Survival Needs to Stay and be Fixed

[Deleted]

I understood you. It's a thematic issue is the problem. Traps aren't enough to really sperate one class from another (they help, don't get me wrong) but from a thematic stand point, what seperates a lonewolf SV hunter from a warrior?

The same stuff that seperates a rogue from a dw warrior.

For Hunters that would be Animal-Spirit themed attacks, traps, agility etc.

[lazypeon100]

The same stuff that seperates a rogue from a dw warrior.

Animal/Spirit themed attacks, traps, agility etc.

I think we'll have to respectfully disagree. I don't see that being a big enough of a difference. Rogues for instance rely on stealth and underhanded tactics. I don't think we should turn "the pet class" into something it's not.

[Deleted]

I think we'll have to respectfully disagree. I don't see that being a big enough of a difference. Rogues for instance rely on stealth and underhanded tactics. I don't think we should turn "the pet class" into something it's not.

How? Stealth is about the same as traps.
There is only one rogue spec that really does utilize stealth mid combat.

[threads]

this thread's proof SV will continue to be laughed and hated until we get ranged back.

[mber341]

No you can't. Survival's changes were on a different league to every other spec change. Yes, there have been other drastic, disliked spec changes. That is not equivalent to flat out losing the whole spec in the nature of the Survival remake. Extent matters.

Your username suits you.

[Deleted]

Yes but how would a Survival Hunter be different from a warrior or rogue if he had no pet? Because of the traps? I mean it would feel more like a rogue spec based on traps than a hunter one at that point. What would tie the spec to the Hunter class?

And what is for Marksmanship to be a hunter without the pet? It's the same question. It's tied because is a hunter with different kind of traps, u know, traps that summon animals if u want or something.

Then u have to apply the same question for dps monks, why they are different from warriors or rogues? They hit exactly like them, with a 2 handed weapon or 1 handed weapons. Or a DK for example, also hits with a weapon and melee, and also the retri paladin. Then wat's the difference then?

[Bepples]

What does it matter if the change was bigger if your point is the audience changed, all of thoses changes made me drop the class as I no longer enjoyed it and I was no longer the right audience for it, just as you dropped survival as you no longer enjoyed it and you were no longer the right adudience for it.

It really is not the same thing because the extent is totally different. You can't compare, for example, a Protection Paladin getting Holy Power which you don't like but still remaining a holy-themed, fast-paced, versatile tank, with Survival which turned from an easy-to-approach, highly versatile and mobile ranged spec to a complex, unwieldy melee spec. One is an addition you don't personally like, the other is a total removal and replacement. Trying to argue they are the same thing is intellectually lacking and dishonest.

Sorry, but no. It was the reason I quit my hunter as a main after TBC.

I realise this is a matter of personal preference, but I utterly fail to empathise with someone who is arguing that a boatload of additions to the class in 3.0 somehow made the class worse. MM and SV gained a signature ability, all 3 specs had useless talents trimmed and gained more useful passives in their trees. That's basically 3.0 in a nutshell. I'm not seeing any room for a 'downgrade' here. It was the BC specs plus more useful talents and variety in the skill sets. Walk me through the thought process of how that makes them worse.

Edit : You might be right about the autoshot thing actually. Getting old I guess. There was some thing they added in the last patch in TBC I really hated though. But if it wasn't stutterstep stuff, then I can't for the life of me remember what it was.

They really didn't make any major Hunter changes in the later BC patches. I'm certain you're thinking of 3.0, which, while releasing before WotLK, was the WotLK systems patch.

Back then I was furious over whatever change they did, but by now, I just don't really care. I keep a roster of every single class at max level, so if I find one boring, then off I go to something else more fun.

Well I'm the opposite. I used to be very optimistic about class changes in every expansion up until WoD, but WoD and especially Legion snapped me out of it. It's clear the developers are more interested in trying to dazzle everyone with their 'creativity' rather than building on good class design or coming up with actually cohesive and enjoyable ideas.

I realize there is no point trying to argue with you though. I just don't get why you come into every single SV thread with your hate. SV melee seems to be here to stay and there is nothing you can do about it. Go do something productive.

You seem to have a habit of trying to tell me what to do and think in this discussion. Fuck off with that, kindly.

Your username suits you.

Good counter-argument.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

It really is not the same thing because the extent is totally different. You can't compare, for example, a Protection Paladin getting Holy Power which you don't like but still remaining a holy-themed, fast-paced, versatile tank, with Survival which turned from an easy-to-approach, highly versatile and mobile ranged spec to a complex, unwieldy melee spec. One is an addition you don't personally like, the other is a total removal and replacement. Trying to argue they are the same thing is intellectually lacking and dishonest.

It doesn’t matter if you don’t like that the change is bigger. In all cases rather it be sv going meele demo losin meta or pallys geting holy power the spec changes and people no longer want to play it. If I didn’t want to play a pally because of holy power or demo because of the lack of meta my complaints are equaliy as valid as your because you don’t like meele. The change is bigger yes but that doesn’t matter if a spec changes so you no longer like it the magnitude of that change doesn’t matter if you know there not going to change it back and it doesn’t make your disliking it any more valid then some one who dislikes a spec change for a different reason.

[Deleted]

Make survival ranged again.

That is your fix.

Problem solved.

Agreed
10 chars

[RaZz0r]

Survival should be ranged it makes no sense like if your key goal is freaking survival the last place you want to be is right in front of the enemy.
And as someone who has been a hunter main since pretty much day one legion is the only xpack.
Where i have only enjoyed two out of the three specs to some degree.
If i wanted to be a freaking melee class i would have picked any of the other classes.

