I’m glad you admit that rsv posting is not actually goal-driven at this point.
1 Like
And how do those folks feel about it? 'cuz I agree with you that things change. I myself don’t mind msv.
My point is that we should recognize those who have feedback about how something changed for them. In the same way people want msv to evolve in DF but it obviously needs work. Most specs go thru minor changes that add up over time to make it something different, evolving. Msv was a complete shift.
I still hear the echoes of warlocks who miss their Metamorphosis for similar reasons. Are they wrong for feeling and voicing over it? , nah. I mean down the line they can restore some fantasy for it because of that feedback.
We live in a world where we once had feral and guardian part of the same tree yet they recognized how much simpler it would be to expand on it. Imo, Survival is in a similar state right now. A Ranged spec who became melee but evolved back to be much more Ranged dependant, in other words closer to what it was rather than staying committed to the original idea. On top of that there IS a healthy community that supports rsv now so what’s the issue for them to voice it? I don’t know you yet, you come off a bit aggressive with your own opinion as if I’m attacking you personally when I’m specifically stating that a compromise would be healthy for the game.
1 Like
You seemed to imply that there were no other examples from other games of things getting removed.
Players miss all of those things, and you’re right, now and then you’ll see threads of people longing for all of those things on different forums.
But there’s only one on this list where no matter how much time passes, the same 10-15 person clique continues to derail threads and make meaningless posts about something that Blizzard repeatedly continues to say isn’t coming back in the following expansion.
And as we just learned, for some of these people, there’s quite literally no end goal or purpose to it, just to troll.
Which is cool, people can troll if they want, just as long as we all know it’s for nothing but trolling.
2 Likes
No, the goal is to get rsv back, we just dont care what trolling white knighters like you think.
3 Likes
The people of who have the power to make your goal reality or not have told you it’s not happening.
2 Likes
The whole issue I have with this whole case of RSV/MSV is that the side advocating for RSV being brought back somehow thinks that it was the most awesome and perfect spec back in wotlk/mop. It really wasn’t. And Wotlk just proves it, go back and play it and say with a straight face it’s as perfect as you keep claiming.
Also the biggest issue is that you look at something bad (current SV) and claim it’s bad and that RSV should be brought back. How the change was a crime and how the people in charge should be held accountable yada yada yada. But you do know, that if the RSV-> MSV would never have happened the Mop/wod RSV would have gone through 3, soon 4, expansions of changes and small or large reworks. Right?
Look at almost any other spec in the game and there is barely any, if even one, spec that is the same now as in Mop/Wod. Crying for Mop RSV being brought back is just delusional and smells of anti-progress. I am not a fan of where they have brought hunters. Not at all. But I am not so stupid and narrow-minded that I think the response/reasonable thing to do is cry for them to bring it back to how it was 6-10 years ago. The game would be quite stale then if you ask me… I’d rather we perhaps focus on giving feedback on how they can make the current game better? You know based on what we actually have now. Not some rose-tinted memory of what was.
TL:DR not saying the class is in a good state or even that current SV is better than any previous SV. But to cry for it to be brought back to a old state instead of improved on, year after year and patch after patch must surely be tiresome? That’s not really how it works. How many ultimatums and tantrums you ever do throw.
2 Likes
a) You act like we haven’t played it since Legion. You can still play RSV you just have to break the ToS to do it.
b) This is mostly a strawman. No one’s asking for a 1 to 1 copy paste of MoP SV to modern WoW. It would need changes such as spec-unique talents. Ghorak has an entire write-up of a hypothetical modern Survival complete with a talent tree.
The point is continually dumping hundreds of hours of time and effort into melee SV is an utter waste. You keep defaulting back to this cliche “moving forward” line. Not every change is automatically positive progress. It’s possible to pick a bad design and double down on it and that’s what they’ve done with SV.
10 Likes
…well, yes, you are. You already know this clearly so it’s weird to respond like this, but just to recap: you dropped this stock-standard “You’re trying to undo progress!” line, I called it a cliche, and you responded with “Yes this whole drama about RSV sure is a cliche”. It’s immature and pointless yet it’s your go-to response on the forums.
