Id be tired of it too but luckily its just a handful of salty MM players who havent even tried the spec
Current and old MM and old Survival hunter were so similar that as a player I just assumed MM was the better class cause you got stronger pets until they changed survival to be so fun and give it the ol Rexar and Nightelf Sentinal feel to it while giving us new fun gameplay and it has always been in the middle to top tier ever since. I would like and arcane slash ability to replace arcan arrows or something that way i can weave in and out of mele as needed then id think the class be perfect or my other suggestion.
2 Likes
Current MM is a ghost of Old (WoD) MM, which did great ST dps. Old Surv, meaning Ranged, was a DoT spec, with special emphasis on Traps. MM better? No, but it was easier.
MM pets being stronger, not that I know of. Surv. being mid to top tier ever since it became melee? No. Its been up and down.
No one on these forums really knows why Surv was changed to melee, but since it was done, the number of Hunters in the game have dropped, both by count and percentages. I don’t know what they were after, but that is what they got. That, and a reduction in the Huntard population.
hunter is the most popular class in wow, so that is ok
if you think old mm and surv were similar then bm was also similar. they all had the same talent tree and same general playstyle with a casted focus generator. that was just how most dps classes were pre-legion.
comparing current SV to the old specs is pretty much pointless because it has only existed with spec specific talents when they shifted to every spec being a mini class.
1 Like
Pretty much back in the day, I thought beastmaster and survival hunter was the same except maybe 3-4 skills that was a pew that did damage in different ways but didn’t really matter cause it was just shoot something and pet attacks and one had exotic pets the only thing that felt different was markmen but only slightly cause no pet and focus on player damage.
the only similarity between rsv and bm that i recall, at least in warlords, was that both were ranged hunter specs with no or low cast time abilities. to say that they were ‘the same’ is correct in that current arms and fury are the same because they’re both warrior specs that fight in melee range using 2h weapons, or frost and arcane are the same because they’re both mage specs with cast times.
5 Likes
Pretty much you shoot something and pet attacks I don’t see the engagement of one doing dots as main DPS and other more direct damage they were both shoot and pet tanks at default and BM looked better to cause of exotic pets.
1 Like
But I feel like they could be hybridized more the current Survival but keep the melee weapon and make it better to stay in mele maybe cause maybe a passive auto attack leech or make mongoose bite and raptor strike heals in melee anything to make you want go into mele but the option to shoots magic energy slashes at range would be better I think Aspect of Eagle should be remade as a passive but 25yds cause a magic mele slash should be shorter range then a missile weapon or they could make something less amazing make arcane shot work with melee weapons to become arcane slash and remove Aspect of the Eagle as it is a better utility then that long cooldown ability.
I mean, if this is how you look at it, that’s up to you ofc. It’s not really a solid argument to justify removing a spec from the game.
Why? Well, applying the same logic to other classes/specs…
Warlocks? 3 specs casting different spells, one of which with a bit more focus on demons.
Mages? 3 specs casting spells with different colors.
Rogues? 3 specs focusing on beating enemies with 2 sticks, generating combo points to spend on finishing moves. And popping in and out of Stealth.
Warriors(arms/fury)? 2 specs focusing on beating enemies with larger sticks. One roars a bit more, the other spins a bit more.
Bottom line, why not apply the same logic to how all classes/specs are based, in fantasy? Why was only RSV vs MM looked at this way, but no other specs were?
6 Likes
You have it backwards. Pretty much you have your pet attack something then you shoot it.
I agree it is just an opinion -nods- They play similar a lot classes play similar and i hope they continue diversifying the specs but making them feel good and fit the RP of the class and I mean all classes.
-nods- this is true normal you get you pet to gain agro first though they steal agro fast enough sometimes i shoot first.
Not directed at you personally, but I know that some players want all classes to basically be diverse, on a level similar to hybrid classes. Again, that’s their preference ofc, but many players want classes to have 1 core fantasy, with the specs focusing on a specific part of said core fantasy(with core fantasy, I’m referring to a common primary style of combat).
And this is precisely my point here, they didn’t have to completely remove RSV. They could’ve done the same to that spec as they did with all others, going into Legion, and it would’ve been fine. Even with modern philosophies where more focus was put on identity over class.
I mean I played Survival before the change and beastmaster they felt similar and I liked them both a lot but when I logged on one day and it was all different my eyes went wide and I wanted to try it and it it was fun for me I loved it even though I still think it lacks on the survival and I still had beastmaster if I wanted to pew pew with a pet I never felt I was missing a playstyle.
We’re all different ofc, we all have our preferences and subjective views. Putting that aside, and working with the assumption of the default, that a spec which is heavily focused on hard-casting, and a heavy burst/front-loaded damage profile(MM), with one that is based on consistency and build-up, that style of of play(RSV, focusing on DoTs). Subjective views aside, those base concepts are more or less the opposites of one another. Sure, both were built on the same foundation of a class that focused primarily on combat, using ranged weaponry, with resource builders and spenders, which was very much intended.
Anyway, again, putting subjective views aside. Would you say that the MM we got in Legion, or the one we have now, both versions focusing on front-loaded damage and burst, as their main profile, with something like what can be seen in the link below, would you say that those promote the same style of playing? Would both promote you to make the same decisions during combat, depending on what enemies/encounters you’re up against? Pure ST, stacked cleave/AoE, spread cleave/AoE, etc. etc.
I think a 4th spec be nice maybe call it Sapper Hunter that about traps and poisons and fire dots and explosions would be cool and maybe Survival can become more arcane and beast and druidic warrior with leech mechanics for sustain so you can stay in mele but able to go mid-range and send energy slashes in the air sending waves of energy able weave in and out of mele depending on the circumstances a hunter-style warrior/spellcaster with a pet companion.
Agreed with the 4th spec route.
As for the name, I would simply call it ‘Munitions’. It fits the general theme of how they’ve named our specs in the past, focusing on a specific part of the core class fantasy. And it also accurately describes(hints at) what it focuses on, in terms of its core identity and theme.
1 Like
I guess that names works too and sounds cooler
There were originally two variations on bard - 1e’s abomination of multiclassing and 0e/2e’s dilettante mage/thief that traded sneak attack for some magic and the potential to learn any weapon. I feel like support/melee/ranged in mail would definitely fit that second type, too (and valor bard is as close as 5e comes to recreating it other than college of swords)