Am I the only one that's not okay with the Big Revamp?

[Deleted]

I understand the reasoning, specs should have a unique feel but I think they are going too far. And I'm not talking about specific abilities and their balancing.

Here's the problem.

The whole idea of RPGs is to, well, play a role. You choose a race, a class, get used to it, identify yourself with it. I've played a Hunter since mid TBC, not continuously but I got a taste of all the expansions and the feel of playing a Hunter has been more or less preserved. Sure, a lot has changed with tenths of abilities added, removed, revamped etc. but the very basic idea of an archer with a pet is still the same.

For me it's not about which abilities they add, remove or change, whether it's considered a nerf or a buff or if we can top dps charts. It's about the soul of the class.

What Blizzard did with Hunters in the alpha so far is changed them into a completely different class, or rather different classes. Since 2007, my character has been an archer with a pet. Now I have the choice between:

• a semi-archer (since we've only got one shot left and it's a focus dump) with 2 pets and summoning random beasts at the base of their rotation - so a beast master, little to do with Hunters
• an archer without a pet - so basically an archer, nothing to do with Hunters
• a melee with a pet - so basically a ranger, very little to do with Hunters

I'm not even going to mention the weird MM talents, summoning undead beasts and archers? What does this have to do with hunters?

If things go the way they are going, as of Legion launch I will not be able to play my hunter. I just want a ranged weapon and a pet. I don't want 10 pets, 0 pets or a melee with a pet.

It used to all make sense because when you think of a Hunter you think: ranged weapon, a pet, tracking, maybe some minor poisons, maybe some traps, maybe minor stealth.

I feel like the best way to resolve this would be changing Hunters into Rangers and adding a 4th spec - "Hunter", with one pet and a few shots.

[Pull My Finger]

Don't be like your puritan grand-grandparents. Enjoy the variety that is the spice of life. Try something new every once in a while. Challenge everyone's ideas and beliefs, most of all your own. Expand your horizons, advance your imagination. Realize that it's not the fault of things that aren't "right", but your fault for not being able to integrate them in your thinking. Be smart. Be brave. Don't be a bore. And always use sun blocker.

[Deleted]

Oh I always use sun blocker.

I have no problem embracing new mechanics, I like exploring new classes and specs. I enjoyed the transition from mana to focus and (more or less) all the subsequent changes to the Hunter class.

But this is changing the very idea of a Hunter.

To me it's like telling a priest they can't heal any more, or a Druid that they don't shapeshift. I chose to play this game for a reason, I chose to play this class for a reason, now I feel like I get a free and mandatory class change.

If you bought a car and got a completely different model would you happily accept it as a challenge?

[Jibjub]

I feel like they have made WAY too many changes over the years to classes and not nearly enough to the world in which we plays those classes.

New spells, same boring instanced world.

[Pull My Finger]

If you bought a car and got a completely different model would you happily accept it as a challenge?

Since they would be offering me the choice between the SUV, the city cruiser and the limo models, I'd go with the one that suits my preferences. Luckily, they have three!

[Dadwen]

Going to be the first time I didn't even try a expansion (only other times I stopped playing some before BC and a few months in Cata, but the crappy job they did in WOD with the classes had me quit in March, and seeing the even crapper changes they come up with has killed any urge I had to even get legion, I've played SV since LK and enjoyed it most of the time BM was a ok 2nd spec and I never really like marksman that much.

Frankly IMO the current class designers suck compared to the olders ones, I used to go with alts when I got bored but the changes they did in WOD killed that too.

*On the plus side it gave me more time to try some other games (hated the older witchers games because of the controls (story and graphics were good) so was not sure giving 3 a try but it was dam good IMO (controls ticked me off some times still but MUCH better than 2 was)

[Maxilian]

I understand the reasoning, specs should have a unique feel but I think they are going too far. And I'm not talking about specific abilities and their balancing.

Here's the problem.

The whole idea of RPGs is to, well, play a role. You choose a race, a class, get used to it, identify yourself with it. I've played a Hunter since mid TBC, not continuously but I got a taste of all the expansions and the feel of playing a Hunter has been more or less preserved. Sure, a lot has changed with tenths of abilities added, removed, revamped etc. but the very basic idea of an archer with a pet is still the same.

For me it's not about which abilities they add, remove or change, whether it's considered a nerf or a buff or if we can top dps charts. It's about the soul of the class.

What Blizzard did with Hunters in the alpha so far is changed them into a completely different class, or rather different classes. Since 2007, my character has been an archer with a pet. Now I have the choice between:

• a semi-archer (since we've only got one shot left and it's a focus dump) with 2 pets and summoning random beasts at the base of their rotation - so a beast master, little to do with Hunters
• an archer without a pet - so basically an archer, nothing to do with Hunters
• a melee with a pet - so basically a ranger, very little to do with Hunters

I'm not even going to mention the weird MM talents, summoning undead beasts and archers? What does this have to do with hunters?

