Can’t believe they throw survival under the bus like this
SV has not been killed, knock it off
5 Likes
I understand the thought process on the nerf. However… Venthyr Boomkin, in 9.1 didnt see any nerfs until 9.1.5, and then didnt really see any nerfs till 9.2. Fire Mage was not nerfed through all of 8.3.
I could be wrong, but it just feels that some classes/specs are allowed to be outliers for long periods of time, while other classes show signs of being outliers and are nerfed rather quickly. Additionally, it feels that some classes/specs get a lot of attention in buff class change cycles, while others are left to languish and get the ole “We need a major patch or expansion to make the changes needed.”
I do appreciate that the team is working on some tuning, but these targeted tunings seem to be less about addressing outliers, and more about targeting specs from being outliers. Some specs are allowed to stay outliers. Others are quickly addressed. Some specs are allowed to be bottom barrel for the duration of an expansion, while others are quickly buffed when they dip.
I know it is impossible to make changes without upsetting people. No matter the class changes, buff or nerf, people will complain. I would just like a little elaboration about the tuning philosophy and direction, when it is so inconsistent on how it is approached.
5 Likes
Buddy, this is like a 4% nerf to the spec in consistent heavy (8+ target) AoE and has zero impact in any sort of cleave/AoE below 9 targets. And plot twist: Survival is incredibly powerful in these cases too.
It’s like 30% ahead of the third-highest spec in the game in this sort of heavy AoE.
This spec isn’t dead in the slightest. Tf are you smoking?
4 Likes
LOOOOL THIS IS NOT A NERF 
DESTRO SUPREMACY IS HERE TO STAY
KISS THE RING LESSER CLASSES, YOUR WORLD OF WARCRAFT BELONGS TO ME NOW!
1 Like
This seems like a massive overreaction to a nerf that only affects situations with >8 targets…
That was SV hunter basically only viable strength in pve. If you choose single target over cluster, you’re not top tier dps in any situation
So you think that situations are either only single target or only packs with >8 mobs?? 1-7 enemies, survival will do exactly the same dps as it does now. >8 it will do slightly less.
I know it’s not gonna be such a big deal. But it’s sad how blizzard finally gave this spec some attention and made it compatible just to hit it with nerf right away.
Boomking is still monster DPS, ice mage as well. But in general it won’t affect it as much. My opinion is just leave it, it’s not played enough that it’s noticeable. It’s a flavor spec that rewards people who love it/
We still not going to nerf priest in pvp?
why god.
While I do have a Hunter and have enjoyed Survival, I find it strange that it would be classified in the realm of AoE abilities, considering it is just a bonus passive for an existing AoE ability.
It’s good to see powerful legendaries, it just felt like this one is something beyond a vast majority of, or maybe even all of the legendaries.
So class balance should be done based on the potential emotional reaction to said balancing, and not what will make the game healthier?
1 Like
This is coming in time for mdi and nothing more
I never said that. I just said the nerf didn’t seem to pass economic muster to me. It was literally only targeted at MDI. Games should take into consideration customer reaction and unless it’s so broken it can’t be ignored nerfs should be done rarely IMO.
What do you mean it doesn’t pass economic muster? The nerf is directly targeted at scenarios where they became an outlier to an unacceptable degree, and has virtually no impact elsewhere. The community perceiving this nerf as being more severe than it actually is isn’t anyone’s fault but the people who do not understand it.
1 Like
Sentiment has a significant effect when you’re talking millions of users. Just ask Microsoft how Vista went. So making a nerf (negative sentiment even if the numbers don’t change) will have an economic impact on the health of the game. Less subs or active players, less investment from Activision Blizzard.
Except those scenarios don’t really exist in normal gameplay, thus applying that to normal gameplay only serves to have a negative economic effect on the game for no larger benefit. Particularly when this could be applied only to the MDI tournament realm and not to the game as a whole. So by making this a public nerf they’ve taken a hit they didn’t really need to. Small, but still a hit.
It’s clear you’re a numbers person. This isn’t about numbers it’s about the appearance of a nerf. If Blizz had buffed Chaos bolt and Incinerate at the same time this would probably have neutral sentiment but they didn’t. Sentiment is hard to quantify because it’s not like you can say “if we nerf X we’ll loose Y players” you have to do it and see, moreover you could have lost that anyway due to other factors.
My larger point was it seems an unnecessary silly risk to take when overall sentiment is generally negative about WoW, Shadowlands, and ABK anyway. As aforementioned I probably would have waited until I could combine it with a buff to something else related to those specs however minor. Is this going to break the game? No, is it going to cause at least one player to potentially go “I’m done with them!” probably, but if not this than something else probably would have eventually. What it does do is prevent ABK from having time to bring that player back from the brink. Losing that engagement means that it will be much harder to recover that player in the future.
Yes, please buff all of my characters. Thank you. 
Real drastic nerfs there… not. Demo still broken in single target and why are some classes still at 5 targets but these busted ones get to remain at 8, nerf them down to 5 and see how wonderful it is.
1 Like
So how was my original statement incorrect, then? You’re arguing that sentiment and emotional reactions should be taken into account when issuing balances instead of just looking at class performance. You’re right that I’m a numbers guy, but I strongly believe that anyone that looks at the blue post, which specifically states this has no affect on the majority of gameplay situations, and decides to quit was either A) not engaging with any of the relevant content to begin with, or B) on verge of quitting anyway.
I am fully aware Blizz is in dire need of good will at the moment, but telling the people on the upper end that they just need to deal with an unhealthy meta when a fix is easily doable is hardly fair. Warlock will still be one of the absolute best DPS in both raid and M+, even with the nerf.
5 Likes
I will never understand the absolutely insulting stance Blizzard has taken against the playerbase with the AOE cap. Instead of letting player skill be the deciding factor in pull size, continuing the double down, triple down, quadruple down, etc. on soft caps and hard caps is just so pathetic. If groups can handle the healing required in larger pulls, the interrupts required in larger pulls, and the tank aggro/tank survival in larger pulls, let them pull larger.
But instead, for some absolutely unknown reason, all of our characters have to just randomly get worse when Blizzard decides an ability is hitting too many targets too hard. Just let the players play the game. Remove all of the AOE caps - hard and soft - and just please, for the love of god, LET THE PLAYERS PLAY THE GAME. Sorry we don’t play the game like game devs demand of us, apparently, but if players are having fun doing something, how about don’t ruin it?
Get rid of the hard and soft caps on AOE.
6 Likes