Community Council discussion on Hunter design

Classes Hunter
1116

Maybe. To me it just depends on whether Munitions can (or ought to)

  • form a spectrum, in turn, that’d a good breadth of playstyles (similar to what its inclusion could do for MM in that Technique vs. Armaments balance spitballed above), and
  • whether Munitions feel like they ought to instead be acquirable by everyone (in which case they should maybe be a Class Tree thing).

To my thinking, Munitions ideally should be their own spec, with a little bleed into the other spec trees (see Salvo, Razor Frags, WFB) but not necessarily outright shared via the Class Tree, especially if not an augmentation of a shared skill or if not a pure utility (so, Razor Fragments okay; Explosive Shot more debatable, if BM were expanded to absorb MSV but Munitions made its own things alongside an expanded MM).

I gave the spitball on a MM-Munitions hybrid just because you’d already given a take on a potential MSV inclusion into BM (though much less ambitious/comprehensive than I would like for any RSV-MM hybrid, which I’d imagine as more evenly split), and because the same problem of “{Housing Spec} does NOT promote the idea of {included other builds}” I feel applies equally to MSV into BM.

  • The main difference there, to me, was that RSV didn’t have to lose anything to fit into MM, so long as Aimed Shot is optional (and no other parts that’d be required of RSV would require [stationary] casts), while MSV would have to lose its munition components and a couple other eclectic/“resourceful” elements to fit into BM (simply because MSV has more ‘things’ thrown into it than RSV ever had, and is anti-synergetic with only one ranged tool, Aimed Shot, whereas current MSV is anti-synergetic with the whole of ‘beast stuff only; pet does majority of damage’). Of course, if we were trying to do many flavors of Munitions, instead of just old RSV (which, yes, really could be replicated in full in just 4-5 nodes), then the same could apply there.

The extent of your suggestion in including (only a couple mechanics out of the dozen or so from) MSV into BM seemed like “This spec would otherwise be lost; take it or leave it.” As such, the nearest mirror seemed what could have been done with, say, WoD RSV (which, yes, the unique capacities from would require only 4 nodes —old ES, BA, LnL, Spread— to return the whole of that spec’s skills and passives which would have been a doable merge into Legion MM, and an easy inclusion within MM today). 100% of a spec’s unique mechanics, as opposed to some 17%.

  • Of the shared talents, only two were particularly Survival-esque, Chakrams and Exotic Munitions. Which leaves us with… 6 nodes, even then, while the likes of Salvo, Serpentstalker’s, and Wailing Arrow are already more related to RSV than MM.

That is to say, it was on the subject of what playstyles could be merged, as compared to themes. Modern MSV isn’t possibly going to fit in its entirety into BM; it’d have to be truncated. WoD RSV, on the other hand, didn’t attempt to offer multiple playstyles under the banner of theme; it was, essentially, just a playstyle. (It’d take far more to really flesh out a theme, be that of Munitions or Survival.)

On the other hand, MSV simply packs a lot more to it, as any Legion-onward design would. Raptor Strike is a mere replacement for Arcane Shot, and base Carve is used at an identical pace to Beast Cleave already (both per 6s), so that leaves your mock-up with solely Mongoose Bite and Deadly Duo, just two of about a dozen mechanics that each do far less outside of their original context. One wouldn’t then point to that <20% of mechanics and think “Ah, yes, there’s my MSV.” But, you could increase the node count and pathing freedom of BM greatly and at least add a Primal Hunter, one aspect of MSV, while Munitions takes up its other elements. You’d still never again have MSV, of course, because those two halves are now split, but you would have access at least to its parts.

Similarly, you wouldn’t be able to have a full-fleshed Munitions (in more than just the kinds and playflow held by Survival) or Survival (say, with mixed stealth elements and advanced trapping elements atop Munitions) spec and then push it into MM… but you absolutely could have an MM for which both ranged technique and ranged armaments play an equal part and into which both WoD RSV and its thematic elements already present in MM (~25-40% of nodes, depending on how you define them) and the modern MM, both, could be housed in full. That would have been a playstyle, at least, that actually could be salvaged and merged.

Which themes of Hunter would deserve an entire 3rd spec depends simply on how much space they actually need, I would think.

  • If what interests RSV players about RSV were a relatively narrow aspect, then that’s easy to reproduce elsewhere, either within MM or within a new Munitions spec that goes beyond that or within a new Survival spec for which that would likewise be just one of multiple diverse options of equal prominence all cohesive under some aspect of Survival (rather that only where that theme intersects with, say, Munitions).
  • If what interests MSV isn’t constrained to just an RSV/WoD-sized third of that modern spec, though, that will be harder to include elsewhere, just as a modern Ranged Survival that isn’t just Munitions would be harder to include elsewhere.
  • At which point, we’d have to look at the sum total of mechanics we’ve really liked, and what contexts were required to make them work, and, if we’re not about to get a 4th spec, see what we could really maximize from three specs.
    • Can we include a sort of axis or two across each spec (as per the earlier balance of {personal use of beast powers} vs. {directing beasts}, and whether that comes from the pet itself or more from aspect abilities or beast-themed attacks)? If so, what could fall under each theme while actually fleshing them the theme’s options all the further?

