The problem with hunters in pvp is that they have no mechanical weaknesses

[Krusza]

After the last thread with him, I've done the same.

Don't know what color the sky is in Krassz's world, but no one will ever convince him it's other than what his delusions tell him.

Because you're all incapable of arguing. You're all shit at the game and always will be, not my fault he can't read what a thread is about.

*points out issues with hunter class design*

"BUT REPRESENTATION GUYS"

No wonder the US ladder is 10x easier to gain rating on when it's full of downers like this. Seems like the stereotypes are true.

[Aliatril]

idk this post seems to be frustration around 1v1. Most of this doesn't apply to 3v3 settings. People always think the game is or should be balanced around 1v1 and it's not and never will be.

[Ravingmad]

Well if you don't see the issues with world PvP then you mustn't really know how Legion PvP works.

Instanced PvP is based around stat templates. All PvP balancing is done around those templates. Those aren't active in world PvP, that's why rogues can kill you in 2 globals and why tanks can 1v5. Damage overall outside of instanced PvP is stupidly high, not to mention certain legendaries like rogue cloak which makes fan of knives one shot a 10-man raid or valeera's which makes feint heal 20% of your HP.

If you can't understand why killing someone in half a PvE rotation isn't actual PvP then I don't really know what to say. That doesn't happen in instanced PvP.

My point was for you to elaborate an answer, because you seem to just like bashing people's opinion without giving reason why.

[Krusza]

My point was for you to elaborate an answer, because you seem to just like bashing people's opinion without giving reason why.

I did give you that. Did you only read the first sentence?

[RelaZ]

After the last thread with him, I've done the same.

Don't know what color the sky is in Krassz's world, but no one will ever convince him it's other than what his delusions tell him.

Are you guys really so delusional you don't see the difference between representation and class design, and more particularly how they have almost nothing in common?

People will play whatever happens to be the most effective, regardless of how badly designed it is.

For example: If Blizzard removed all spells from Warriors and replaced it with just 1 spell that would do 95% of your health as damage, ranged instant etc - that would be terrible class design but the representation of Warriors would skyrocket because they would be super effective.

Same could potentially be said for Hunter - they really are the swiss-army knife, but with none of the downsides. That downside which kept them back used to be the deadzone and with it gone Hunter design is/can be problematic.

But class design really, really, has nothing to do with representation. Only effectiveness. Any design can have high representation if the damage/healing tuning of it allows for it. Literally any design. It has nothing to do with how good said design is.

And no, I'm not saying Hunter design is bad, that Hunters are good/bad atm or saying that not having deadzone is bad, but it certainly could be argued.

Its PvP nonethless.
What is the actual PvP then?

World PvP
Battleground PvP
Arena PvP

Which one do you consider to be the "valid" one in your opinion, and why? Please elaborate.

Anything instanced is a lot more valid than wPvP. wPvP in Legion is basically who has more PvE gear and more fucked up trinkets/set bonuses/insane stat scaling.

Anyone sane would basically say it goes like this Arena > RBG > random BG > wPvP when it comes to what "valid" PvP is.

And of course someone (no names required) is going to come in here and scream "REEEEEEEE ARENA IS TRASH", but hey guess what random BGs is the LFD of PvP, Arena is Mythic. Get over your weird delusions.

[Caolela]

Are you guys really so delusional you don't see the difference between representation and class design, ...

I wasn't commenting on that, but in reply to Kag.

[Kagthul]

I wasn't commenting on that, but in reply to Kag.

Pretty sure he was replying to my rather incredulous "you haven't blocked this guy yet?!" statement.

[Caolela]

Pretty sure he was replying to my rather incredulous "you haven't blocked this guy yet?!" statement.

Yes, exactly.

[Charge me Doctor]

These problems didn't exist in TBC (with the exception of resto druid and SLSL warlock). I'd suggest playing a TBC private server if you're into pvp because it will be a lot more fun than live. Since Activision came along pvp has only become progressively worse with each expansion.

