View Poll Results: What do you think?

Voters
349. You may not vote on this poll
  • Change it! Remove the 5% damage debuff so it isn't required in PvE but is cool for PvP.

    136 38.97%
  • Change it! Make it deal damage so it feels better, the same treatment as Blade Flurry.

    11 3.15%
  • Change it! Give it a raid debuff of some kind.

    21 6.02%
  • Change it! Take it off the GCD.

    103 29.51%
  • Change it! In some other way, I'll post my idea below.

    17 4.87%
  • Keep it! (I play Classic exclusively.)

    3 0.86%
  • Keep it! (I play both Live and Classic.)

    19 5.44%
  • Keep it! (I do not play Classic.)

    23 6.59%
  • I don't care one way or the other!

    16 4.58%
Page 7 of 11 FirstFirst ...
5
6
7
8
9
... LastLast
  1. #121
    Quote Originally Posted by Schizoide View Post
    Yep, you will need to use Hunter's Mark on every non-AE pull this entire expansion. It's a button that I, and many hunters, don't find fun to press because it does nothing but allow you to do your full damage. It doesn't do any damage itself or have any synergies. It's just busywork, adding a GCD to every single target you attack for the next 2 years.

    Right, it's on the GCD so it cannot be macroed into other abilities.
    Fun is subjective. As a vanilla huntard (not playing classic) for me it's a class defining core ability. I had great pride marking mobs for my raid team and the "it costs a global CD" argument sounds dumb to me. During a boss fight other classes also have raid benefiting offensive/defensive abilities they have to waste GC on. Welcome to the club.

    Also we used to macro it with the pet attack button, pets needed a few sec headstart to hold agro anyway, or made them switch/focus target faster in raids. I know it's not a thing anymore, but im sure hunters will figure out something

  2. #122
    Quote Originally Posted by Bisque View Post
    In regards to the nerfed SV hunter focus regen, I swore I read somewhere that the slow focus regen was a bug and would be fixed in the next patch-if that is the case I hope that is true.

    Back to HM, I remember in one expansion (Panda one maybe...) I think it was arcane shot or one of one of the other shots that all 3 specs shared, that automatically applied HM, I wonder why blizz didn't go that route when they brought HM back.
    cus they are catering to the classic crowd that doesn't like qol

    lol @ the post above me, some people are happy being clerics and bards

  3. #123
    Quote Originally Posted by Vilendor View Post
    Fun is subjective. As a vanilla huntard (not playing classic) for me it's a class defining core ability. I had great pride marking mobs for my raid team and the "it costs a global CD" argument sounds dumb to me. During a boss fight other classes also have raid benefiting offensive/defensive abilities they have to waste GC on. Welcome to the club.

    Also we used to macro it with the pet attack button, pets needed a few sec headstart to hold agro anyway, or made them switch/focus target faster in raids. I know it's not a thing anymore, but im sure hunters will figure out something
    The problem is that Hunter's mark is firstly one you have to reapply in the case of important adds, and second and most important, only important to yourself.
    In the case of the current raid buffs you either automatically reapplly it, or you only use it again during a fight if someone dies and is ressurected.

    If Hunter's Mark was a raid buff that gave increased damage for the rest of the group then sure, but as it is it doesnt.

  4. #124
    The Insane Daemos daemonium's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    Land of moose and goose.
    Posts
    15,575
    Quote Originally Posted by Schizoide View Post
    That (obviously) is not how it works. They aren't going to tune hunters to do 5% more damage than everybody else with HM.