Just food for thought.

It’s a pretty rare position, usually just from those who really, really hate Rapid Fire and the like for whatever reason or thought WoD MM was divinity incarnate, but I mentioned that example only because I have seen and argued against it several times since Legion.

1 Like
1117

That wasn’t my intent. My reasoning for excluding certain mechanics was more a mix of what I thought would fit as part of the BM spec tree itself, combined with leaving out things that weren’t relevant anymore. Admittedly, it was late in the evening so I didn’t spend as much time on it.

I purposefully left out:

  • Anything that had to do with Wildfire Bomb.
    • You could easily move Wildfire Bomb, along with Guerrilla Tactics, and possibly a slightly altered version of Wildfire Infusion, or a talent that focus on CDR + bomb damage for Wildfire Bomb, into the class tree.
  • Anything that had to do with Kill Command resets or about generating Focus via Kill Command.
    • Not relevant to Beast Mastery since, for one, Kill Command in that spec isn’t about generating Focus. Nor would you need it to since you’d have the same means of generating Focus as you currently can with BM, even if you choose melee.
  • Harpoon + ToE
    • Harpoon, and possibly ToE as well, could be added somewhere in the first bracket of the class tree.
  • Talents which provide passive increases to damage of one or several abilities.
    • They don’t really do anything to further the base gameplay of the spec/playstyle, and could be baked in elsewhere anyway.
  • Other talents that I think would fit in as part of the class tree.
    • Lunge
      • IMO, shouldn’t be part of a spec tree at all, but is better suited as part of the utility section of the class.
    • Fury of the Eagle
      • Could be placed as an option in the choice node for Barrage, where you’d pick between the two. One requires a melee weapon, the other, a ranged weapon.
    • Aspect of the Eagle
      • Could be moved to the class tree, or be made baseline for the spec.
        • You could even alter it to provide some benefits for pet-based attacks as well if you wanted to.

This leaves you with the following:

  • Butchery
    • I guess you could add that as a choice node with Kill Cleave in the BM tree. Where it still aims to replace Multi-Shot/Carve, and trigger Beast Cleave on use.
  • Birds of Prey
    • Could fit as a tanget branch, extending into the capstone bracket down from the talent I suggested that is Endless Wrath(2nd bracket, bottom left). Altered to rely on Bestial Wrath instead of Coordinated Assault.
  • Viper’s Venom
    • Could be added to the BM tree as well, works with both melee and ranged. I’d say somewhere in the first bracket.
  • Flanking Strike
    • Since they removed Chimaera Shot from Beast Mastery, I don’t really have a good idea for a spot where this could fit in as an alternative to an existing BM talent. Thoughts?

I made some changes to the previous concept to reflect these points above here:

→ Code to import into TTM

Node count: 40 | Maximum skill points: 50
Not counting Animal Companion

Agreed.

Fair enough. I’ve never seen as much, but sure.

1 Like
1118

We also rallied for ranged weapon variance ages ago. Hunters wanted Guns to be usable in the deadzone, but to have a low maximum range. Bows would carry an in-built Hawkeye for maximum range but would have a deadzone, and the Crossbow would deal the most damage somewhere inbetween, with a shorter deadzone and a shorter maximum range.

Alas…

The single-shot Blunderbuss was wildly inaccurate at further distances, and would be a better fit for a mid-ranged option because it can’t be cleaned and reloaded under stress in melee range. While the Repeating Crossbow would be a stronger close-range option thematically.

Edit: I suggested back then that Stings be upgraded to each deal moderate impact damage, and for the visuals to be enhanced into a semblance of the item ‘Barb of the Sand Reaver’ from AQ. Stings would have a .5 second cast time and be thrown by the Hunter, dealing moderate impact damage in addition to their normal secondary effect. Well… at least they deal impact damage now.

I would have loved greater depth for the class, such as the proposed Sting alterations and Traps requiring a reagent cost similar to Rogue Blind and Poison effects to more clearly delineate the grounded, non-magical nature of the class, but I guess they wanted to keep Hunters as a starter class, which the class still suffers from to this day.

1119

Wow, you guys were busy while I was away! I have lots of reading to do. :slight_smile:

2 Likes
1120

A while back i posted an thought about expanding MM but it only got like 1 read/heart so i imagine it was too long maybe idk. Should i reposte here/link as this seems like a great place for it?

