Not really no.
DoT-management, yes! And with an increased focus on traps/improvements.
But Dark Ranger? No thx. Dark Rangers aren’t hunters. They are casters who use unholy magic and engages in necromancy, they just happen to be wearing a bow as well. They are no longer what they used to be before becoming Dark Rangers.
Can’t speak for everyone else, but for me, I want the old playstyle of RSV with as much resemblance as possible, though with more focus on further depth to it’s intended theme and playstyle. Because that’s what is needed for it to fit into modern WoW.
More or less this:
It’s not just about 1 single ability. It’s about all of it put together.
Besides, like I said above, in order for RSV to fit into modern WoW they would have to add more to the spec beyond what it used to be about.
Any abilities/effects currently within the Hunter class that references old RSV in some way, they do so in name only. They no longer promote the same playstyle/gameplay loop which you could get from playing RSV.
See above.
If there are people who actually played and enjoyed RSV, if those people continue to counter your argument of how “MM is basically RSV anyway”, probably best to take the hint.
Obviously people don’t agree with your assessment, and in the debate of bringing RSV back, it’s better to listen to those who want it back and who points towards it’s actual design and playstyle, rather than listening to someone who apparently couldn’t care less.
And yes, this with the basis of returning it as a 4th spec option.
Uhm…what?
…
Not going to bother, @Kaedys said it well enough.
Right there, under Class Abilities.
They open with:
“The hunter is a combat class, like the rogue and warrior, but whereas those classes rely on melee attacks, the hunter relies on ranged power.”
The following lines talk about supportive elements and complementing features.
In addition to the opening paragraph of the class description ofc.
There’s a big difference between what’s called “method of playing” vs. “intent of design”.