    The balance goal is for everybody to do the same damage. Of course they never actually achieve that, but that's the goal. Hunter single-target damage will be tuned assuming the HM debuff is active.
    Don’t see why they wouldn’t it’s not like there isn’t a 5% or more gap between some specs most of the time and it’s not like hunters have the best aoe or on demand damage like some other classes.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Kaver View Post
    I was more referring to live BFA. Currently some classes are doing 20-30% more dps than others. Of course we have corruption right now but with all the covenant systems we will like see something similar in SL. Blizzard are not going to be able to balance the game very well with all these layers they are adding. My point is, there are a lot of people mad because they will only do 95% dps to targets without HM but we don’t know how much dps those 95% is. With Blizzard shitty balance, 95% hunter damage might be more than 100% damage of other classes. Especially in AOE situations because they don’t have to balance beast cleave etc based on HM.
    Ah Ya then we don’t really know how things will play out with all theses systems after tuning is done.

  5. #125
    Quote Originally Posted by Daemos daemonium View Post
    Don’t see why they wouldn’t it’s not like there isn’t a 5% or more gap between some specs most of the time and it’s not like hunters have the best aoe or on demand damage like some other classes.
    Seriously?

    Because hunters don't deserve to be the best class in the game. That screws over everybody else.

  6. #126
    Quote Originally Posted by Sondrelk View Post
    5% ST damage is still not insignificant though. Sure, it probably won't mean much in the grand scheme if we assume bad balancing will be a thing, but it would still be more reassuring if Blizzard removed the damage component from HM and balanced around it. If AoE damage is the concern then they could just nerf Multi-shot.
    I dont think they balance multishot, beast cleave etc. around HM anyway. It would make no sense if they did since HM only really affect single target abilities.

  7. #127
    Quote Originally Posted by Schizoide View Post
    Seriously?

    Because hunters don't deserve to be the best class in the game. That screws over everybody else.
    Oh come on, it isnt that difficult to apply HM... even on a short CD, their damage is always balanced around the tools they have und where they want it to be.

    They look at raid data and if Hunters need a 2% buff, they'll give it. It's not like hunters are weak or not used/played. Every spec has some inconviences. Many would ask that hunters get more casts and cant cast while moving. In fact BM is currently too strong considering how easy it is (noone can deny this).

    Applying HM is part of your toolkit. You won't cast HM on every target (it's anyways impossible) and you wont be casting it on adds that die in 4 sec. It doesnt mean that you cannot do good focus damage.

    Just think of other specs that gotta debuff every target before dealing damage. E.g. an elemental shaman has to apply flame shock first on every focus target because having no flame shock is much much more dps loss than 5%. A hunter will just not apply HM and deal 4.7% less damage.

  8. #128
    The Insane Daemos daemonium's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    Land of moose and goose.
    Posts
    15,575
    Quote Originally Posted by Schizoide View Post
    Seriously?

    Because hunters don't deserve to be the best class in the game. That screws over everybody else.
    Classes should have strengths and weaknesses I don’t see a problem giving hunter a ST boost if other classes are stronger in other places.

  9. #129
    Quote Originally Posted by Schizoide View Post
    That (obviously) is not how it works. They aren't going to tune hunters to do 5% more damage than everybody else with HM.

    The balance goal is for everybody to do the same damage. Of course they never actually achieve that, but that's the goal. Hunter single-target damage will be tuned assuming the HM debuff is active.
    Balancing in WoW sucks anyway. The difference between covenants are going to be more than 5 %. And the difference between classes are also going to be much more than 5 %. So hunters might be the top spec when using HM and still in top 5 when not using HM. We don't really know.

    An AOE is probably going to almost the same no matter what. They wont balance AOE abilities around HM so these ability will do the same damage as if HM didnt exist.

  10. #130
    Yes, that is why I specified single-target damage.

  11. #131
    Quote Originally Posted by Daemos daemonium View Post
    Classes should have strengths and weaknesses I don’t see a problem giving hunter a ST boost if other classes are stronger in other places.
    Did i miss something? Applying HM is easy, can be done before pulls or while doing mechanics where you cant hurt others. There really is no skillcap.

    There are other, far more punishing mechanics. Like being in melee or being a caster not able to cast while moving.