There are a few ideas to go with it, but the main poiny was to expand the dark ranger theme and redistribute damage out of aimed shot.

Ive also had the thought that maybe marks should be based more on tyranda instead. Or one side of the tree is shadow based dark ranger and the other side is arcane based what ever night elve huntresses are called. The middle bing more traditional MM stuff.

1 Like
1121

Not to tear open an old wound, but let’s take a closer look at this infamous picture: /i.imgur.com/kBVr5Uc.png/

I wouldn’t argue against what’s written here, as it’s a rough outline of intent, perhaps a marketing slogan to highlight the differences between a Hunter and the other physical DPS, the ranged weapon and the pet standing as the primary mode of differentiation. I don’t disagree with this.

I would only add that in practical reality this page appears to have taken its final manifestation into what later became the Marksmanship Tree.

From this picture, it is possible to arrive at the conclusion that MM was the original starting point for the Hunter class, with BM and SV perhaps developed afterwards. I also don’t disagree with this notion either, especially with the popularity of Legolas after the LOTR movies aired. I guarantee the servers were flooded with Night Elven Marksmen at launch.

Elements of what later became BM, the ‘Hunter Pets’ section, doesn’t do justice to the fully-fledged BM spec, and there is no mention of any Survival [Talent] in it as a third option.

That said, which was hopefully conveyed without malice, let’s carefully take a look at the post-launch Hunter Specialization symbols, which more accurately shows the finished product, here: /www.wowhead.com/classic/talent-calc/hunter/

We see the Tame Beast icon, representing BM.
Pet DPS.

We see a Bull’s-eye icon, representing MM.
Ranged DPS.

But what do we see for Survival?
What was its original capstone talent?

The rest is for you to investigate.

1122

A bloody hand-axe, the old Mongoose Bite icon, from back when it required a dodge to be made usable.

Which… makes sense for what it was back then: the compensatory spec that, outside of the subtle bump of a “stars-aligned” melee-weave (when Auto-shot would have just completed and/or you had MB ready from a ranged dodge), or the 5-minute burst of Readiness, merely raised Hunter’s floor — reducing the penalty for having been forced out of ranged combat and made it easier to escape back to it.

Whether that’s particularly relevant to today, given that SV only seemed to have some third the focus or centricity that MM enjoyed in Vanilla and was reworked 2-5 times over* is up for debate, though.

  • Pragmatic thematic shift when changing the original capstone from Lacerate to Wyvern Sting, incidental shift in moving from defensives, melee, traps, and stings to add Explosive Shot, streamlined in WoD, then transformed into Legion MSV, then into post-Legion MSV.
2 Likes
1123

Ahh, right. That makes sense. Though, I will caution that it’s pretty difficult to set up well something as interconnected as Wildfire Infusion (mechanically requires 4 SV nodes and 2 class nodes for full effect at present) into the class tree.

So, first, the point of KC on MSV isn’t just Focus regeneration.

  • It applies an 8-second Bleed that increased AA damage and thereby ST damage (and soon also grants WFB CDR, thereby also affecting AoE).
  • The fact that it’s ranged but doesn’t cost you anything (unlike how, say, if we were allowed to use Arcane Shot at will, would still be inferior in damage-efficiency to RS/MB) as long as you aren’t overcapping or using it at the tail of an MB window is a huge part of its gameplay.
  • There’s also the specific effects of the resets for CDR, multiplicatively stacking bonuses, etc., which SV easily could do more with if they so please (even if Mad Bombardier was probably not the way to go).

That said, because it’s also effectively a completely different skill from BM’s KC… one could easily rename the skill and provide less RNG-dependent Focus management to BM if that might be preferable to just Barbed Shot and doubled passive regen.

In short, it’s the mirror to Barbed Shot, not to BM’s Kill Command.

Cobra Shot, on the other hand, has no inherent difference from Arcane Shot except in that the latter is better against Plate. You could easily replace baseline Arcane Shot with Cobra Shot, then offer the choice between Barbed Shot and “Harrier”-or-whatever-one-may-call-it. That in turn would open up things like…

So, originally Flanking Strike seems to have descended from an RSV complaint —too little influence over LnL procs beyond BA being used on CD, especially in PvE— and offered a way to force out those free procs while leveraging the fact that one worked with their pet for benefits that’d disproportionately affect Melee. Imagine that “flanking” rather more literally: you could blink-strike to enemies near your pet, and your pet could blink-strike to you. (If you had no pet, you simply had a bonus-range melee attack, but it’d still otherwise function just fine.) If you were to try to consolidate SV’s thematic gameplay around working with a pet, this would be a lucrative place to pick up the tab from areas you’d trimmed down.

