Survival revamp inevitable?

[A Chozo]

There was no "glaring homogeneity". This is a post-Legion invention. The Hunter specs diverged in gameplay and theme expansion-after-expansion and by WoD they were substantially different from one-another. They didn't "fix" shit. They broke what was formerly a great and widely-enjoyed spec.

There was a glaring homogeneity problem in MoP and WoD. Everyone who liked old Survival is now playing MM and BM and are fine with it - they just wanna cancel a less popular but perfectly functional spec so that they have 3 chances of having a "meta" spec.

Instead of having Hunter 1, Hunter 2 and Hunter 3, Blizzard actually made 3 distinct specs, and yet people like you still think that having 3 of the same gameplay is better than 3 different and fun specs.

I understand that you are mad because they unmade a gameplay you disliked in favor of something different, but you have to understand that it was in the best interest of Hunter players to have more diversity in their gameplay. And we got just that. If we had old survival back with current Survival parses (good aoe, horribad single target) people would still be avoiding it in favor of the other two.

[Dadwen]

There was a glaring homogeneity problem in MoP and WoD. Everyone who liked old Survival is now playing MM and BM and are fine with it - they just wanna cancel a less popular but perfectly functional spec so that they have 3 chances of having a "meta" spec.

Instead of having Hunter 1, Hunter 2 and Hunter 3, Blizzard actually made 3 distinct specs, and yet people like you still think that having 3 of the same gameplay is better than 3 different and fun specs.

I understand that you are mad because they unmade a gameplay you disliked in favor of something different, but you have to understand that it was in the best interest of Hunter players to have more diversity in their gameplay. And we got just that. If we had old survival back with current Survival parses (good aoe, horribad single target) people would still be avoiding it in favor of the other two.

Ummmmm nope not even a little fine with it, not even subbed because of that 1 issue.

[lazypeon100]

Big yikes. That's no where close to true man.

[A Chozo]

Ummmmm nope not even a little fine with it, not even subbed because of that 1 issue.

Hmmm what a difficult choice to Blizzard, cater to all 15 Survival Hunter players or to you....

[Dadwen]

Hmmm what a difficult choice to Blizzard, cater to all 15 Survival Hunter players or to you....

right just to me and all the others that are also calling for the old SV back (and not the 15 people that actively play MSV).

Ehh 15 might be pushing it lol....

Plus side some hunter fixes this last round (from what I read minor but only went to real hunter specs..... )

- - - Updated - - -

Big yikes. That's no where close to true man.

I still follow the official forums there are many that have said they dropped the class due to it. (so untrue I think they are just trying to be a ass).

[A Chozo]

right just to me and all the others that are also calling for the old SV back

Here's the thing. The others are already playing and paying, because MM and BM still behave similarly to old Survival. New Survival players are still playing.

Why cater to you and kill a niche but awesome spec, while instead they can cater to everyone else who easily adapted?

Hell, someday people here will realize that it's several times easier to ask the devs to introduce some new talents in Marksmanship' tree that allows it to play more similarly to old Survival, instead of asking melee Survival to be remade again into the old, problematic version.

[lazypeon100]

- - - Updated - - -



I still follow the official forums there are many that have said they dropped the class due to it. (so untrue I think they are just trying to be a ass).

I mostly post on the official forums, haven't really been on here in years. But yeah, there are a lot of unsatisfied hunters who miss the old spec. Personally, I don't want to take away from the people who enjoy the current spec, because I think Blizz's choice to do that to anyone in Legion was asinine.

I'd rather they implement a 4th spec with an updated version of old SV. I of course know that is a total pipe dream and that it is far more likely the spec will get reverted at some point rather than be left to languish in obscurity forever.

[Dadwen]

Here's the thing. The others are already playing and paying, because MM and BM still behave similarly to old Survival. New Survival players are still playing.

Why cater to you and kill a niche but awesome spec, while instead they can cater to everyone else who easily adapted?

Hell, someday people here will realize that it's several times easier to ask the devs to introduce some new talents in Marksmanship' tree that allows it to play more similarly to old Survival, instead of asking melee Survival to be remade again into the old, problematic version.

All they do by trying to shoe horn old SV spec's into MM is screw up that spec, (and there are people bitching about that on the forums too).

and I'd almost be willing to bet money they would make more players happy bringing back the old SV than keeping it the way things are. (A niche spec that has less than half the next lowest spec in the game) and can you show me any proof between LK-and MOP that SV had less players than what is active in MSV now, I've seen it's almost a running joke people saying if they've seen any MSV hunters around.