    Generally speaking, a BM hunter should be pretty low at single target potential and a MM hunter / SV hunter pretty high. Especially SV needs to be the best to make it more popular. And HM won't break hunters.

  12. #132
    No, "generally speaking", every single spec should perform absolutely the same in both single-target and AE. They don't because that's a really difficult thing to actually implement, but there's a reason why it's called balancing. You shouldn't be screwed with no recourse because you chose the monk class or whatever 10 years ago.

  13. #133
    Quote Originally Posted by Kaver View Post
    Balancing in WoW sucks anyway. The difference between covenants are going to be more than 5 %. And the difference between classes are also going to be much more than 5 %. So hunters might be the top spec when using HM and still in top 5 when not using HM. We don't really know.

    An AOE is probably going to almost the same no matter what. They wont balance AOE abilities around HM so these ability will do the same damage as if HM didnt exist.
    Honestly, who is NOT going to apply HM? Any hunter will use it when it is useful and there will be a numerical breakpoint like "if HM costs a normal GCD and your target lives less than 12 sec, you don't apply HM". Basically you will use HM on boss and if adds have to be burnt down, you simply wont care about HM unless the timings are very special.

  14. #134
    Quote Originally Posted by Aurosh View Post
    Did i miss something? Applying HM is easy, can be done before pulls or while doing mechanics where you cant hurt others. There really is no skillcap.

    There are other, far more punishing mechanics. Like being in melee or being a caster not able to cast while moving.

    Generally speaking, a BM hunter should be pretty low at single target potential and a MM hunter / SV hunter pretty high. Especially SV needs to be the best to make it more popular. And HM won't break hunters.
    The problem is in M+, and add or council fights in raids. The constant obligation to switch targets creates a very unhealthy mindset where your rotation feels sluggish if you try to constantly reapply it or gives you a sense you are underperforming if you are not.
    On ST bosses then no, it is not a problem. But this is about target switching and how constantly annoying it feels to feel compelled to reapply it.

  15. #135
    It's not a "problem" in that sense anyway. Hunters lived with HM for over a decade. Many of us just don't like it, because it isn't fun to have to press a button that does nothing on its own before you can use your other buttons that do.

  16. #136
    Quote Originally Posted by Aurosh View Post
    Honestly, who is NOT going to apply HM? Any hunter will use it when it is useful and there will be a numerical breakpoint like "if HM costs a normal GCD and your target lives less than 12 sec, you don't apply HM". Basically you will use HM on boss and if adds have to be burnt down, you simply wont care about HM unless the timings are very special.
    Having played with Hunter's Mark throughout BfA I can confirm that you probably won't reapply it, and only apply it once in the case of raid bosses. The problem is the constant sense of underperforming if you are not applying it constantly. As I have mentioned before, 5% is not an insignificant amount of damage, and so not using it makes you feel like you are underperforming.

  17. #137
    The Insane Daemos daemonium's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    Land of moose and goose.
    Posts
    15,575
    Quote Originally Posted by Aurosh View Post
    Did i miss something? Applying HM is easy, can be done before pulls or while doing mechanics where you cant hurt others. There really is no skillcap.

    There are other, far more punishing mechanics. Like being in melee or being a caster not able to cast while moving.

    Generally speaking, a BM hunter should be pretty low at single target potential and a MM hunter / SV hunter pretty high. Especially SV needs to be the best to make it more popular. And HM won't break hunters.
    id think HM should just be another knob when it comes to the the damage done not that it has any thing to do with skill cap. if hunters don't have the best aoe or best burst but can be put a bit ahead of other specs on ST with HM i think that's total fine. of course this should also differ with the specs Bm should do less damage then MM for example as it's fully moble.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Schizoide View Post
    No, "generally speaking", every single spec should perform absolutely the same in both single-target and AE. They don't because that's a really difficult thing to actually implement, but there's a reason why it's called balancing. You shouldn't be screwed with no recourse because you chose the monk class or whatever 10 years ago.
    Cant say i agree I get why you'd want all of the specs in the game to have the same performance in all places but I've always been a fan of strengths and weaknesses when it comes to design with something like a rouge having less sustain damage then a warrior but alot more burst or a hutner having more ST but a mage being better at AOE.