Given that ToE, at least in its current form, is more often disliked (for basically removing Harpoon as a mobility tool by forcing it to be used on CD for Focus and damage) than liked… that might not be worth it. You could instead just include baseline the mobility advantage after killing an enemy (Harpoon CD reset or temporary bonus charge) and call it a day and you wouldn’t need the extra node, nor would you likely accidentally… kill the mobility of the spec/build that most needs it.

  • Of course, if ToE also granted a second charge, it’d probably be considered basically fine, even if still overly obligatory.

Naturally; makes sense. Though I’d recommend giving that same attention to the similarly ‘bloat’ BM talents.

If only BM can go melee, though, what use would the class tree have for a 3-yard increase (basically unnoticeable to MM, for instance) sufficient to spend a talent on, let alone for the Class Tree to potentially bottleneck a path with?

This assumes that Explosive Shot would be made Munitions-only?

Probably not worth bothering, to be honest. Between SV-KC and allowing Arcane/Cobra Shot to be used with the hand-crossbow, it’d largely feel like button-bloat all while making PvP harder to balance (imagine any other melee being able to deal its full damage from 40 yards… let alone from flung… slime-green… bird spirit… things?)…

Wouldn’t this be taking a spot more alike to Beast Cleave itself? Granted, it’s pretty hard to imagine anything like MSV AoE without WFI.

That should be fine? Though I’m assuming Deadly Duo is bundled in some (at least the parts concerning KC’s reduced CD and being able to use it regardless of enemy HP)? Else you lose most of the value of BoP and may as well make it work independently of Bestial Wrath.

Given that Stings are pretty spec-agnostic (every spec has some manipular over Serpent Sting, come 10.1, even if they’ve ever only offered quadratic damage to MSV), I’d have thought it’d make the most sense just to have this be (spec-conditional) in the Class Tree, perhaps even absorbing Serpentstalker’s Trickery out of MM.

1124

Not sure how you came to this conclusion.

It’s an image of pages from the wow manual, where they provide summarized descriptions of the prime features of what each class was about.

As seen in that image, they talk about how we’re a ranged combatant who specializes in the use of ranged weapons as our primary way of combat. “To complement/support our ranged proficiencies, we have a loyal pet and a wide array of movement restricting spells”. It talks about how we’re able to tame beasts which “can attack the target and keep it occupied while the hunter engages in ranged attacks”.

The pages also bring up the subject of how you can interact with our pet, how to keep it happy, how to train it.

And lastly, it shows some sample abilities from our core toolkit.

Auto Shots - ranged
Serpent Sting - ranged
Aspects - bestial, pets
Revive Pet - bestial, pets
Traps - movement restriction, damage, survival
Wing Clip - movement restriction, survival

And yes, the page focuses much on the ranged aspects of the class, when describing what it’s about. It was the primary feature/focus of how they intended for us to play it. They don’t go into detail about talent categories, they just talk about the overarching class fantasy.

1125

Ah, Ghorak. We have not crossed blades in quite some time. In our lastest clash, I found you to be the more reasonable and agreeable rival. The considerable effort you’ve placed into your work is commendable and deserves praise. You are a true son of your chosen specialization.

Perhaps so. I would only argue that the Ranged DPS fantasy took it’s most iconic manifestation in Marksmanship, which should be a largely resonable assessment, if not completely inarguable.

Marksmanship represents the conveyance of arms through a Bow, Crossbow, or a Gun (but isn’t solely limited to these conveyances ala Throwing Axes, and Spears.)

In a vacuum, the base Vanilla Hunter did in fact sustain the highest amount of DPS with the ranged weapon due to the comparative weight provided by MM to the Hunter Superstructure. This is a completely uncontested standpoint. In fact, I’ve never heard it stated otherwise.

But you didn’t solve the riddle I deposited.

We may resume our talk afterwards.

1126

I literally just woke up 5 minutes ago. I’m gonna need coffee before I can begin to decipher this…

But I do have to say, I’m kind of with Ghorak here. I don’t really see how you drew your conclusion that the manual represented MM, and not the whole Hunter class? You said that BM and SV were developed afterwards? Huh? Where did you get that idea?

I am confused, but it could be because I woke up 5 minutes ago. I’ll check this out again after work to see whether I could understand your point then…

1127

Only in that MM had high, if not sole, contributive value to the Ranged DPS role. The other specializations did not. Perhaps it can be explained from another angle: Temporarily remove MM and it’s basic skills from the game. What would remain?

What would BM and SV each contribute to the class in terms of DPS modality? How would their individual contributions to the class differ with the removal of MM skills?

This is where I’m coming from.