It’s probably contributed to the continual sidelining of the melee part of melee SV, so yeah that is a positive result.
I see this happen quite often, actually. Newer players coming to the class, finding out what SV used to be, and asking why they ever changed it because it seemed so good in the past.
Melee SV fans seem to think it’s only the few of us on the Hunter forums that don’t like melee SV. In fact there’s a lot of dissatisfaction about the spec that just never gets posted to the forums. That’s how most contentious issues are. Most people don’t bother saying anything, positive or negative. That doesn’t mean everyone’s happy with things. Perhaps Blizzard should go and find out what the popular opinion is for a change instead of just making assumptions.
Most of these are poor comparisons. I think even you can see why permanent camo and siphon life is not anywhere close to Survival going melee. The SV melee rework was by far the largest single rework to any spec in WoW’s history, and the most contentious as well.
Yes all classes go through a lot of changes but pretending extent doesn’t matter is immature. Most specs in the game have a clear lineage of iterative development where a core identity and, to some extent, gameplay continues to be represented. I played a protection paladin a lot in MoP and I started playing it again recently. The class is heavily changed but you can see a lot of the same thematic and gameplay elements being improved and iterated upon. You can’t do that with SV; there’s a point where everything is thrown out and they start over. The only comparison that comes close is what happened to Demonology… which was also a mistake for many of the same reasons. Even then, it was a ranged DPS before and a ranged DPS after while SV was totally changed and largely in a direction that made it alien to its own class.
I remember you posted about this once before. It’s awesome that you got the perspective of the actual creator of the ranged SV we knew and played. Do you have a link to the original post? Because it’s difficult to find it again.
People pretending SV now is more like what it was in Vanilla is one of the most brazen class design revisionisms ever created. What’s even more incredible is that we literally had the playable classic WoW where people can go back, experience the class, and see for themselves how untrue it is and they still believe it.
I think one thing that surprised me was how a lot of these urban myths about classic and TBC still live on. I assumed that people would realise from the playable versions that they weren’t true but they still get perpetuated. Another example is the whole spiel about Thoridal being bad for Hunters. You have thousands of Hunters in classic BC right now getting Thoridal with major DPS increases and you still get people swearing up and down that the Golden Bow was better and Thoridal should go to Rogues/Warriors. The BC Hunter discord had to pin a post about it because they still always get asked about it.
Also, on the Travis Day comment: you have to love how he says they game it the unique identity of being the beast companion guy as if BM doesn’t exist.
His statement was arguably worse because he made a specific, unambiguous claim about ranged Survival that just wasn’t true. In Ion’s mind SV was all about unqiue CC talents until Pandaria at which point the removal of talent trees meant they had to copy over a bunch of stuff from MM. In reality 4.3 SV played the same as 5.0 SV and SV’s Explosive Shot and Black Arrow were never part of MM before Legion. This is far from the only time he’s said something blatantly dishonest. In fact for him it’s the norm.
Reading between the lines, in short, they applied a certain logic to the design of the hunter class, a logic that wasn’t applied to all other classes/specs at the time. Basically, they thought that there couldn’t be two specs where both of them had a focus on the use of ranged weaponry. More importantly, rather than doing what they did with all other specs, by developing them to become even more defined in their existing themes/fantasies, they scrapped RSV/old SV without even bothering to try to make it distinguish itself further, from the other hunter specs.
Is the concept in [this link] “perfect”, from a design perspective? Most likely not. But it sure as heck wouldn’t play anything like current MM. The main point is that they could’ve done the same to SV, as they did to all other specs, going into Legion. But they didn’t…
This is why we’re still here, petitioning for the return of RSV. Contrary to the opinion of some, based on what they/the devs said, it wasn’t justified to remove the spec. Something that’s especially obvious, given what they’ve done with SV since. Note how they’ve stamped SV as the “beast companion guy”, which is how they had previously branded BM, since the start 
[/quote]
3 Likes
So again, if I was a dev and came to this thread, I would just click off it and do what I feel would be best for Hunters. Why? Because I would not want to read about something that happened, now going on 7 years ago that is not in game. What is even more funny is that these people seem to think THEY designed the game, and people being PAID to do it do not know what they are doing. Nope. Wow just happens to be the longest SUCCESFUL MMO running.
