Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ...
6
7
8
  1. #141
    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

  2. #142
    Quote Originally Posted by satimy View Post
    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.

  3. #143
    Quote Originally Posted by Primal View Post
    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.
    Mm is 4 buttons, survival is 10

  4. #144
    Hasn't the "Button count is difficulty, guiz!" meme died yet?
    Quote Originally Posted by Azortharion View Post
    Top parse =/= correct play.

  5. #145
    Quote Originally Posted by FpicEail View Post
    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.



    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.



    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.
    I was regurgitating nothing. Yes, SV was the utilitarian trap/pvp spec from vanilla and was never popular or even viable until Cata. Prior to that, the spec was a dead spec. Period.

    I'm not arguing for or against SV as melee but up until Cata, SV was dead. Even when SV became viable, it still felt like the spec had nothing special about it. SV becoming melee was no doubt a big surprise to everyone and in it's current melee form, it still isn't great for the reasons I posted.

    Will it go back to being a ranged spec? I don't see that happening now. Blizz couldn't make SV it's own unique spec different enough from MM back then so why would they try again?

    I think you need to learn to read before you post your fanatic type responses. I doubt SV will ever go back to being a ranged spec and if it still stays as melee, it still needs work to reduce the clunkiness and high-skill floor compared to other melee specs.

    Hey if it goes back to ranged...great! I just don't see this happening.

  6. #146
    Scarab Lord Partysaurus Rex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Bonnie's Bedroom
    Posts
    4,622
    These old vs new comments crack me up. As survival originally had several melee attacks, traps, and survival tactics. Survival along with many other specs focused on the root/original design for the class/spec, back before they falsely deified Greg Street had his way with classes. Currently the melee spec is a strong spec. For the number that dislike it and wish it would return to a ranged spec, there are just as many people who like the new spec and like the variety.
    Last edited by Partysaurus Rex; 2017-04-28 at 08:19 PM.

    "I’d rather be divisive than indecisive, drop the niceties!"

  7. #147
    Quote Originally Posted by Partysaurus Rex View Post
    These old vs new comments crack me up. As survival originally had strong melee, traps, and survival tactics. Survival along with many other specs. Focused on the root/original design for the class/spec. Back before the falsely deified Greg Street had his way with classes.
    Ahahahahahaha... strong melee? It got 1 attack... which required you to parry meaning you had to have aggro. The 31 point talent was a ranged sleep... raptor strike, Montrose bite, and wing clip were available to all 3 specs.
    Last edited by aikanaro; 2017-04-28 at 08:13 PM.
    Heroes get remembered.... but legends never die!

  8. #148
    Scarab Lord Partysaurus Rex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Bonnie's Bedroom
    Posts
    4,622
    Quote Originally Posted by aikanaro View Post
    Ahahahahahaha... strong melee? It got 1 attack... which required you to parry meaning you had to have aggro. The 31 point talent was a ranged sleep... raptor strike, Montrose bite, and wing clip were available to all 3 specs.
    I'm not sure I meant strong... I can't remember what I was trying to say. (I think I meant to say it is currently a strong spec) The point though was getting back to its roots. Legion accomplished that goal. Personally it still feels wonky so I could definitely seeing it getting a lot of attention/changes for the next xpac... but I don't see it going back to a ranged spec.

    "I’d rather be divisive than indecisive, drop the niceties!"

  9. #149
    Short of adding a 4th spec there is no winning situation.
    Heroes get remembered.... but legends never die!

  10. #150
    Quote Originally Posted by Nythiz View Post
    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.
    Doesn't matter how much I agree with you on other points; this one is still pure bullshit. ESPECIALLY the HFC part. SV and MM were more distinct from one another in WoD than they ever were before, now that Kill Shot was Marksman only and Arcane Shot and Serpent Sting were SV only. If I do what you say and look at the abilities they had access to... well... they shared a grand total of ONE ability (Multi-Shot). And even that worked differently for both specs (Bombardment for MM and Serpent Spread for SV). I feel like you are agreeing to a spurious and often-repeated claim here purely to compromise to seem "fair". Survival's alleged "lack of a defined theme" was never a problem for anyone until Blizzard themselves claimed it was a problem, then every die-hard fan ever started repeating this claim and apparently we have to accept it, even though it hasn't been valid since WotLK when all the hunter specs started getting their own unique abilities.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nythiz View Post
    Better make some good suggestions on what to improve, rather than to reminisce about old SV.
    Uh, no, actually. We are NOT obliged to be constructive towards the melee spec. It's primary flaw is that it's melee. Talking about "oh, they need to streamline the rotation and make the talent choices more diverse" is a waste of time when the foundation itself is rotten. This is a bad attempt at getting ranged-preferring players to comply. Most people have just forgotten about the spec and pretend like hunter is a 2-spec class. Some of us are interested in seeing the old ranged SV return. That leaves the remaining people interested in seeing the melee spec stay. They can talk about the spec all they want and demand buffs and developer attention all day like they have been doing since the start (I think having a spec literally stolen from another group of people just for their own good has gotten to their heads a little and the entitlement is off the charts), but you are out of your mind if you think we should just shut up and help them along with that.