1128

I’m confused…

You seem to be agreeing, more or less, that Hunter was built primarily as MM first and foremost, with the rest being either meant as simply (especially in Ghorak’s view, seemingly) complementary to that or (more in your view) an outright afterthought.

So why this talk of “crossed blades”? That seems melodramatic — and more importantly, out of place.

Moreover, I’m still not sure why we’d necessarily want to take cues from a period where Aimed Shot had a 3-second cast for frequently less of a bonus over weapon damage than the auto-attack you’d otherwise have gotten off if not for that cast, when even Multi-Shot had a cast-time and auto-shots a hidden one, etc.

Look at any other class and look at what past “core” aspects they’ve grown out of and see how many people want to go back to, say, only having access to a third of their skills per stance and all built resources being purged if you swapped between them, or Stealth being a 50% movement speed penalty with so little reward for its use compared thereto that one was basically forced to level as Combat, etc.?

1 Like
1129

A narrative device. I’m from Argent Dawn (US), we practically exhale melodrama.

In my first set of posts back in Janurary, I “crossed blades” with not only Bepples, but Ghorak over the same issues presented here. In what I felt was a heated exchange of words, and a somewhat distasteful exchange at that, when you consider that I had just recently returned from a long hiatus and had little interest in debate.

Edit: For future reference, here’s the thread in question.

1 Like
1130

Feel free to specify which nodes those are, that you’re thinking of. I do agree, however, that it will be a bit more tricky to keep such depth on a specific talent, if moved to be a part of a class tree, rather than a spec tree. At least if you think of how to leverage it for a specific spec, and its various other talents/abilities.

It can be done ofc, but would risk becoming very convoluted, or “overdesigned” in the process.

Never said as much^^

Are you referring to the ‘Bloodseeker’ talent? If so, dno if you’ve noticed, but I have included that talent in the concept in my previous posts.

I haven’t decided exactly how the implemented end-product would be but, considering how BM has the option to make use of Kill Command for AoE, through Kill Cleave, I’m thinking of how best to handle the possibility to leverage additional bleeds for the increased attack speed(and how that could easily get out of hand, if you allow KC to apply bleeds to all targets hit, during Beast Cleave windows, with Kill Cleave selected).

Either way, ‘Bloodseeker’ is part of my proposed merged BM concept.

You mean how it doesn’t cost Focus, how that is a huge part of its gameplay?

Not sure what you’re after here.

Could you provide some examples? What you’re thinking of.

Sure, though, keep in mind that I’ve included ‘Lacerate’ as a melee equivalent to Barbed Shot. Obviously still somewhat RNG based, but considering how BM plays, and would, even if made with a melee option in that way, last I checked, you wouldn’t have any Focus issues.

Are you talking about Hunting Companion from Legion? With the increased chance to gain another charge of Mongoose Bite. I guess you could technically force it, depending on how much mastery you had.

Anyway, I’m talking more about the current version of Flanking Strike that exists on retail atm. The reason I compared it to Chimaera Shot(when it was a part of the BM spec) is due to how it’s an ability that’s designed with a short-term CD, with no Focus cost, that could allow you to reliably generate a decent amount of Focus per use.

And yes, Chimaera Shot did cleave damage while Flanking Strike doesn’t.

That was my thought as well, but I wanted to mention it anyway.

Yep, thought as much.

This wasn’t really my concern when working on the concept. I mostly just saw no point in trying to bring over talents from SV that were nothing but mere percentage increases to damage. I was just looking at how you could merge the two.

A thought I had was to also add in an element of increasing the max range of ranged attacks as well. Obviously wouldn’t be as useful for a ranged spec as a melee one, but I guess that’d depend more on how many extra yards you’d give ranged attacks.

Anyway, you don’t have to include that talent. You could just leave it out, or allow your melee attacks for the merged version of the spec to have those 3 extra yards by default.

Yes.

Although, do note that I, in another post, talked about replacing the loss of ES in the class tree with my proposed ability for the Munitions spec; Cluster Shot. You could just put that somewhere else in the capstone section of the class tree.

It would still be a 1.5 min CD. As for the proposed inclusion of a benefit to pet-based attacks, I’d imagine it in the form of something akin to old Blink Strikes. Where, on a fixed CD, you’d be able to make your pet rapidly teleport to a target from far away. Targets that your pet couldn’t easily get to with something like Kill Command/Barbed Shot/Lacerate(built-in charge functionality). As Charge-effects are [usually] more restricted in terms of pathing requirements.

If you do it that way, then you’d effectively have to consider how Butchery would be a replacement, not only to Multi-Shot/Carve, but also to Kill Command as a means of AoE.

