Why is here only 2-3 players who really think they are right just because they have something backed up by data?
Icy veins dps chart is wrong , and their guide as well.
Warcraft logs doesn’t show proper stats and dps.
Demonology was overhauled massively and yet people don’t complain as much as much hunters complain who “played” least played spec since cata
Me? lol, no. My Covenant is Venthyr! I just want to play MM as a spec I can recognize from when I was learning to play MM Hunter. There are some choices I make that I’m not entirely happy with, but they are more about Focus cost than DPS. If I was meta-oriented, I woulda talented into Volley and Explosive Shot? at least once by now. I favor Single Target builds, as should all MM Hunters! 
Are you kidding? Locks are still crazy bitter that Havoc “stole” Meta (despite Meta being a DH thing originally, and warlocks stealing it first).
But a lot of that is that current Demo is actually fun, it’s the same raid role, and it’s actually a relatively well-designed spec. MSV is certainly not the same raid role, and while the other two are subjective, for most hunters neither of them applied to MSV.
In the case of Demo, Blizzard heavily revamped the spec, and it got a lot of flak during Legion. They gave it a lot of TLC in BfA, and it’s now in a pretty good spot, and thus the complaining has largely fallen off. Pretty easy to see why there’s a difference compared to MSV.
Incidentally, also on that list of specs that got heavily revamped in Legion are Affliction, Enhancement, and Shadow. All 3 got a lot of complaints, and all 3 have been effectively reverted to more or less what they were prior to Legion. Many hunters are just asking for the same thing for Survival.
Trust me, I understand lol.
But, I also think about the people who don’t post here, the average player just you know. Enjoying the game, or the people who do like SV but aren’t being dishonest about what happened or just want to see the spec they enjoy improved upon. I think there’s a lot of people that aren’t involved in these daily conversations who have done nothing wrong.
Plus, I just think it’s the most pragmatic move going forward to help end the precedent of deleting specs, but really don’t feel like getting into that again because I feel like a broken record right now lmao.
I do understand, and I don’t blame people for feeling that way. I know I’m a minority, but I’ll keep arguing for it because I think it’s the best move going forward for the class and does the least harm overall. I’m undeterred by spoiler posters.
Because having data that backs up what you’re saying is a much more effective argument than ‘I feel’, ‘I think’, ‘In my opinion’, etc. Speaking of…
Got any proof for these claims?
Actually I wouldn’t say that hunter’s core thing is a ranged weapon, we have been able to use melee from the start and was used for a portion of the game when a mob or enemy got to close. I would argue that having almost any beast we want via taming is what people generally come to hunter for. I think you just have a bias in hunters using ranged weapons because it was why YOU played hunter.
The “proof” is that it disagrees with their pre-determined conclusion, and thus must be wrong.
It’s the new way of thinking about data, an echo of the anti-intellectualism of the past. If the data disagrees with one’s belief, the data is wrong.
Hmmmm actually it was explicitly the central feature of the class according to the classic devs.
The original wow manual kinda did, it was even in the first line of it’s description.
sigh 2nd again…
I mean, this has been hashed out thoroughly in other threads, but Blizzard has, from day one, described hunters as specifically a ranged class. They actually reinforced that in SL, since 2 of the 3 new baselined damage abilities are specifically ranged-weapon-only (Arcane Shot and Steady Shot), and the third is still a “shot”, it’s just given the “hand crossbow pulled out of my bum” treatment for SV, just like Serpent Sting.
We had melee abilities in vanilla simply because ranged weapons had a minimum range. But then, for that matter, Warlocks had a conjurable stone in vanilla that improved their melee damage. Doesn’t mean that their central concept suddenly isn’t spellcasting.
Edit: Damnit, Bepples, why you gotta beat me to it like that
But you also seem to be looking over “This class has two man advantages: a loyal pet and a wide array of movement -restricting spells” meaning the pet and cc are their main things. Also the classic devs had plans for a multiple things that never made it to the game, such as rogues using shields.
I would argue there are multiple different core aspects to the class, since no class in the game is entirely one dimensional.
Pets, traps, and ranged weaponry would be the main pillars that make up the hunter since classic. Things have of course evolved from there but I don’t think it’s accurate to say ranged weapons weren’t or aren’t a major core part to the hunter.
Exactly, so hunter isn’t ONLY about ranged weapons. Sure some people may play hunter for bows and guns but some play it for the traps or pets.
I can’t get into survival. It’s clunky and feels weird. Every time I try I just think to myself why aren’t I playing a rogue, monk or warrior.
He is just a troll on these forums together with that Dawn.
It’s sad when their life is all about being on forums and play the game. Don’t argue with kids , just ignore them completely.
ya but ranged is in the first line… your over looking that.
Dude, the first line is literally “The hunter is a unique class in World of Warcraft because it is primarily a ranged attacker”. It doesn’t get more clear than that. The fundamental description of the class, since day one, has been “ranged attacker”. The other elements are secondary (hence why they aren’t the first things mentioned).
Honestly, the mental contortions y’all go through to try to maintain this fiction that hunters have always intended to have a melee playstyle are actually astonishing.
So no, you don’t have any proof for what you are claiming. Gotcha.
“Paladins are the consummate knights in shining armor, meant to be in the thick of things. Their defensive abilities allow them to stand toe to toe with monsters and take a beating - they are tanks overall. Wielding their mighty hammers and the strength of the Light, these holy warriors command forces in battle, continuously throwing themselves into the fray wherever the fighting is the thickest. The Paladin is a mix of a melee fighter and a secondary spell caster.”
That is the original Paladin description. No I did not feel like pulling it out and making a pic. As you see, the classic paladin played nothing like this description. But now it does…100% percent. Things change. That is the nature of the game.
Wait, so wanting to have data to back up assertions is because we’re “brainwashed”? Do y’all in other countries just accept any assertion you hear? Why have data and supporting evidence when you can just believe whatever makes you feel good, right?