    You are trying to be diplomatic and failing HARD.

    Quote Originally Posted by nToxik View Post
    I was regurgitating nothing. Yes, SV was the utilitarian trap/pvp spec from vanilla and was never popular or even viable until Cata. Prior to that, the spec was a dead spec. Period.
    Revisionist history. Survival was played pretty extensively in Wrath. It was played in BC as a support role; not as popular as BM because it had hardly any unique flavour at the time, you could only bring 1 per raid otherwise it wasn't viable, and existed solely to buff OTHER PEOPLE'S damage, but it was at least played more than MM was. In Vanilla it was played in PvP quite a bit and towards the end Lightning Reflexes made it pretty good when in T3-level gear. It was pretty dead before 1.7...when it had a bigger focus on melee. What a surprise.

    Quote Originally Posted by nToxik View Post
    I'm not arguing for or against SV as melee but up until Cata, SV was dead. Even when SV became viable, it still felt like the spec had nothing special about it.
    So yes, you are regurgitating a bad claim. No one thought this was a problem until Blizzard said it was a problem. This is exactly like the ridiculous reagent change to talent switching in Legion where Hazzikostas said frequent talent changing was a problem and then you had people coming out of the woodwork saying "yeah I always thought it was bad for the game" even though you NEVER saw that sentiment on the forums before Hazzikostas' post. I'm sure in this case there were at least some people thinking that they were too similar (I personally could not find any old discussions on this subject), but most people evidently didn't care and just enjoyed the spec. No problem with that. The spec was unique enough with its dotting capability and full mobility with minimal pet reliance; that makes it distinct from BM and MM. It seems like people are fixated on equating it with MM (even though I've seen someone on this board insist that BM and SV were the identical specs and MM was the different one.... and let me tell you, that inconsistency speaks volumes to me about the validity of this point). MM was more slow-paced than SV, focused on the quality of the shot rather than augmentation of the shot, and was not fully mobile. In WoD, like I said earlier, they shared literally just 1 ability. This shit is why I think this point is nonsense.

    Quote Originally Posted by nToxik View Post
    Blizz couldn't make SV it's own unique spec different enough from MM back then so why would they try again?
    a) Survival was more successful then. They can devote time and effort on the spec with the peace of mind that people will actually play it and their effort would pay off if it were ranged again.
    b) That's Blizzard's problem, not the player's problem. Find a way to make SV unique. It's not like it was a massive issue to the players at the time. Blizzard shouldn't be taking their design incompetence problems out on the players. This is shit reasoning and you know it.
    c) Blizzard couldn't make SV popular as a more melee-focused spec in Vanilla so why would they try again?

    Quote Originally Posted by Partysaurus Rex View Post
    These old vs new comments crack me up. As survival originally had several melee attacks, traps, and survival tactics. Survival along with many other specs focused on the root/original design for the class/spec, back before they falsely deified Greg Street had his way with classes.
    What is with you melee lovers and revisionism? No, Survival did not have strong melee capability. Even when it was meant to (pre-1.7... when no one played it and it was shit). Survival also originally had ranged attacks, and now it doesn't. So they didn't actually "go back to its roots". None of the hunter specs have EVER totally lacked ranged capability before. Survival in Legion does.

    Greg Street's vision for the classes was vastly more successful than the complete and utter clusterfuck put forth by the group of morons in charge now. So implying that he was bad from the game is yet more revisionism. Survival ESPECIALLY was far more successful during his heyday than it is now.

    Seriously, what we have here is:
    - Vanilla: Survival being unpopular
    - BC: Survival being a little less unpopular
    - WotLK/Cata: Survival being pretty popular
    - MoP/Early WoD: Survival being EXTREMELY popular (one of the most played specs in the game)
    - Legion: Survival being unpopular again

    ... and you look at that and say "... yeah, clearly the spec had the best design in Vanilla and Legion did a good thing by going back to it". You're delusional.

