Bring back ranged survival!!!

[ydraw]

if this was true then nobody would be playing it. you not liking something does not = it being a failure.

Almost nobody is playing it. 2% of hunters or 0.2% of the total player base is about as close to nobody as you can get without removing the spec entirely.

[Lex Icon]

Almost nobody is playing it. 2% of hunters or 0.2% of the total player base is about as close to nobody as you can get without removing the spec entirely.

prove it.(raid stats ain't an accurate representation.)

[Lorgar Aurelian]

Survival was touted as the "most fun" melee spec during Legion alpha too. But it was the most dismal failure in the history of the game. Nobody wants Melee hunters.

So it’s the most dismal failure because not a lot of people raid with it? You think it’s doing worse then all of the useless raid classes in classic?

- - - Updated - - -

Almost nobody is playing it. 2% of hunters or 0.2% of the total player base is about as close to nobody as you can get without removing the spec entirely.

And as lex said you need more then just raid stats.

- - - Updated - - -

Raiding wise it's 100% a failure with the lowest mythic representation at .3% regardless... I just want them to bring back a fun Hunter play style that isn't mainly I don't care if you call it thumbing my butthole spec I would still play it because it's the most fun to play I actually unsubbed the game after playing since vanilla because I couldn't stand playing BM or Marksmanship and I do not like playing melee unless I'm tanking. I don't want them to remove melee Hunter I did try it out I did play it for a little bit and yes it was fun I have no qualms with people who want to keep it and want to play it. They have just as much right to play they weigh that they want to. It's honestly all easily solved with them adding a fourth spec to Hunters like they did with Druids you can call it whatever you want I'm actually a firm believer in the problem being that it's still called survival and people want their spec to be called survival. Well I actually do enjoy using bows they could also make it a throwing class make javelins or throwing axes for instance.

I’d be fine with a 4th spec, though I think survival is a great name for meele. A guy with his dog/wolf and a spear is what I think of when I think of a survivalist not some one with exploding arrows.

[threads]

prove it.(raid stats ain't an accurate representation.)

lol you people know the spec is hella dead why deny it

[Lex Icon]

lol you people know the spec is hella dead why deny it

winning argument right there!

[Lorgar Aurelian]

lol you people know the spec is hella dead why deny it

Hard to know much of any thing when it’s not backed up with facts.

[threads]

Hard to know much of any thing when it’s not backed up with facts.

you just deny any stats people post so what's the use arguing about it

[Kaver]

I would like more classes in the game to have both a ranged and a melee dps spec. Right now it’s only Shaman, Druid and Hunter.

- - - Updated - - -

Raiding wise it's 100% a failure with the lowest mythic representation at .3% regardless... I just want them to bring back a fun Hunter play style that isn't mainly I don't care if you call it thumbing my butthole spec I would still play it because it's the most fun to play I actually unsubbed the game after playing since vanilla because I couldn't stand playing BM or Marksmanship and I do not like playing melee unless I'm tanking. I don't want them to remove melee Hunter I did try it out I did play it for a little bit and yes it was fun I have no qualms with people who want to keep it and want to play it. They have just as much right to play they weigh that they want to. It's honestly all easily solved with them adding a fourth spec to Hunters like they did with Druids you can call it whatever you want I'm actually a firm believer in the problem being that it's still called survival and people want their spec to be called survival. Well I actually do enjoy using bows they could also make it a throwing class make javelins or throwing axes for instance.

Blizzard are never going to give a pure dps class four specs. It would be cool though, but every spec in the game take time for Blizzard to balance. The only reason why they can justify druids having four specs is because two of them are tank/healer..

[Lorgar Aurelian]

you just deny any stats people post so what's the use arguing about it

I don’t deny any thing, less people raid as survival woopty doo. That doesn’t how ever cover the rest of the game if you have the stats for the rest of the game show them and I’ll shut up.

[Donkeywing]

I don’t deny any thing, less people raid as survival woopty doo. That doesn’t how ever cover the rest of the game if you have the stats for the rest of the game show them and I’ll shut up.

Let's be very fucking generous and assume SV representation is much higher in other statics of the game. How much would the SV population need to increase in those stats to drag it out of the dirt and call it a spec that is well played? Without providing a proper reason for such a large increase/deviation you're just making a fool of yourself. There is no reason to expect anything more than minimal variance, until you have a convincing, well thought-out argument that will discredit the raid stats entirely. The funny thing is, the most convincing argument doesn't actually apply this tier, and you know it. People would rather have no dmg instead of the garbage.