Once again, the DF will go live, Hunters will probably be a hot mess, and we will be back here complaining why the devs screw over Hunters. Well devs do not screw us, we do that all by ourselves. Because we cannot talk about how to improve Hunters without the minority screaming about changes made 6 years ago.
Honestly I gave up a while back. I just hope that things will come out decent enough were Hunters are not bottom of the barrel.
4 Likes
I think it’s fair to said old RSV have little going for it in terms of differentiating itself from the other specs. I remember, especially in Cata, thinking to myself something along the lines of “the specs are the same with different flavors. Keep X on CD, keep Y debuff up, keep Z buff up, A & B are fillers”
I’ve grown my opinion on RSV/MSV listening to others opinions. I miss the old RSV but they can 100% bring it back in DFs Talent system. MSV can be a cool direction they take but I feel like it should be more involved with its pet, as of now the pet is just there for KC to give you focus and mostly everything else is passive. If Blizzard can define the Hunter/Pet relationship in the spells better they can make it a better experience. I also don’t care much for WFB and think the MB gameplay plays more into the “ferocious” fantasy Blizz seems to want it to be.
Not entirely sure what you meant to achieve with this statement. In context, your use of “perfect”, as a term, has no substance. And also, when did we claim that it was, objectively, the perfect spec? All we’ve ever said is that, contrary to the opinion of some players, it DID in fact have coherency, an identity of its own, and it most certainly fit well into the common class fantasy of a hunter, as realised in WoW.
I say “we” because I assume that you’re including me when you said “the side advocating for RSV being brought back somehow”.
My negative view of current SV, is the fact that they’ve developed it to a state where it is more-or-less played like melee-BM + Bombs. To the point where they’ve borrowed or taken several abilities and effects from BM, in order to create an identity for the new SV. You even saw what they said in that interview yourself. They think of current SV as the “beast companion guy”. This was the singular main point of identity for BM, up until Legion.
Add to that the fact that they, since the rework, claimed that it was justified because “RSV was basically MM, but with more traps, or different arrows”. They made this statement, knowing well enough that the two specs did not share a single signature ability/effect during WoD. All they(each core spec) shared at the time was the common class fantasy of having a primary focus on the use of ranged weaponry. And, again, if that’s enough to justify a rework, then why didn’t they do the same to all other pure dmg specs/classes in the game?
MM and RSV couldn’t both focus on the use of ranged weapons(despite doing so in different ways)?
Okay, how come it’s okay for all three mage specs to focus on casting spells(despite doing so in different ways)?
How can all three warlock specs still focus on casting spells(despite doing so in different ways)?
How can all three rogue specs still focus on beating enemies with 2x 1h-weapons, while popping in and out of stealth(despite doing so in different ways)?
Again, I assume that you included me when you said the “RSV side”.
When have I ever said any of this? Heck, I haven’t seen anyone here on the “RSV side” claim that they want MoP SV back exactly as it was, and nothing else.
You did post a comment in my topic on returning a modern version of RSV to retail, so I like to think that you’ve at least read the OP before posting in there. If you did, you’d know that I definitely am not asking for RSV to be brought back exactly as it was in MoP, and nothing else.
Again, this isn’t what’s being done. If you think that it is, then I can only assume that you aren’t reading what the “RSV side” is actually saying.
And while it is true that the opinions of how it should be brought back tend to vary, depending on who you ask, I for one have never asked for them to remove current SV, in order for us to get RSV back.
2 Likes
I’m the immature and delusional one alright 
How do you even have the time or energy? Geez
This is the problem when you are so fanatic. You kind of miss the whole point.
I have never advocated that MSV was or is a success or that it’s better than RSV. That is how you RSV people like to spin it to make it easier to say I (we I guess) are wrong and you are right.
What I say over and over again to a freaking wall (that’s how it feels talking to you RSV:ers) is that I am tired of you turning any feedback post into “MSV bad RSV must come back”, instead of just giving concrete feedback on the current SV and DF alpha. This is not exclusively of course but to the majority. And it’s just getting real old and counterproductive. Because Blizzard obviously doesn’t agree with you and to be honest it’s perhaps time to accept that and look ahead.