    Quote Originally Posted by Partysaurus Rex View Post
    Currently the melee spec is a strong spec. For the number that dislike it and wish it would return to a ranged spec, there are just as many people who like the new spec and like the variety.
    HAHAHAHA. Maybe you should do a little research before making yourself look stupid.

    Survival in 6.1:
    https://www.warcraftlogs.com/statistics/7

    Survival in 7.1.5:
    https://www.warcraftlogs.com/statistics/11

    Look at its damage relative to the other two specs. Then look at its parse count compared to the other two specs. Then come back to me and try to tell me "just as many people like the new spec" with a straight face. Once again, you're delusional.

    I've said it before but it's worth repeating here: Ranged Survival was popular even when it wasn't the best. Melee Survival is unpopular even when it is the best.

    Quote Originally Posted by Partysaurus Rex View Post
    The point though was getting back to its roots.
    Its roots were a massive failure. That's why they shied away from melee in the first place. People didn't like it.

    Only the team of Hazzikostas, Nervig, Holinka, and the rest of the incompetent goons heading WoW design would think "yeah Survival is popular but why don't we give that old failed melee idea another try, only this time let's totally remove the ranged capability!" and agree that that would work out. Good for them that they have acolytes like you to defend them.
    Last edited by FpicEail; 2017-04-28 at 09:07 PM.

  11. #151
    Quote Originally Posted by FpicEail View Post
    Doesn't matter how much I agree with you on other points; this one is still pure bullshit.
    Guess we'll have to disagree then.

    The specs had some major distinctive factors. MM had kill shot, SV had some distinct features (traps / BA / pet). But rotation-wise they shared a LOT of similarities:

    - Both specs had their major spec defining shot on a ~10s cooldown, Chimaera Shot and Explosive Shot
    - Both specs generated focus in the exact same manner, other than the skill being called different. Steady Shot and Chimaera Shot
    - Both specs dumped focus through a similar styled instant (granted it took T18 gear for MM) shot
    -Both specs had a proc that allowed you to spam a few extra instant shots for some mini-burst with Thrill of the Hunt (talent, but it was picked practically 100%) and Lock and Load.

    Again, I'm not saying the specs needed much. But they did need a little push to differentiate them more.
    And not much needed to be done. I mean take the current MM build and the WoD survival and you've already got 2 builds that are significantly more diverse than towards the end of WoD.

    Uh, no, actually. We are NOT obliged to be constructive towards the melee spec. It's primary flaw is that it's melee. Talking about "oh, they need to streamline the rotation and make the talent choices more diverse" is a waste of time when the foundation itself is rotten. This is a bad attempt at getting ranged-preferring players to comply. Most people have just forgotten about the spec and pretend like hunter is a 2-spec class. Some of us are interested in seeing the old ranged SV return. That leaves the remaining people interested in seeing the melee spec stay. They can talk about the spec all they want and demand buffs and developer attention all day like they have been doing since the start (I think having a spec literally stolen from another group of people just for their own good has gotten to their heads a little and the entitlement is off the charts), but you are out of your mind if you think we should just shut up and help them along with that.

    You are trying to be diplomatic and failing HARD.
    Chill out there buddy. Stop trying to be a forum crusader here.
    We don't need more toxicity in this hunter forum, there is plenty already.

    I've been playing this game long enough to know that Blizzard double backing on itself is extremely unlikely. Their pride knows little bounds and saying 'sorry' and making SV ranged again isn't something I would put money on.

    I would very much prefer SV to be ranged again as well (nice strawmanning there btw); but blizzard isn't going to cave because we puppy eye beg them to do so on MMO forums.
    Circlejerking in this forum about how bad the new survival is and how much injustice was put upon us won't really accomplish much other than fuel the toxicity and swamp the topics.

    EDIT: Then again, they did just double back + listened to the community on the DB/DF stack thing for BM. So there is hope
    Last edited by Nythiz; 2017-04-30 at 05:33 PM.

  12. #152
    Stood in the Fire
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    The Vaasa Glacier, Finland
    Posts
    376
    Honestly, I'm ok with survival being melee. I don't play it much, I'll probably get to faff around with it when we start Gul'dan mythic progress on Wednesday though, adds a breath of fresh air after playing BM and MM fir the last 8 months.

    In general though I can see the need for some tweaks but no major overhaul.
    One does not need tactical genius to conquer the French. They surrender anyway.

Posting Permissions

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