And you have no Proof at all that all the people that played old RSV are happily playing MM or BM that's just out right BS and talking out the wrong hole. (if you have any proof post it.)

- - - Updated - - -

I mostly post on the official forums, haven't really been on here in years. But yeah, there are a lot of unsatisfied hunters who miss the old spec. Personally, I don't want to take away from the people who enjoy the current spec, because I think Blizz's choice to do that to anyone in Legion was asinine.

I'd rather they implement a 4th spec with an updated version of old SV. I of course know that is a total pipe dream and that it is far more likely the spec will get reverted at some point rather than be left to languish in obscurity forever.

I'm sure there are a few people that deserve to keep it, if they brought old RSV back, but people like those in this thread make me hope they bury it.

[lazypeon100]

I'm sure there are a few people that deserve to keep it, if they brought old RSV back, but people like those in this thread make me hope they bury it.

I assume the vast majority of players aren't out to antagonize others. But I understand. There are some posters who I believe absolutely post bad faith arguments and try to gaslight people in an attempt to defend the spec, rather than call Blizz out on their poor choices.

I do genuinely want the spec to succeed because I want the class to succeed. But I also think part of that very much means the old spec needs to be updated and returned in some form. And I agree with you, MM talents are not the way to do that. It limits the talent choices MM players actually wants and leaves old SV players no flexibility in talents while being shoehorned into MM. It's also clear after five years of this that Blizz cannot make it work within MM's talent / design anyways.

[kiramon]

I assume the vast majority of players aren't out to antagonize others. But I understand. There are some posters who I believe absolutely post bad faith arguments and try to gaslight people in an attempt to defend the spec, rather than call Blizz out on their poor choices.

I do genuinely want the spec to succeed because I want the class to succeed. But I also think part of that very much means the old spec needs to be updated and returned in some form. And I agree with you, MM talents are not the way to do that. It limits the talent choices MM players actually wants and leaves old SV players no flexibility in talents while being shoehorned into MM. It's also clear after five years of this that Blizz cannot make it work within MM's talent / design anyways.

Survival has the same problem as feral. You can’t make a melee version of the class that is “balanced” against its ranged version. All else considered, the ranged will win. Let alone the fact that blizzard continually sets the melee versions far beneath the ranged... even boomkin having innervate but feral not...

Oh and the survival gameplay is lackluster... at least in bfa idk now but at least I could put up good numbers except bm was op lolol

[Dadwen]

Survival has the same problem as feral. You can’t make a melee version of the class that is “balanced” against its ranged version. All else considered, the ranged will win. Let alone the fact that blizzard continually sets the melee versions far beneath the ranged... even boomkin having innervate but feral not...

In this case when they made it I think Ion even said it could not really out do the Ranged spec's or it would make some feel like they had no choice but to play that spec even though they picked a range class. (so it's going to have to live with some type of handicap). IMO it was a really really (really really) stupid idea to begin with.

[Argorwal]

What is SVs current group utility btw?
Something only SV brings with it, but not BM/MM?

(Serious question, I really don't know)

Is there any?
If not, why not?
Not even a 5% buff to something like battle shout or whatever?

The key abilities on icyveins for example only list freezing trap, muzzle (interrupt), Intimidation and feign death.

Seriously?
Is there nothing?

Does Surv at least still have Tranq-shot?

Most (all?) 5% buffs like that are class wide, not spec wide.

At least for:

Warrior 5% attack power
Demon hunter 5% magic
Monk 5% physical
Mage 5% intellect
Priest 5% stamina

The only spec specific dps buff I can think of is windfury totem, but I may be forgetting others.

- - - Updated - - -

Survival has the same problem as feral. You can’t make a melee version of the class that is “balanced” against its ranged version. All else considered, the ranged will win. Let alone the fact that blizzard continually sets the melee versions far beneath the ranged... even boomkin having innervate but feral not...

Oh and the survival gameplay is lackluster... at least in bfa idk now but at least I could put up good numbers except bm was op lolol

Same with shamans and elemental over enhance.

[F Rm]

Here's the thing. The others are already playing and paying, because MM and BM still behave similarly to old Survival.