If things go the way they are going, as of Legion launch I will not be able to play my hunter. I just want a ranged weapon and a pet. I don't want 10 pets, 0 pets or a melee with a pet.

It used to all make sense because when you think of a Hunter you think: ranged weapon, a pet, tracking, maybe some minor poisons, maybe some traps, maybe minor stealth.

I feel like the best way to resolve this would be changing Hunters into Rangers and adding a 4th spec - "Hunter", with one pet and a few shots.

Well some people have different fantasies, also the undead thing is based for those that want to fulfill the fantasy of the dark ranger.

Note: In the end, i do understand you but i do like the options that we get so, i'm ok with those things

[shadycharacter1]

Don't be like your puritan grand-grandparents. Enjoy the variety that is the spice of life. Try something new every once in a while. Challenge everyone's ideas and beliefs, most of all your own. Expand your horizons, advance your imagination. Realize that it's not the fault of things that aren't "right", but your fault for not being able to integrate them in your thinking. Be smart. Be brave. Don't be a bore. And always use sun blocker.

the fuck are you even saying

[Xar226]

I don't have alpha access so I can't comment on how things feel from a playstyle perspective, but conceptually, I really enjoy what they're doing with specs. I even wish they would go farther. I still think there is too much overlap with, for example, Fury and Arms warriors, and while all the mage specs are mechanically different I think they're too similar conceptually.

I think part of it is where we come from with the genre. You seem to have entered roughly in WoW and so it set your expectations. For me, I loved these types of games long before WoW existed, and to me the right way to start a game like this is with four archetypes: Warriors, Priests/Clerics, Mages and Rogues. Those are wildly different approaches and go to wildly different outcomes.

In any event, I do agree that they lost the original hunter identity. I wouldn't be wildly opposed if they added a fourth hunter spec at some point (though I question, if they wanted to add a new spec, if this would be the best choice), but as it is I consider it a relatively small evil to move toward what they're trying to accomplish. In fact, hunter has moved up my "depth chart;" my plan this expansion is to main my priest instead of my rogue, but I think my second toon will be a hunter.

[Deleted]

Since they would be offering me the choice between the SUV, the city cruiser and the limo models, I'd go with the one that suits my preferences. Luckily, they have three!

Well, I already made the choice to buy a 4x4 and paid for it. I like it when people recpect my choices and not try to stick me with something I didn't want "for my own benefit". Damn, it just got political...

[shanthi]

Well, I already made the choice to buy a 4x4 and paid for it.

Yeah, but this isn't a car, it's a game of a type that changes over time. You didn't buy a static property, like a car or truck, you bought a fluid piece of content. It's a bit like arguing that you "bought" a TV show (by subscribing to HBO, let's say ) with a certain cast of characters and don't think the show should be able to change the characters against your will. It is, of course, your right to stop consuming the content if it no longer appeals to you, but you aren't an injured party, any more than a person who once liked a TV show and now no longer does is. The game, and the hunter class, was never yours in the first place.

As I said, it's perfectly valid to not like it and not play the class, or the game, but you seem to implying (with your car analogy) that Blizzard doesn't even have the right, ethically, to change it, which is crazy.

[Dadwen]

Yeah, but this isn't a car, it's a game of a type that changes over time. You didn't buy a static property, like a car or truck, you bought a fluid piece of content. It's a bit like arguing that you "bought" a TV show (by subscribing to HBO, let's say ) with a certain cast of characters and don't think the show should be able to change the characters against your will. It is, of course, your right to stop consuming the content if it no longer appeals to you, but you aren't an injured party, any more than a person who once liked a TV show and now no longer does is. The game, and the hunter class, was never yours in the first place.

As I said, it's perfectly valid to not like it and not play the class, or the game, but you seem to implying (with your car analogy) that Blizzard doesn't even have the right, ethically, to change it, which is crazy.

You are right, but on the flip side not only does he have the right to stop consuming it but also he does have the right to complain about it (and word of mouth advertising can work both ways for or against a product)

[threads]

nah after 10 years of the same shit i like the change. petless ranger, melee + pet, dark ranger talents > 3 specs that are mostly the same.

if people want to rp with their 1 pet go BM and sit in goldshire.

[Thursley]

The core class fantasy in the past was "archer with a pet" as you said, but the problem is the specs didn't really expand on that. Beast master was an archer with a pet that did a lot of damage, marksmanship was an archer that focused on high damage shots and range with a weak pet, and survival was an archer that did DOT damage and had better traps and things with a weak pet. None of those are particularly compelling. In Legion the core class fantasy is simplified to just "hunter," but the spec fantasy is MUCH more developed.

It's unfortunate the more developed specs don't match your particular interest any more (and I'm sure many others will have similar issues), but overall I think the class is better off with specs that are distinct.

[GrieverXIII]

nah after 10 years of the same shit i like the change. petless ranger, melee + pet, dark ranger talents > 3 specs that are mostly the same.

if people want to rp with their 1 pet go BM and sit in goldshire.