In TBC you could pop BW and let your pet eat any clothie while /lol ing at him. Hunters in TBC were literally cancer

[Aryah]

I dont play a hunter so this isnt a post defending my hunter.

With that said, hunters are the second to last represented class in 3v3 arena
in the world and Marksmanship is the 11th most represented spec of all.

I dont really see the problem outside of some people having problems with them 1v1 or in world pvp.

Balancing classes around 1v1 or wpvp will never happen and SHOULD never happen.

well if they ever balanced the game around 1v1. sure.

End of thread.

[Ravingmad]

I did give you that. Did you only read the first sentence?

I was referring to your initial answer. "World PvP is a massive joke at the minute and in no way representative of actual PvP."

Your 2nd answer was constructive, yes. I was merely stating that you did elaborated an answer on your 2nd reply.

[Krusza]

End of thread.

No, it's not.

I don't know why no one can understand threads on this forum but it's about the design of hunter, it's not calling it OP. He even calls it trash.

[Aryah]

No, it's not.

I don't know why no one can understand threads on this forum but it's about the design of hunter, it's not calling it OP. He even calls it trash.

What makes deadzone design necessarily better that no deadzone?

They have no mechanical weakness in terms of range vs melee, but that's what makes them unique out of all the classes. I would argue that is good design.

[Illana]

No, it's not.

I don't know why no one can understand threads on this forum but it's about the design of hunter, it's not calling it OP. He even calls it trash.

OP calls it a problem, however statistics show that it's not.

What more do you want?

[RelaZ]

OP calls it a problem, however statistics show that it's not.

What more do you want?

I even explained earlier how statistics (representation) and class design have nothing in common, no correlation whatsoever. What's so hard to understand about that?

[smaktat]

Take back 5-40 yard range.

Staying in melee range of a hunter, even as a caster was a thing you accually had to do.

This is the best answer.

[Illana]

I even explained earlier how statistics (representation) and class design have nothing in common, no correlation whatsoever. What's so hard to understand about that?

who's talking about class design? It's the OP asserting that somehow hunters have no downsides and implying they are overpowered.
You yourself said that people will play what is most effective, no matter how badly designed
So if people will play what is most effective and representation is so low: what conclusion can you infer from this?

[RelaZ]

who's talking about class design? It's the OP asserting that somehow hunters have no downsides and implying they are overpowered.
You yourself said that people will play what is most effective, no matter how badly designed
So if people will play what is most effective and representation is so low: what conclusion can you infer from this?

/facepalm

OP is talking about class design - he's literally saying that not having deadzones is an issue with the design of the class. A class/spec can be super well designed but perform shit due to numbers tuning and the complete opposite, it can be dogshit designed and the most represented one. Or in the case of hunters they can have a pretty shit design (not neccesarily due to the reasons OP pointed out) and be pretty low representation. From that I conclude that representation and class design have nothing in common and that it means nothing.

People really need to learn the difference between balance and class/spec/game design.

[Illana]

/facepalm

OP is talking about class design - he's literally saying that not having deadzones is an issue with the design of the class. A class/spec can be super well designed but perform shit due to numbers tuning and the complete opposite, it can be dogshit designed and the most represented one. Or in the case of hunters they can have a pretty shit design (not neccesarily due to the reasons OP pointed out) and be pretty low representation. From that I conclude that representation and class design have nothing in common and that it means nothing.

People really need to learn the difference between balance and class/spec/game design.

K i read the OP I see where you're coming from now

[Krusza]

K i read the OP I see where you're coming from now

Finally, maybe more people can re-read the opening post and realize what this thread is about.

Don't know why that's such an issue on this forum.

Maybe they'll see this post?

With the recent nerf, hunters still have no mechanical weaknesses but now their damage is so sh!t that they might as well stop playing arena for this season.