Hell, someday people here will realize that it's several times easier to ask the devs to introduce some new talents in Marksmanship' tree that allows it to play more similarly to old Survival, instead of asking melee Survival to be remade again into the old, problematic version.

So, which one is it?

Is BM and MM playing/behaving like old SV or should they replace several of their talents to make them play/behave more like old SV?

Here's the thing. The others are already playing and paying, because MM and BM still behave similarly to old Survival.

Short answer? No they don't. Not even close.

You even said so yourself, here:

Blizzard actually made 3 distinct specs

How can BM and MM play/behave similarly to old SV if they are now "distinct" in their designs?

Hell, someday people here will realize that it's several times easier to ask the devs to introduce some new talents in Marksmanship' tree that allows it to play more similarly to old Survival,

You're clearly against the idea of the devs removing/reworking SV for us to get the gameplay of the old SV back as an option. But apparently, you have no problem saying that they should rework for example MM to do just that...

What about MM players who want to keep with the theme and the "distinct" design and fantasy of that spec? How do you justify removing half or more of what makes MM into what it is, just to fit something else in there?

The reason so few(apart from the comments we see from players like yourself who have little to no interest in the ranged aspects of the class) are asking for RSV to come back through MM, is because they are not the same. They did not, nor would they play the same. Trying to merge the two would only cause a giant mess and the end result would be two partial specs pulled together into one with no options to delve deeper into either fantasy and not enough coherency in terms of the core design.

instead of asking melee Survival to be remade again into the old, problematic version.

What was so problematic about it?

By all means, do elaborate further...

[A Chozo]

What was so problematic about it?

Again, as was pointed out in the thread, it was very similar to the other two specs gameplay and flavorwise, to the point that the devs made it into something entirely different but still flavorful for the Hunter class.

They can easily emulate the old Survival vibe with just a few (not several) talents or even with a legendary.

Some players online wanna deny Melee Survival players their fun just so that they can have a third Hunter spec to jump to and from depending on the meta, and that's very unfair. It would be like suggesting the removal of Feral or Enhancement just because they happen to be melee -those players wouldn't have a secondary, similar spec to jump to if that happened (unlike old Survival players who just went BM or MM).

[Bepples]

There was a glaring homogeneity problem in MoP and WoD.

There really wasn't.

Everyone who liked old Survival is now playing MM and BM and are fine with it - they just wanna cancel a less popular but perfectly functional spec so that they have 3 chances of having a "meta" spec.

Well I'm someone who liked old Survival and now plays MM and BM and I'm not fine with it, and as you can see from other posts in this very thread I'm not the only one. Didn't you freak out at me a few posts ago for this exact sort of hyperbole?

Instead of having Hunter 1, Hunter 2 and Hunter 3, Blizzard actually made 3 distinct specs, and yet people like you still think that having 3 of the same gameplay is better than 3 different and fun specs.

Considering BM, MM, and SV are specs within the Hunter class, "Hunter 1, Hunter 2 and Hunter 3" is actually the entire point of them.

They didn't have the same gameplay so this is just a strawman. Besides; BM and MM both stayed ranged and even share some abilities like Multi-Shot and Kill Shot yet they magically are not the same gameplay, so evidently it's possible to keep the Hunter specs sufficiently distinct without making one melee.

I understand that you are mad because they unmade a gameplay you disliked in favor of something different, but you have to understand that it was in the best interest of Hunter players to have more diversity in their gameplay. And we got just that.

"In our best interest", eh? Give me a break. For the overwhelming majority of Hunter players it didn't add a choice; it removed one. Hazzikostas himself said they knew Hunters wouldn't like it and they were aiming towards rerolls and new players.

Here's the thing. The others are already playing and paying, because MM and BM still behave similarly to old Survival. New Survival players are still playing.

Why cater to you and kill a niche but awesome spec, while instead they can cater to everyone else who easily adapted?

For one, people did quit over ranged Survival. Dadwen is one. I know many. I know formerly frequent posters on the forums who quit over it. Sure, it's probably a drip in the ocean compared to the regular sub losses, but part of handling a game with generally bad PR as of late is not to haphazardly piss off groups of people because "it's not that many"; because as Blizzard found out, if you do that enough all those "insignificant" groups of players add up to a huge chunk of the playerbase.

