking they are going to change it back to ranged is delusional. That said, the SV spec needs to some re-work to further define it. It needs more of a 'signature' ability that sets it off from other melee specs. It also needs to be a little less clunky. I doubt any significant changes will happen this expansion.

[Stupud]

Next up, ranged Rogues and DKs

[Detaur]

Next up, ranged Rogues and DKs

DK actually has a "ranged" spec that should have been the inspiration for the current Survival Hunter. Unholy DK can be played from midrange for the most part. If Survival was given the same ~15y range as Unholy DK for most of its stuff, I think it would be in a much better spot with the community. Disclaimer: I'm not advocating that Bliz has done it right, and that Survival should be anything short of an advancement of what it was. However, if they felt Survival needed to be closer to lay its traps, the Unholy DK style midrange play could have been a good alternative.

[stevan021]

Same question can be asked the other way around. Why did they delete a range spec that some enjoyed? You didn't lose anything if you didn't want to play it. Instead we got the atrocities of all three spec we have now.

The thing is if it was wrong back then it's still wrong now.

[Bepples]

That said, the SV spec needs to some re-work to further define it.

It needs to be Ranged, with the same general playstyle and theme that it was before 7.0. That worked. This version didn't.

The thing is if it was wrong back then it's still wrong now.

It's not as wrong, though, because it would be restoring a spec they deleted rather than just deleting the spec in the first place.

[stevan021]

It's not as wrong, though, because it would be restoring a spec they deleted rather than just deleting the spec in the first place.

The solution many here proposed would do both. They would delete an existing spec AND add a new spec.

[Kazlehoff]

Be glad there not touching SV. there touching BM and all it means is another round of nerfs.

[Bepples]

The solution many here proposed would do both. They would delete an existing spec AND add a new spec.

Ranged Survival was here first, was here for longer, and had far more people enjoying it. There are also far fewer options for an archer-type spec in the game v.s. melee, and fewer ranged options in general. Therefore Ranged Survival has both the moral and the practical high ground here.

Like everyone in this debate always says: if they are willing and able to do 4 specs: great! However, it does not appear that is the case. Assuming we will only ever have 3 specs, they should be the 3 specs we've always had. And that means ranged Survival.

Honestly all I can say is go back to your melee class; you have 12 of those to choose from. We had 3 archer choices (quite distinct from other casters). Your post history indicates that you play a rogue and warrior. This is the issue we talk about in these threads; Blizzard taking hunter design and aiming it towards people other than Hunters. We didn't go over to warriors/rogues and demand they make those specs ranged.

[nToxik]

The problem was that SV (pre-melee) was a spec that had no defining theme to it. In vanilla it was seen as the 'pvp spec' that enabled you to get out of melee quicker and get back to range but it wasn't even good at that. BM was about the pet. MM was about ranged. SV then became a mishmash of weird abilities that kind of evolved right or wrong into a DoT spec (lol hunter warlock?) with explosive shot and the weird and lame black arrow ability. But it still had no character to it to define it.

Now I grant you that I was also surprised when Blizz announced SV would become a melee spec and I see why it has low representation now - a lot of players choose hunter as a ranged class. I get it. I think SV would be more popular if they made it a little less clunky and reduced the skill floor slightly to play it.

However, I don't see Blizz reverting it back into a ranged class ever. I think that will never happen. But maybe they can change the spec a little make it more appealing. While it is the top DPS spec for hunters at the moment, it struggles to compete with other melee specs, doesn't bring anything unique to the raid that other melee classes can bring and its high skill cap requires you do perform extremely well to even match other melee who don't require the same high level skill cap to play effectively.

[Bepples]

The problem was that SV (pre-melee) was a spec that had no defining theme to it. In vanilla it was seen as the 'pvp spec' that enabled you to get out of melee quicker and get back to range but it wasn't even good at that. BM was about the pet. MM was about ranged. SV then became a mishmash of weird abilities that kind of evolved right or wrong into a DoT spec (lol hunter warlock?) with explosive shot and the weird and lame black arrow ability. But it still had no character to it to define it.

I realise regurgitating Blizzard's PR nonsense about class fantasy is all the rage with their acolyte fans these days, but this is pure, unfiltered nonsense. SV was the ranged utilitarian; better traps, augmenting shots, fast-paced and mobile. That was its character. It was certainly lauded enough to be the most popular hunter spec for a good chunk of WoW's history whereas now it's not just the least popular hunter specs by a large margin but it's also one of the least, if not the least, popular specs in the game. You're utterly fucking delusional if you think that's an improvement because "the spec has gained character". It HASN'T. In fact, it's modern form defies all adherence to it's core identity as a SURVIVALIST since a Survivalist would utilise every advantage available while modern Survival squanders its advantages by needlessly limiting itself to the vastly more dangerous melee range and throwing explosives and shrapnel at ITSELF.... and you called old Survival a mish-mash... what a joke.

Now I grant you that I was also surprised when Blizz announced SV would become a melee spec and I see why it has low representation now - a lot of players choose hunter as a ranged class. I get it. I think SV would be more popular if they made it a little less clunky and reduced the skill floor slightly to play it.

It would be more popular if it remained ranged (and VIABLE; unlike the 6.2 disaster). No melee compromise. There are enough melee specs in the game and hunters clearly don't want one.