So make Survival ranged again and stop trying to force a spec on hunters that no real hunter player wants.
Cause lets be real 99% of all survival hunters are ether doing cause its a meme or they are warrior / dk mains and they wanted a 4th spec to play.

[Bepples]

It doesn’t matter if you don’t like that the change is bigger.

Yes it does. The rest of your post is not worth reading. Pretending extent doesn't matter and forcing false equivalencies is the type of argumentative approach you'd expect from a 12 year old. By your logic, any percentage damage nerf is equivalent to Survival being remade into a melee spec since it makes the people playing the spec like it less.

Paladins gaining holy power does not represent a change in the intended audience of a spec. You may not like the change, but the purpose and intended role of Protection (I use this example because I used to play Protection very extensively, including during the Holy Power addition) was the same before and after the change. That's not true for Survival, and this isn't conjecture either. Look at Hazzikostas' recent comments on Survival's representation (Gamescom interview). They knew Survival would be an unpopular spec because most of the class wants ranged specs. Admitted by Blizzard. Not debatable. Survival's intended audience changed in Legion. That's not true for any single other spec change ever, and claiming otherwise is a mixture of stupidity and dishonesty.

[Ashmiel]

Yes it does. The rest of your post is not worth reading. Pretending extent doesn't matter and forcing false equivalencies is the type of argumentative approach you'd expect from a 12 year old. By your logic, any percentage damage nerf is equivalent to Survival being remade into a melee spec since it makes the people playing the spec like it less.

Paladins gaining holy power does not represent a change in the intended audience of a spec. You may not like the change, but the purpose and intended role of Protection (I use this example because I used to play Protection very extensively, including during the Holy Power addition) was the same before and after the change. That's not true for Survival, and this isn't conjecture either. Look at Hazzikostas' recent comments on Survival's representation (Gamescom interview). They knew Survival would be an unpopular spec because most of the class wants ranged specs. Admitted by Blizzard. Not debatable. Survival's intended audience changed in Legion. That's not true for any single other spec change ever, and claiming otherwise is a mixture of stupidity and dishonesty.

I guess the last thing I can say is something like ..
Hah! Survival belongs to us now, the proud and the few! And kindly fuck off right back at ya.

[Bepples]

I guess the last thing I can say is something like ..
Hah! Survival belongs to us now, the proud and the few! And kindly fuck off right back at ya.

Anyone who denies that SV going melee is an attack on the class and is still striving to achieve reconciliation between melee Survival and ranged Hunters with hopes to break the stigma and gain acceptance for Survival should read posts like these and realise the futility of their position.

[Deleted]

I dont like SV right now, spec seems to spammy and no thinking just procs on top of rng on mongoose bite, i wish they brought back the sv ranged spec back with more abilites and make BM a melee/ranged hybrid.

[Hyxi]

After the butcher job Bliz did to the other specs, ya'll actually think SV would have been the same spec you played before if it stayed range?

lol ok

[Bepples]

After the butcher job Bliz did to the other specs, ya'll actually think SV would have been the same spec you played before if it stayed range?

lol ok

"We were going to fuck it up anyway so we might as well fuck it up as much as possible". Not a good defence.

Also, even if the quality of the spec were reduced, recovering from that would have been far easier than recovering from the current situation. ANY decision moving forward is going to be ridden with downsides, from keeping the current format of the class to remaking ranged Survival in any way (either as a replacement to existing Survival or as a 4th spec/part of MM). Making Survival melee = class design team backing themselves into a corner.

[Ashmiel]

Anyone who denies that SV going melee is an attack on the class and is still striving to achieve reconciliation between melee Survival and ranged Hunters with hopes to break the stigma and gain acceptance for Survival should read posts like these and realise the futility of their position.

I never intended to have any sort of reconciliation between ranged and SV hunters. And neither are you. I couldn't care less if SV is ranged or melee as long as the spec is fun to play for me.
Current SV is fun. Old SV was not. To me. That is all that matters. I guess you will continue to go into every single SV thread and cry about it as you have done since SV melee was revealed.
And I have to admit, the collective wailing of you crybabies are equal part amusing and annoying.



In any case. SV could do with some changes. I wont list exact things, but for the feel of it, a good start would have been making the mastery actually useful to further increase the importance of the pet.
I do find it somewhat silly that I'd drop caltrops and exploding traps beneath my own feet.
The mongoose mechanic I'm fine with.
Mok'nathal is fine. Feels really really weird playing without it when you get used to it.

All in all I think what it needs is mostly minor things as it currently stands.

[Bepples]

I never intended to have any sort of reconciliation between ranged and SV hunters.

I'm sure you don't, and I'm sure most Survival Hunters share the same "Fuck you, got mine" selfish attitude that you do. The point is that you have Survival Hunters and their sympathisers trying to mend their reputation with the class and act like the spec is beneficial to the rest of the class. Your post is helpful counter-evidence of that.

[Ashmiel]

I'm sure you don't, and I'm sure most Survival Hunters share the same "Fuck you, got mine" selfish attitude that you do. The point is that you have Survival Hunters and their sympathisers trying to mend their reputation with the class and act like the spec is beneficial to the rest of the class. Your post is helpful counter-evidence of that.

Looking at it objectively I'd say it is benefical to the spec as a whole to have 2 ranged and one melee spec. It does give more opportunities on how to play and what you can do.
That people like or hate the spec is entirely irrelevant in that regard.

Would it have been nice if everyone enjoyed SV. Yeah, of course it would. But it seems to me the vast majority of hunters refuse to even try the spec because "hurr durr ain't ranged." Which is just pathetic.

[TOM_RUS]

Melee hunter = garbage hunter. The only way to fix it is to make it ranged again.