Secondly, why should we treat Survival melee players like they're a protected species? Most of them would probably play a ranged Survival as well given it had fun gameplay (like the old one); how many do you really think are specifically attached to having to fight in melee range? Your arguments here come across as desperate because you're dodging around the fact that you want them to appeal to the most fringe niche spec playerbase in the game just out of pure selfishness since you're a part of it.

It makes much more sense to have Survival as a widely approachable spec. Even having the current gameplay just with a ranged weapon would be preferable. You're still not giving any reason why they should stick specifically to being melee. Again, consider the current gameplay but ranged. Does that suddenly make it too similar to Marksmanship? Does that make all the current Survival players quit? Melee is the single biggest turn-off... so why stick to it?

Hell, someday people here will realize that it's several times easier to ask the devs to introduce some new talents in Marksmanship' tree that allows it to play more similarly to old Survival, instead of asking melee Survival to be remade again into the old, problematic version.

It's not possible to achieve this anywhere close to sufficiency because Marksmanship is a different spec with a different gameplay and identity. As a thought exercise go to the Warlock class and try to shove Affliction into Destruction talents. You'll just end up with a diluted Affliction and a Destruction with severely limited talent choices. The same applies to Survival and Marksmanship.

Again, as was pointed out in the thread, it was very similar to the other two specs gameplay and flavorwise, to the point that the devs made it into something entirely different but still flavorful for the Hunter class.

You are never going to get us to agree to this no matter how much you repeat it. You're depending on a reductive oversimplification of the Hunter class.

Marksmanship focused more on raw skill with a ranged weapon alternating between carefully-aimed sniping and quick, suppressive shooting. It's the one that hits with huge physical burst damage at an extreme range. In contrast, ranged Survival relied on its utility and exotic munitions and had an emphasis on kiting, control, and sustained rot damage; from the very beginning of the game it was all about resourcefulness and opportunism, using any and all tools at its disposal to get an advantage. Speaking of which, you know what doesn't fit that archetype? Arbitrarily limiting itself to a melee weapon.

These were two distinct and valuable approaches to ranged weapon combat and Hunters very much appreciated them. One of the best times to be a Hunter was early WoD where all 3 specs were close enough to be played in mythic raiding. Want high sustained damage, mobility, and cool aesthetics via use of explosive and poisonous munitions? Go Survival. Want to dish out priority burst and feel like an expert sniper? Go Marksmanship. That's the ideal Hunter setup. Survival having this tokenistic melee just means no one picks it except for roleplayers who are specifically attached to being melee; and since that's almost no one, Survival just ends up being a mostly-abandoned spec and the ultimate punchline of class design.

They can easily emulate the old Survival vibe with just a few (not several) talents or even with a legendary.

No, they can't. Survival had unique abilities and interaction between them as well as important passive effects that can't be easily emulated in Marksmanship.

Survival had Black Arrow which granted Lock and Load procs for free Explosive Shot: baseline Marksmanship had none of those things, and you can't assume someone who takes one talent will take the other so you can't just represent these three things via talents. This is why when they made Lock and Load an MM talent they made it effect Aimed Shot and proc off auto attacks; such a thing makes sense as an MM talent, but it's not the original Lock and Load anymore. At the end of WoD there was a mechanic where you could multidot with Black Arrow and funnel into Explosive Shot with all the extra LnL procs; that's a simple, fun, innovative mechanic that could have been a great inclusion in the future of ranged Survival, and that would be no longer possible with this setup.

Survival had passives like Serpent Spread, Trap Mastery, and Entrapment which enhanced the utilitarian feel. Spreading Serpent Sting like that was a really awesome mechanic and this exotic munitions approach played in well with the utilitarianism. You don't get that with Marksmanship, and you can't easily do it through talents either.

Finally, MM has baseline elements that can't be reconciled with ranged Survival. Aimed Shot and Rapid Fire do not fit ranged Survival's gameplay. You would have to talent those out, but they themselves have talents and borrowed power effects (e.g. conduits, legendaries) that revolve around them.

You see how once you start brainstorming an approach it falls apart? If they even tried this beyond just reusing a couple names and icons from old Survival they would both fail to replicate the ranged Survival feel while also nuking Marksmanship's talent options from orbit. This is all to skirt around affecting Survival, the game's most problematic and dysfunctional spec. It's madness, and the fact that you're seeing this as the better option is just another example of the general selfishness and entitlement of melee Survival players.

