No, because like I said: all those melee specs are far better established and less problematic than Survival. We should stop adding to the problem. Hold off adding new melee specs, and definitely don’t convert ranged specs to melee specs. Since Survival was converted to melee and it clearly isn’t working out, they should revert it. This will help alleviate the melee overcrowding issue.
What’s “rancid” about Survival is that they chose to make a spec unique via a weakness. Most specs build on the base class; Survival effectively takes away from it by making you use a melee weapon instead of the ranged weapon. It’s entire identity is predicated on being handicapped. No, this isn’t the same as Enhancement or Feral because those classes are not cemented as ranged classes through use of a ranged weapon (another point you ignored in my post).
Shields are a far more minor combat/aesthetic difference than ranged weapons so this is pointless. Besides, we did have 3 ranged weapon users and they removed one. You can’t ignore the fact that it used to be ranged. If we were already low on ranged weapon specs removing one was a mistake, and they should undo that mistake.
This is an incredibly weak point of comparison. Nothing is even in the same league as what they did to Survival. You gave an example of a mehcnaical difference within a spec. Melee Survival is effectively an entire new spec in the place of ranged Survival. Nothing at all was inherited beyond the basic utilities that come with the class. The closest you can get is actually Demonology Warlock in Legion (that expansion did have a lot of rancid class design after all) but that example won’t help you because it’s another change that should be reverted.
This wording here really encapsulates your approach to this discussion. You’re trying to isolate each individual reason I said it should be melee, ignore all other reasoning, and say it’s not enough. But that’s fallacious because they are related to eachother. You saw how in my replies to both 1 and 2 I referenced the fact that it used to be ranged, i.e. point 3. That underlies everything here. A major breaking change was made to the spec and now the discussion is about the merits of keeping the change and not reverting it. And the results aren’t in melee Survival’s favour. It’s predicated on a handicap. It’s worse than every comparable example because it’s in a class heavily defined around ranged weapons and it’s up against 2 ranged specs instead of 1. It’s contrary to the interests of most of the people playing the class. It’s not particularly appealing to people who aren’t playing the class. It exacerbates the melee overcrowding issue. These are all important points that can’t be treated as independent of one another.
We can see the results of this: the spec is consistently abandoned and the subject of ridicule, and mostly just manages to divide the community and cause bitterness while only satisfying a small niche.
The hell I do. Evidently it’s not easy to balance as they have consistently failed at it. Reaching a state where Survival is strong enough to be a compelling choice v.s. 2 ranged specs while not entirely invalidating them is damn near impoossible. It’s the most malfunctional spec in the game. Don’t even begin to pretend this is a point we’re going to agree on.
Yes, and I went over this above. Survival’s circumstance is unique due to a list of factors. This is why it’s uniquely unpopular.
Good for you. You’re in the company of less than 5% of the total Hunter population according to covenant statistics, and it’s been that way since Legion (that’s assuming you actually play one since you sure as hell aren’t posting from a Hunter). Evidently most Hunters actually find BM and MM more fun.
I do believe I listed a lot of arguments beyond that, actually.
I want to see it thrive too. I’m just a realist and I know that it’s never going to thrive so long as it’s a melee spec, and the reasons why are obvious common sense even ignoring the spec’s history. Speaking of which, that history proves it can thrive as a ranged spec. So, actually, the most constructive feedback anyone can give for the spec is that it should be ranged. Any time at all spent on melee Survival that isn’t making it ranged is time wasted.
It would have a higher focus of “special munitions”, namely poisons, explosives, and possibly other elements beyond that such as electric attacks. It’s identity would be the resourceful opportunist that uses practical, inventive tools to gain an advantage in combat. It’s playstyle would revolve mainly around sustained rot damage and provide avenues for multidotting and funnel-cleaving. It would also be the master of CC with improved trapping. This is all based on what ranged Survival used to be (I would personally swap out Black Arrow with an electric-themed attack to maintain the “special munitions” theme without venturing into magic archer territory) and it’s distinct from both BM, since it doesn’t depend on pets, and MM, since it’s not dependent on sharpshooting and hard-casted physical burst).
Ghorak has a forum thread describing what such a spec would look like, but he prefers to keep Black Arrow:
You wouldn’t even need to change the other specs that much. For BM nothing at all would change. For MM you would have to address 3 talents: Serpent Sting, Lock and Load, and Explosive Shot. Lock and Load can basically be renamed and given a new icon (it’s already quite different to the original). Serpent Sting can basically stay as is; it’s not unusual or illogical to allow MM to make use of it in certain situations. Explosive Shot would need to at least be rebranded like Lock and Load, and perhaps changed to a different burst AoE skill (perhaps it would allow Barrage to be useful again). No baseline mechanics would have to change.