I guess you could go about it that way, but I like to think the way I suggested is the better one. Similar cost-efficiency ratio to using KC for AoE, but with an option for even more burst potential, while maintaining the steady passive AoE from Beast Cleave auto attack damage. Not to mention how it would allow for you to manage it based on your own character, rather than through your pet(could have its benefits :slight_smile: ).

Not sure what you mean. Yes, it would have its benefits if combined with something like Deadly Duo(Deadly Duo has replaced Killer Cobra in my concept, and also reworked to work with Bestial Wrath instead of Spearhead).

I mostly just thought to include it to have an option for a passive means of applying Serpent Sting to a target/multiple targets without having to pick Serpent Sting (+ Hydra’s Bite) in the class tree. You could also combine it with the branch that focuses on the new version of Aspect of the Wild in the BM tree, along with the bonus talent I suggested; Cobra Commander.

Another upside to it would be the fact that it’s not restricted through a long CD, like it is if you look at the reworked version of the Bloody Frenzy BM talent on PTR, where it only happens while Call of the Wild is active(albeit there, it’s a guaranteed application per use, for the duration).

Again, it doesn’t have to be included. It was just a thought…

1131

You seemed to pretty clearly imply that, so my impression could only go in that direction.

Bloodseeker, Quickdraw, Lunge, and FotE.

No, that it doesn’t cost you damage.

KC is not a damage loss to use over Mongoose Bite, in the opportunities open to using it (wouldn’t overcap, wouldn’t be able to get an extra MB into your MF window by leaving KC cooled and zeroing out your Focus now instead). Arcane Shot, even if the MM buffs were made baseline classwide and one took the Ranger talent, would still be damage-loss. Not a huge one per shot against Plate, but because it’d cost a third more Focus than RS/MB, it’d still be an always-available tool for keeping damage up partly, rather than a sometimes-available tool for keeping damage up fully.

Current examples: Arcane Shot, FotE CDR, Flanking Strike CDR, and WFB empowerment or CDR, each on KC reset. And of course those interact with MSV’s means to guarantee those resets, such as Pheromone Bomb.

Other random possibilities:

  • Reset KCs progressively decrease the GCD incurred by your next GCD skill, stacking until down to the game’s minimum GCD. This accelerates spread.
  • Reset KCs leave the target marked, causing the next KC to also strike them (sort of target-specific Hailstone mechanic, if you will). This makes spread more worthwhile.
  • Essentially, anything else that wouldn’t directly become mass AoE (or, wouldn’t normally be able to mass-apply Bloodseeker).

But doubled passive regen + RNG-based Focus-over-time buffs is going to feel very different from MSV, which leverages Focus for uptime; leaving charges or even the full CD of certain skills for a known upcoming moment they’d be forced out of melee range. Situating the latter requires much more deliberate means of Focus regeneration.

  • This is also why the loss of a shorter-duration Serpent Sting and even the addition of Intense Focus made MSV feel more constrained; they had fewer tools that weren’t a DPS loss that they could use from range, and less of a margin in which to use what remained before losing DPS.

No, Flanking Strike itself at the time had an absurd Focus cost but also a very high chance to grant an MB charge, whereas the chance provided on all other skills via Hunting Companion alone was very small.

I inferred as much; I’m just pointing out that you have the option for something far more thematically dense than just a 30s CD gap-closer with a bit of Focus gen attached.

If MSV is to be about the Primal/Bestial Hunter working in tandem with their pet, being able to blink-strike/dash-strike on a very short CD (6s, pre-Haste) to an enemy near your pet’s position, or they to you, would be pretty thematically dense.

Fair enough. I just suspect it would improve the combined spec, especially in terms of improved pathability.

True, you could make it a bit more valuable for ranged skills. Though, that’d kind of be encroaching on MM’s Mastery, no?

Ahh, right. Kk.

Right, but SV already has as many buttons as MM, and you wouldn’t much be reducing that button count here. Perhaps more when accounting for their actually using Serpent Sting directly. Given that AotE is only necessary because of arbitrary restrictions that you’ll likely have removed (such as access to Arcane/Cobra Shot) anyways, you can get rid of that then-unnecessary bloat, making uptime management that much more valuable without the CD to just deal with it for you a sixth or more of the time.

I’m assuming as a passive with an ICD again, rather than anything active (not akin to a Lynx Rush, just truly the old WoD Blink Strikes)?

Further thoughts on this note for later, if you like. (Has to do primarily with just Beast Training.)

I’d have to tentatively disagree. I would think that one of the obvious opportunities in adding the Primal Hunter / Tandem Fighter theme to BM would be to have a much more balanced, or even Hunter-led, split of the damage.

More important that that, though, is the sense of agency, and how that’d be pushed towards buff-maintenance or direct damage (+ CDR).