Some players online wanna deny Melee Survival players their fun just so that they can have a third Hunter spec to jump to and from depending on the meta

Yeah, who do those Hunters think they are, wanting a 3rd spec to play and enjoy....

and that's very unfair. It would be like suggesting the removal of Feral or Enhancement just because they happen to be melee -those players wouldn't have a secondary, similar spec to jump to if that happened (unlike old Survival players who just went BM or MM).

No, it wouldn't be like that because Feral and Enhancement have both always been melee. Survival was originally a ranged spec and then it was changed to melee. That's the most "unfair" change here, and it needs to be reverted.

[A Chozo]

There really wasn't.

Of course there was. Why do you think they did all the work to unmake old Survival and make the new one? It was a heavy complaint - all three Hunter specs felt the same, similar to how all three Rogue specs also felt the same. It was an heavy complaint on MoP and WoD. Hell, it still is - people are constantly complaining that all specs are "builder/spenders".

They won't undo Melee Survival just because people in a forum think it's unpopularity is a reason to undo it, in the same way that they won't kill Enhancement and Feral. The meta doesn't guide the game's development. Raider.io statistics neither. It's fun. And Survival Hunter is fun for the current Survival players. Changing it to possibly please this ridiculously ambiguous amount of players who "quit" (yet apparently pester forums) would be one hell of a weird move.

You'll see ranged Survival back the day they turn Feral into a ranged spec too.

[kiramon]

In this case when they made it I think Ion even said it could not really out do the Ranged spec's or it would make some feel like they had no choice but to play that spec even though they picked a range class. (so it's going to have to live with some type of handicap). IMO it was a really really (really really) stupid idea to begin with.

If only they felt that way about feral over balance, since feral is such an integral part of druid fantasy lol

Balance obviously wasn’t since it had 3 spells in classic... 4 if you count the talented swarm or roots lol

[F Rm]

Again, as was pointed out in the thread, it was very similar to the other two specs gameplay and flavorwise, to the point that the devs made it into something entirely different but still flavorful for the Hunter class.

They can easily emulate the old Survival vibe with just a few (not several) talents or even with a legendary.

The only thing the specs actually shared back then was the overarching theme of all being focused on ranged combat using ranged weapons. Their respective toolkits did not overlap with one another. Their individual core design and gameplay loops were not the same, no matter how much you say otherwise. It's enough to actually go back and read up on that to figure that out for yourself.

If you find the base theme/fantasy of focusing on ranged weapons to be "problematic" when it's a part of several specs, despite how each of them approaches it in a different way, then you will have to apply the same logic to all 12 melee-weapon based specs as well as all the magic using ranged specs we have.

If the nuances and underlying themes don't matter, if it's just about the generalized mechanics, then it's the same with all specs in the game.

Ergo, more than 1 or 2 melee focused specs is redundant. More than 1 or 2 caster specs? No way, they all cast spells so we can't have that...

See the flaw in this type of logic yet?

Some players online wanna deny Melee Survival players their fun just so that they can have a third Hunter spec to jump to and from depending on the meta, and that's very unfair. It would be like suggesting the removal of Feral or Enhancement just because they happen to be melee -those players wouldn't have a secondary, similar spec to jump to if that happened (unlike old Survival players who just went BM or MM).

Is that the only reason anyone would want RSV back, huh?

I guess I was wrong about myself for thinking I want RSV back because I enjoyed playing it, like I did continuously from the end of WotLK up until 6.2 in WoD, with no switching between the specs during this period...

Besides, I never said that I want to take MSV away from those who enjoy it. I want RSV back as a 4th spec option.

[A Chozo]

Besides, I never said that I want to take MSV away from those who enjoy it. I want RSV back as a 4th spec option.

That would be awesome. The more specs, the better. They could even make it have a different flavor, like Dark Ranger or something.

[F Rm]

That would be awesome. The more specs, the better. They could even make it have a different flavor, like Dark Ranger or something.

Dark Rangers aren't hunters.

They were, before they died and were then resurrected. They use unholy magic and necromancy, pretty much the exact opposite to what a hunter is all about.

If anything, the fantasy of Dark Rangers could become one of it's own as a playable option, just not something that is a part of the hunter class.

As for hunters, while ofc some would love to be able to play as a Dark Ranger, it's not the same thing as what RSV was all about, not even close, and I believe that it would be a mistake connecting the two fantasies in any way.