  18. #138
    If rogues had a lot less sustain than other classes, they would be complete garbage in any fight longer than their burst duration. If mages had less ST than other classes, mages would be complete garbage in pretty much every raid. That's why.

    Obviously classes shouldn't play the same, but their overall performance should be balanced, again note I use that word balanced, very common word but it actually has a meaning, to perform at the same level. If they don't perform similarly that would be unbalanced.

    I mean, this is really basic stuff. Your class doesn't deserve to perform better than everybody else's. That's why hunter primary target damage will be balanced assuming the HM debuff is active. Otherwise hunters would do 5% more damage than every other class, and that is not a sane design goal.
    Last edited by Schizoide; 2020-09-03 at 07:22 PM.

  19. #139
    Quote Originally Posted by Aurosh View Post
    Honestly, who is NOT going to apply HM? Any hunter will use it when it is useful and there will be a numerical breakpoint like "if HM costs a normal GCD and your target lives less than 12 sec, you don't apply HM". Basically you will use HM on boss and if adds have to be burnt down, you simply wont care about HM unless the timings are very special.
    I agree. There are just a lot of people complaining that Blizzard are "stealing" 5 % damage of their damage on targets without HM. But our AOE abilities will no be balance around HM. So beast cleave will not do 5 % less damage compared to if HM didn't exist.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Schizoide View Post
    If rogues had a lot less sustain than other classes, they would be complete garbage in any fight longer than their burst duration. If mages had less ST than other classes, mages would be complete garbage in pretty much every raid. That's why.

    Obviously classes shouldn't play the same, but their overall performance should be balanced, again note I use that word balanced, very common word but it actually has a meaning, to perform at the same level. If they don't perform similarly that would be unbalanced.

    I mean, this is really basic stuff. Your class doesn't deserve to perform better than everybody else's. That's why hunter primary target damage will be balanced assuming the HM debuff is active. Otherwise hunters would do 5% more damage than every other class, and that is not a sane design goal.
    Yes but other classes do also have stuff similar to HM. Outlaw Rogue got an attack that increase their crit change and damage on only ONE target. So Blizzard will also balance Outlaw Rogues single target damage around that ability, just like HM. A lot of classes have stuff like this.

    In the end, there are always classes that do 5-10 % more damage than others. We don't know if Hunter are going to do 5 % more damage than Palading for example. This could very well happen. Especially with covenants on top on everything.
    Last edited by Kaver; 2020-09-04 at 10:50 AM.

  20. #140
    The Insane Daemos daemonium's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    Land of moose and goose.
    Posts
    15,575
    Quote Originally Posted by Schizoide View Post
    If rogues had a lot less sustain than other classes, they would be complete garbage in any fight longer than their burst duration. If mages had less ST than other classes, mages would be complete garbage in pretty much every raid. That's why.

    Obviously classes shouldn't play the same, but their overall performance should be balanced, again note I use that word balanced, very common word but it actually has a meaning, to perform at the same level. If they don't perform similarly that would be unbalanced.

    I mean, this is really basic stuff. Your class doesn't deserve to perform better than everybody else's. That's why hunter primary target damage will be balanced assuming the HM debuff is active. Otherwise hunters would do 5% more damage than every other class, and that is not a sane design goal.
    for something like a 5-10% difference I can't say i see a problem not every fight is a patch work so it's not like classes that have better burst instead of sustain or better aoe instead of single target wouldn't be taken outside of the high end.

    but mabye it's because I've never really cared about Min maxing class selection from fight to fight that i feel like strengths and weaknesses are the better way to go.

Posting Permissions

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