I got confused. It sounded like your design was going just from Endless Wrath to Birds of Prey, without Deadly Duo in between. But Deadly Duo is the main talent there, especially for anything but exactly 3-target-fights, not BoP, as it and CA together triple KS damage even in single-target. And without DD reducing KS to half its CD and CA increasing its damage dealt by 50% (as a very brief bleed), BoP drops to a third of its former value. That context would have to be adjusted for. That’s all I meant by it.

Fair. I’m just thinking of the difference between thematic bleed in the spec trees (Salvo in MM, Ranger in SV, etc.) and actually shared capacities via the Class Tree.

If MM is to have Serpentstalkers anyways, it just seems like it’d make sense to have things like Viper’s Venom also available in the Class Tree (along with, say, things like Razor Fragments, since every spec has means of increasing KS frequency).

1132

I’m probably not understanding what you’re after here. Talents in the SV tree that focus on KC resets, while somewhat different ofc to how similar ones in the BM tree works, you do have quite a few of them there(BM) as well. I suppose you could look into how to replace/rework some of those in favor of something currently found in the SV tree. Though, I don’t really see the point of doing so.

Again, KC in the BM spec is not designed to have a random reset mechanic within itself(outside of picking the talent Dire Pack, sort of). There are plenty of other ways to reset/add CDR to it in the BM tree though.

As for generating Focus, are you saying that you want to keep that element(try to include both the KC design for BM, but also add in the way it works for SV as an alternative) as well? I know I for one don’t fancy the idea of tying Focus generation to my pet, despite how it[the SV design] has fewer elements of RNG. Especially seeing as BM doesn’t really have Focus issues these days.

As for what you quoted, you can clearly see that I’m not talking about how Focus generation is the only purpose of KC, for SV. Or am I incorrectly using the term “for one”? If so, my bad.

What do these have to do with the bleed from Bloodseeker? With increasing auto attack damage.

Hmm, okay.

Sure, though…

  • Random Arcane Shots is just…passive damage?
  • FotE, as I mentioned, I intend to put in the class tree. I don’t fancy putting cross-tree dependencies on too many abilities/elements.
  • Where do you see CDR for Flanking Strike based on KC resets in the tree? I see the Frenzy Strikes talent, but that’s about Butchery/Carve, not KC? Do you mean Ruthless Marauder? Bit of a stretch, but okay.
  • Like with FotE, I intended for Wildfire Bomb to be moved to the class tree. And as such, I would like to avoid cross-tree dependencies there.

Sure, but again, BM already has a lot of ways to incur KC resets/CDR, and would have based on my concept as well. Where leverageable functions such as these could be included.

Couldn’t that, at least to a certain degree, be solved by some way of reducing the Focus cost of abilities, for example during a AotE window, or similar?

I don’t recall that. Only this version:

Flanking Strike

6 sec cooldown | 50 Focus

A coordinated attack on the target, where you deal X Physical damage and your pet deals Y Physical damage. If the target is attacking you, your pet’s attack will deal 50% increased damage and 400% increased threat. Otherwise, your attack will deal 50% increased damage. Flanking strike has double the normal chance to trigger Hunting Companion.

It’s higher ofc, but not really a “forced” trigger. Also, could you specify what you meant with “all other skills”? The old Mastery effect only mentions pet attacks.

Sure, but that’s not how it’s designed currently on live. Ofc you can look how to make changes to it, but that wasn’t my initial main goal with the merge.

It wouldn’t be nearly as good as MM’s mastery. Besides, BM’s mastery is additional pet damage, and you have talents in the class tree that increase pet damage?

I don’t intend for Cobra Shot to not require a ranged weapon no. All ranged weapon-based attacks in the BM tree would require the use of a ranged weapon, aside from Wailing Arrow I guess.

Cobra Shot/Barbed Shot/Multi-Shot, all would require a ranged weapon to be equipped in order to be usable.

Yep.

If you intend for Butchery to be an option next to Beast Cleave, then you won’t be able to use Kill Command for AoE, if you pick Butchery.

1133

Primarily just this:

  • BM has a short-CD rotational nuke and a pathetic filler and no deliberate Focus management.
  • MSV has a short-CD generator and a filler-as-nuke, and ties management of its Focus and of its filler-as-nuke window… to melee uptime.

They’re pretty fundamentally different and for later mechanics to have the space necessary to work well, they require those different foundations. Allowing for both, then, would have to probably require early and powerful choices (and not just in the sense of this active or that one).

It’s difficult to imagine something feeling like MSV with a BM KC instead of an SV KC. You could remove the pet dependence from SV-KC and call it something completely different. For it to feel like MSV, you could make SV-KC the Hunter’s own ranged skill, but you can’t have its initial charge be RNG-based or substantially reduce its Focus’s time-to-refill outside of tools over which the Hunter would have agency.