However, I don't see Blizz reverting it back into a ranged class ever. I think that will never happen. But maybe they can change the spec a little make it more appealing. While it is the top DPS spec for hunters at the moment, it struggles to compete with other melee specs, doesn't bring anything unique to the raid that other melee classes can bring and its high skill cap requires you do perform extremely well to even match other melee who don't require the same high level skill cap to play effectively.

We thought melee would never happen because it was an utterly moronic decision but here we are. Cutting their losses, halting development on an effectively dead spec and reverting it to ranged would at least be sensible from an economical, practical, and MORAL perspective (it's actually kind of a douche move to literally steal a spec from hunters just to give yet another addition for melee players). All those reasons you listed do contribute to Survival's unpopularity but there is no factor as large as Survival being melee in a class full of people who specifically chose that class to be ranged. Feral shares pretty much every issue you mentioned yet even it is far more popular than Survival is. The only spec in the game Survival remotely competes with in that area is Subtlety, and there you are comparing the 5th most popular class in the game (remember when we were 1st? So glad Legion fixed that for us, right?) to the least popular, and comparing a spec with almost no legendary dependence at all to possibly the most legendary-dependent spec in the game. Oh, and Survival generally out-performs Subtlety too.

That's how far this spec has fallen. Do you realise that in terms of Heroic parses in Siege of Orgrimmar, Survival came 5th out of all DPS specs in the game? Top fucking five. Obviously 1st place within the class. It wasn't even the best performing hunter spec in Siege of Orgrimmar; BM handily outperformed it for most of the instance. Yet that didn't matter because the PLAYSTYLE and CHARACTER of the spec was so approachable and likeable that people chose it anyway. That's the difference between classic Survival and modern Survival. Classic Survival was popular even when it wasn't the best-performing. Modern Survival is unpopular even when it is the best-performing. Once again, you're delusional if you think that's an improvement by any measure.

[Eej]

Melee Survival is here to stay and I imagine it is partly due to Rexxar being the face of Hunters in Hearthstone (and thus being the most recognizable Hunter). Honestly all they need to do is iterate again on Survival to make it more interesting and go in on MM and make it actually talentable into a traditional MM Steady/Aimed or old Survival LnL/Explosive/Trap playstyle.

[threads]

Melee Survival is here to stay and I imagine it is partly due to Rexxar being the face of Hunters in Hearthstone (and thus being the most recognizable Hunter). Honestly all they need to do is iterate again on Survival to make it more interesting and go in on MM and make it actually talentable into a traditional MM Steady/Aimed or old Survival LnL/Explosive/Trap playstyle.

trying to shove 2 specs into one already failed. no need to try again.

if they wanted a rexxar spec he's a beastmaster. change cobra shot to throwing axes and you have a more rexxar spec than survival.

[Nythiz]

The problem was that SV (pre-melee) was a spec that had no defining theme to it. In vanilla it was seen as the 'pvp spec' that enabled you to get out of melee quicker and get back to range but it wasn't even good at that. BM was about the pet. MM was about ranged. SV then became a mishmash of weird abilities that kind of evolved right or wrong into a DoT spec (lol hunter warlock?) with explosive shot and the weird and lame black arrow ability. But it still had no character to it to define it.

Now I grant you that I was also surprised when Blizz announced SV would become a melee spec and I see why it has low representation now - a lot of players choose hunter as a ranged class. I get it. I think SV would be more popular if they made it a little less clunky and reduced the skill floor slightly to play it.

However, I don't see Blizz reverting it back into a ranged class ever. I think that will never happen. But maybe they can change the spec a little make it more appealing. While it is the top DPS spec for hunters at the moment, it struggles to compete with other melee specs, doesn't bring anything unique to the raid that other melee classes can bring and its high skill cap requires you do perform extremely well to even match other melee who don't require the same high level skill cap to play effectively.

I agree that survival lacked a defining theme. To be frank survival and marksman were too much alike (especially in the Hellfire Citadel era at the end of WoD), when you look at the abilities they had access to and all.
They could have given Survival more identity by playing on it's fantasy a bit more without the need to make it melee though. They could have expanded upon the DoT aspect that survival dabbled in. Survival could be the affliction lock to marksman's destruction lock spec; so to say.

I personally don't HATE the new survival. It's not too bad, but it needs a whole lot of work (not surprising as it's practically an entire new spec) and I feel it's not getting enough attention.
I would still prefer to see survival as a ranged spec again, but that's not because I hate the melee spec; but more because I think that we didn't need another melee spec whereas I feel that we did lose a ranged spec that can't really be found anywhere anymore. With BM also moving more towards melee this expansion (seeing as BM went from 50:50 hunter:pet damage, to 30:70 hunter:pet damage) it feels like the archetype ranged class is now 50-66% melee and only has 1 pure archer archetype spec left.

That said, there is very little to no chance that SV is going back to be ranged (blizzard doesn't like to come back on stuff like this, it makes them look bad and they're too prideful for that); and the chance on a 4th spec is a thousand times smaller.
Better make some good suggestions on what to improve, rather than to reminisce about old SV.

[satimy]

Too me survival is the overweight girl in a room full of land whales. I don't like it, but Mm and BM are such shit that I would rather play a challenging spec

[Primal]

Too me survival is the overweight girl in a room full of land whales. I don't like it, but Mm and BM are such shit that I would rather play a challenging spec

Survival is not even challenging, its only difference from BM is that its melee and you need to move more. MM is actually more challenging than bm and sv IMO.