I personally find it very interesting all statements/facts/stats are denied just like that. If you love the melee spec so much, be aware your spec is build upon the ruins of another, and your spec will therefore never be free of hate or criticism, even if it has a 30% representation, because when it has a 30% representation, the haters will start bending facts to their own interpretation, just like you're doing right now.

[Crimsonfiend76]

I would like more classes in the game to have both a ranged and a melee dps spec. Right now it’s only Shaman, Druid and Hunter.

- - - Updated - - -



Blizzard are never going to give a pure dps class four specs. It would be cool though, but every spec in the game take time for Blizzard to balance. The only reason why they can justify druids having four specs is because two of them are tank/healer..

Ok, make survival a healing/tank class (which conveniently means I'll never play it) along with creating a 4th spec (maybe dark ranger - dot class with old survival abilities). Melee hunter is still a thing, ranged hunters get their spec back (mostly) and the 4th spec prerequisites (no 4 dps specs) are observed...everyone happy.

[Lex Icon]

Let's be very fucking generous and assume SV representation is much higher in other statics of the game. How much would the SV population need to increase in those stats to drag it out of the dirt and call it a spec that is well played? Without providing a proper reason for such a large increase/deviation you're just making a fool of yourself. There is no reason to expect anything more than minimal variance, until you have a convincing, well thought-out argument that will discredit the raid stats entirely. The funny thing is, the most convincing argument doesn't actually apply this tier, and you know it. People would rather have no dmg instead of the garbage.

I personally find it very interesting all statements/facts/stats are denied just like that. If you love the melee spec so much, be aware your spec is build upon the ruins of another, and your spec will therefore never be free of hate or criticism, even if it has a 30% representation, because when it has a 30% representation, the haters will start bending facts to their own interpretation, just like you're doing right now.

you're basically going on and on about a spec that was.. played by players that may or may not still play the game.
over and over we see people go "oh i want it to be like in wotlk,cata,mop,wod." you can't even decide what iteration you want and still you think making it ranged will somehow save the spec.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

Let's be very fucking generous and assume SV representation is much higher in other statics of the game. How much would the SV population need to increase in those stats to drag it out of the dirt and call it a spec that is well played? Without providing a proper reason for such a large increase/deviation you're just making a fool of yourself. There is no reason to expect anything more than minimal variance, until you have a convincing, well thought-out argument that will discredit the raid stats entirely. The funny thing is, the most convincing argument doesn't actually apply this tier, and you know it. People would rather have no dmg instead of the garbage.

I personally find it very interesting all statements/facts/stats are denied just like that. If you love the melee spec so much, be aware your spec is build upon the ruins of another, and your spec will therefore never be free of hate or criticism, even if it has a 30% representation, because when it has a 30% representation, the haters will start bending facts to their own interpretation, just like you're doing right now.

I don't really care if a spec is well played or not, at the end of the day blizzard picks what a spec is and so far they have kept it as melee. I also don't have to make any argument to discredit the raid stats, the raid stats are right people don't like it for raiding but i'm not the one making claims about how many people play the spec that is you and others. you can make any claims you want about how many people like survival as it is now but unless you have facts to back it up your claims are worthless. its really not that hard to understand if you want to make claims about the player numbers put up or shut up.

I also don't care that your butt hurt that old survival is gone, if they want to bring it back either as a new spec or even replace melee ill probably still play hunter as long as the specs are fun i didn't find the way the specs were from cata-wod fun so i didn't play hunter and i didn't bitch about it constantly.

[Donkeywing]

but unless you have facts to back it up your claims are worthless. .

You see I do have facts; the raid stats, its just not something you want. You're not asking for facts, you're asking for undeniable proof, without even coming up with something/anything yourself. Embarrassing. Your limited interpretation of the raid stats still lacks a serious argument; something I have been asking for many times now, but you're either willfully ignorant or just too stupid to know what I'm asking for. You're bending the stats to your own interpretation without any proof or serious argument. On top of that you would need to explain why the deviation would be tripple/quadruple across the board, because those are the factors you're talking about if you want there to be any significant difference.