Yep, feeling exactly the same way.

[shanthi]

You are right, but on the flip side not only does he have the right to stop consuming it but also he does have the right to complain about it (and word of mouth advertising can work both ways for or against a product)

Sure, I wasn't arguing against his right to complain, just saying it's silly to act like Blizzard has done something ethically wrong like take away property that he bought and replace it with something he didn't want, as he suggested with his car analogy. It's much more akin to a TV show changing, as I said. And, in such a case, a former fan has every right both to complain and to stop watching.

[Deleted]

Sure, I wasn't arguing against his right to complain, just saying it's silly to act like Blizzard has done something ethically wrong like take away property that he bought and replace it with something he didn't want, as he suggested with his car analogy. It's much more akin to a TV show changing, as I said. And, in such a case, a former fan has every right both to complain and to stop watching.

That was not at all what I meant, the metaphor was much deeper and spread over a few posts. A guy up there was saying that it should be treated like a challenge, something new, something better, embrace it. My reply was that I sure like challenges, but I don't like being forced into one, then I compared it to buying a car and getting a completely different model instead. The point wasn't that I paid for something, the point was scraping a choice I already made and giving 3 alternatives, none of which are my original choice.

I am not implying it is somehow wrong of Blizzard to do this because I paid for the game. That would be silly.

What I mean is that it is a role playing game, where your choice of class is one of the most personal and important ones. Changing the abilities, mechanics and all that is fine but changing the whole idea of a class is not a good move.

Again, I am NOT comparing it to property or anything like that, please read the posts above.

The core class fantasy in the past was "archer with a pet" as you said, but the problem is the specs didn't really expand on that. Beast master was an archer with a pet that did a lot of damage, marksmanship was an archer that focused on high damage shots and range with a weak pet, and survival was an archer that did DOT damage and had better traps and things with a weak pet. None of those are particularly compelling. In Legion the core class fantasy is simplified to just "hunter," but the spec fantasy is MUCH more developed.

It's unfortunate the more developed specs don't match your particular interest any more (and I'm sure many others will have similar issues), but overall I think the class is better off with specs that are distinct.

I agree that the fantasy is much more developed. But here's the thing, as you said we had an archer with a pet as the basic idea, then we had 3 specs that were more or less the same and that's not cool. My problem is that they basically scraped the original idea of an archer with a pet (the very word "Hunter" implies that). Instead of at least leaving BM as-is and developing MM and SV further (the three specs would still be just as different). To me it's like they took my druid alt and changed him into a paladin.

Just leave BM alone, make LW baseline for MM and completely revamp SV. What would be wrong with that?

[shanthi]

That was not at all what I meant, the metaphor was much deeper and spread over a few posts. A guy up there was saying that it should be treated like a challenge, something new, something better, embrace it. My reply was that I sure like challenges, but I don't like being forced into one, then I compared it to buying a car and getting a completely different model instead. The point wasn't that I paid for something, the point was scraping a choice I already made and giving 3 alternatives, none of which are my original choice.

I am not implying it is somehow wrong of Blizzard to do this because I paid for the game. That would be silly.

Fair enough, from your "I'd like my choices to be respected (damn I just got political)" I thought you were making some argument about fairness or ethics. Now I see that you're not, but that's where I got the impression.

As for class fantasy, I don't think "hunter" implies an archer with a pet. Obviously, that's how the class has played historically, but hunters (in real life, in fantasy) also work alone. Blizzard's Hunter was basically their take on the bow-wielding/woodsman archetype. They used just one take on it for the whole class til now, but I think it's reasonable for them to expand on more styles of the archetype to differentiate the specs. Beast Mastery now seems to be the animal-bonded hunter of old, Survival is a bit like the AD&D ranger (especially if they ever dual wield again beyond this expansion) and Marksmanship is now an elven archer type. That seems like a reasonable way to split them up and make use of a series of well-known takes on it.

Just leave BM alone, make LW baseline for MM and completely revamp SV. What would be wrong with that?

Is BM thematically so different? Yes, there are more animals involved, but things like Dire Beast, Stampede and A Murder of Crows have been providing extra pets for a while. At base, it still seems largely like an archer with a main animal companion and then additional animal reinforcements.

[Self Inflicted Wounds]

It used to all make sense because when you think of a Hunter you think: ranged weapon, a pet, tracking, maybe some minor poisons, maybe some traps, maybe minor stealth.

I feel like the best way to resolve this would be changing Hunters into Rangers and adding a 4th spec - "Hunter", with one pet and a few shots.

Thats not what I think of when I think Hunter. Stealth and poison? When I was introduced to this game hunters had both melee and ranged spells and pets were hardly what they are now.

Its weird to me that you're upset at these changes but not the MANY changes that have been made in the past. BM is what you're asking for. You're still an archer with a pet, just because you don't have tons of shots.

[Deleted]

Nope I'm fine with the changes.