1 Like
This argument that blizz would just click off of the convo bc its a rsv/msv discussion is null and not true. IF they even come here to read things, and they see the drive for rsv, perhaps that changes things.
But you don’t want that. Your a white knighter. You cant think for yourself, whatever blizz tells you is good is what you argue for. This is why your a joke.
1 Like
No one is arguing for cata/mop rsv back, most if not all want lk rsv back. Major difference.
You cant really advocate for more “pet relationship” in df with surv. In alpha, surv is turning into melee bm and its a mess.
1 Like
For the rest of them,
Blizz has been dumping countless resources into alpha msv and its still a complete mess. It still isnt as good as the initially released sham or rogue trees by far.
Whats going to happen is blizz is going to realize msv is just a resource black hole, and when the time comes to move on the spec will be left unfinished, like always, and it will sit that way for another couple of xpacs.
If blizz would have went with rsv and started anew, we would have a tree thats 10x better then the garbage we have now consisting of half-way thought of ideas of the 1%.
2 Likes
Hmm…
It took a while as I had forgotten which topic I posted it in, but here is the link: Is Melee Hunter going to be removed? - #336 by Ghorak-laughing-skull
I couldn’t say what prompted him/them to say what they said in that interview, but you’d think that the lead class dev and senior producer at the time would know enough about a class to be able to make accurate claims about its history. And yes, this is a bold statement of mine, but like has been said already, it’s enough to log into classic to find out that “no, the SV category in classic/vanilla did not promote the idea that you wanted to focus primarily on melee combat”. The “vanilla survival experience” did not have its roots in melee gameplay being the primary focus.
And secondly, Raptor Strike wasn’t even a SV ability. It was a class-wide situational ability you wanted to use, by design, whenever the enemy got too close for you to be able to fire your ranged weapon.
Yeah…
Yep, agreed. Again, you’d think someone who is that involved in the game’s design and development, you’d think that he would know the history of this class. But really…something like this isn’t even hard to look up. Why would he even come out and say those things, knowing that they’re so easily disproven?
I would argue not, that it isn’t fair to say that.
-
You’d have to base that statement on the idea that it simply wouldn’t be possible to design a modern spec, based on the core of old SV/RSV.
-
You haven’t checked the concept I linked you. Like it or not, it definitely wouldn’t play like current MM, or what MM looks like so far in alpha development for DF.
You could bring back a few of its signature abilities/effects. But it wouldn’t be possible to give it any depth or further distinguishing features. Not to mention how it would negatively impact the spec you decide to put those new talents in, seeing as neither BM nor MM promotes the idea of what RSV was/could be.
1 Like
At this point, seeing how bad msv is in alpha, i would NOT mix anything.
Just give us our 4th spec.
3 Likes
-
No, I did not miss your point. I responded to the things you actually wrote.
-
I know you refuted Bepples claim that you do not in fact twist the words of other posters, but here you do so yet again. Example: When did I, in my reply to you, ever claim that you think MSV is a success, or better than RSV?
In the first section, I responded to your claim of how we, the RSV-side, “think that old RSV was perfect”. In section two, I simply wrote down why I think the development of current SV proves, even more so, how hypocritical the devs were, when they accused RSV of being too similar to MM. I also made a comparison to other pure dmg classes/specs to further my point.
In the third section, I refuted your statement that “the RSV-side is stupid, delusional, and narrow-minded for wanting them to return MoP RSV exactly as it was”, even though none of us have actually done so. And yes, you actually said that.
I also pointed out how you commented in my topic of what I wanted for a modern version of RSV. Meaning you do know that your previous statement of “MoP RSV” isn’t actually true.
And like I told Elhyas in the other topic, there are plenty(dozens) of SV topics with recent activity, that haven’t been “turned into MSV bad RSV must come back”.
Blizzard doesn’t agree with a lot of things, until they do…
And as you’re already aware, I am in fact “looking ahead”.
Imagine asking someone for something, they tell you no, and then you spend the next 6 years derailing any legitimate discussion of anything related to what you asked about.
Talk about self-centered, entitled, and spoiled!
7 Likes