[Nouk]

If were going back to ranged, you better give me effing Throwing Axes like Zul'jin and Rexxar in HotS. Thats my friggin wet dream right there, gotta still play GW2 to scratch that itch.

Really enjoyed Survival in Legion gameplay wise, but the social pressure to play it (even when good) isnt worth it. So yeah, ranged would be fine, if it really brings something new to the table. Puny one handed crossbows with a lil poison smeared arrows wont really excite me.

[Bepples]

over and over we see people go "oh i want it to be like in wotlk,cata,mop,wod." you can't even decide what iteration you want and still you think making it ranged will somehow save the spec.

WotLK, Cata, MoP, and WoD Survival all had the same core design philosophies. The biggest change was the Focus revamp going into Cataclysm but from then on the Survival spec of early Cataclysm was mostly the same spec that it was in late WoD. You're just looking at some minor differences in preferences e.g. people who liked the talent tree (Cataclysm), people who liked the first time it became fully mobile (MoP), or people who liked the better distinction from Marksmanship (WoD). But they all like that ranged Survival style that was present in all of those expansions.

Also, "somehow save the spec"? Yes, it is actually a sensible belief and prediction that you can save this spec by going back to the model that has proven to be successful for the spec. How can you base an argument on hypotheticals and uncertainty here when we've had a ranged Survival for many years and it was very successful in those years? That's the difference between melee and ranged Survival proponents; melee Survival players argue their spec has an audience based on vague, anecdotal online discussion while ranged survival proponents can just refer you to the fact that the spec has existed in the past and did, in fact, have an audience.

- - - Updated - - -

Melee DPS = 12
Frost DK
Unholy DK
Havoc DH
Feral Druid
Survival Hunter
Windwalker Monk
Retribution Paladin
Assasination Rogue
Outlaw Rogue
Subtlety Rogue
Arms Warrior
Fury Warrior

Range DPS = 11
Balance Druid
Beast Master Hunter
Marksmen Hunter
Arcane Mage
Fire Mage
Frost Mage
Shadow Priest
Elemental Shaman
Affliction Warlock
Demology Warlock
Destruction Warlock

Its pretty much even, if survival was a range dps the numbers would just swap.

You're forgetting Enhancement Shaman. There are 13 melee specs, 11 ranged specs. If Survival were still ranged, there would be a 12/12 balance.

[Kaver]

Ok, make survival a healing/tank class (which conveniently means I'll never play it) along with creating a 4th spec (maybe dark ranger - dot class with old survival abilities). Melee hunter is still a thing, ranged hunters get their spec back (mostly) and the 4th spec prerequisites (no 4 dps specs) are observed...everyone happy.

I meant (2 dps, 1 heal and 1 tank) and not (3 dps and 1 tank/heal) Dont get me wrong, I’m not against it, I just don’t think Blizzard will allow it..

[Lorgar Aurelian]

You see I do have facts; the raid stats, its just not something you want. You're not asking for facts, you're asking for undeniable proof, without even coming up with something/anything yourself. Embarrassing. Your limited interpretation of the raid stats still lacks a serious argument; something I have been asking for many times now, but you're either willfully ignorant or just too stupid to know what I'm asking for. You're bending the stats to your own interpretation without any proof or serious argument. On top of that you would need to explain why the deviation would be tripple/quadruple across the board, because those are the factors you're talking about if you want there to be any significant difference.

I’m not bending stats at all and there’s only one argument needed. People don’t only play the spec they raid as I wouldn’t raid as survival but I’d still play it. YOU keep making claims about players numbers when you don’t have the numbers to back up the claims. You can babble all you want but at the end of the day you and I have no idea how many people play survival outside of the raiding scene, I’m willing to admit that people don’t like it for raiding but that we don’t have the numbers for the rest of the game your not willing to admit that you don’t know because you would rather try and use the raid stats as a absolute when they in fact are not.

[Donkeywing]

People don’t only play the spec they raid as I wouldn’t raid as survival but I’d still play it.

Maybe people don't raid with survival because they don't raid with a spec they never play.

[Deleted]

Ranged survival was literally "Apply dots" and use explosive shot on cooldown.

Hell, they even made it more braindead when they made explosive shot stack.

I have wanted a Melee Hunter spec since forever.

- - - Updated - - -

Maybe people don't raid with survival because they don't raid with a spec they never play.

Let's be honest. People only play Hunter because it's easy as fuck anyway with zero Nuance.