They’re very different in that regard, because one is meant to support a powerful-but-melee filler, and the other supports a ranged-but-weak one leveled out by a rotational nuke.

Now, if we’re just going for less of that deliberate leveraging of CDs for uptime purposes (already squished a bit in DF, but still heads and shoulders over other melee) that makes MSV feel like MSV and just go with a melee BM that doesn’t have as much synergy between its tools and maximizing relative uptime (or does so very differently), then sure. My point was just to indicate where someone who enjoys/enjoyed MSV would likely say “This ain’t it.”

Agreed.

Food for thought: Not every node has to include only one talent. Look at Paladin, for instance. You can have a Houndmaster | Wildling talent from the outset that pushes KC in a variety of ways. You can also have talents that are dependent on other talents.

There are a lot of little opportunities.

Nope, just my having a days-long migraine and being a bit out of it.

Yep. Just trying to be exhaustive, was all, since I mentioned Arcane Shot should probably just be turned into Cobra Shot, and Cobra Shot could then have rotational-nuke CDR, be that Mongoose Bite or BM-KC, or whatever else.

Out of curiosity, would any such CDR also apply to its alternative?

I guess I just don’t see the point of a melee ability like FotE being put in the Class Tree except as a weapon-conditional auto-swap with Barrage (and then you’d have to sort of standardize the two), if only a single build of a single spec could melee?

Sorry, been playing on the PTR where RM’s buffs have made it obligatory for M+ and got things crossed. Again, not at my best rn; I apologize.

You’re going to have be okay with either some degree of cross-tree dependency or devoting a fair bit of Class Tree space to it in order not to lose the more involved mechanics from Wildfire Infusions.

To me, that’s one of the more fun mechanics available to Hunter, so I wouldn’t want to lose it and I suspect that’s true for others, but ofc, this is your mock-up.

  • My main advice is just to pay attention to the minutia behind why X works as it does in MSV, as compared to what the same thing would do within BM (a very different context), and to, if you’re going to make refits around that intersection between BM and MSV, to go whole hog with what pet-master / Wilding / Primal Hunter interactions you can.
1134

Ah. Makes more sense.

I do agree that manual Focus regen through KC vs the almost-purely-passive+RNG based method in BM, that these certainly amount to feeling different. And would probably be a bit tricky to pull off having both, within the scope of a single spec.

At least if you include both the mechanics related to generating Focus, along with other functions, such as CDR/resets etc.

I suppose you could rework my suggestion for Lacerate to work more closely to how KC does for SV, in the sense that it wouldn’t just increase your passive Focus regen rate over a set period, but would instead instantly grant a certain amount per use.

Perhaps, going [much] further, you could even look at what could be done with it as a replacement to the Frenzy-mechanic for BM.

Sad to hear. Hopefully getting better by now?

It certainly could. Although, you’d probably have to look into the Focus starvation issues that it could amount to.

It’s a good point. I’m just not entirely sure how to fit it into BM itself.

NP.

Sorry, I should’ve specified that I want to keep the level of cross-tree dependency down, not letting it overtake too much of the design space. And yes, WFI is one of the factors for this.

1 Like
1135

Appreciate the words. Having said that…

Well, that’s because they had a very different approach to talent design back then. What the overarching purpose of talent categories was, compared to the core specs/spec talent trees of today.

We talked about this in our latest “clash” as well, back in january. You questioned the motives and intentions of parts of our class design from the original game, and I replied with:

There were no core specializations in Vanilla. There wasn’t any intent towards providing players with dedicated playstyles through individual talent categories. There was only the core class toolkit, and the overarching purpose of that toolkit, as per your main role(hunter = damage dealer, most effective at range), and the various talent categories only served to enhance parts of our core toolkit, in ways that were/would be relevant in all parts of the game.

Beast Mastery: This category, its talent focused on improving everything that had to do with our pets, and other bestial aspects. It focused on increasing the survivability of our pets, the damage of our pets, certain pet-specific utility(Intimidation, IRP, etc.), and again, it provided options to improve our bestial aspects(Monkey/Hawk/Cheetah/Pack).

Marksmanship: Its talents focused on improving all aspects of the use of ranged weapons. Better damage, improvements to specific ranged utility(ImprCS, Scatter Shot), along with improved efficiency in terms of mana consumption, CDR, attack range, etc.

Survival: Its talents focused on improving all aspects of our survivability, allowing for better adaptation to specific situations(content). It improved our tracking capabilities(damage), our defensive options(for both melee and ranged), increased our stamina, bonuses to general class-wide utility such as Feign Death, and more-so, our Traps. It also provided enhancements to our melee-capabilities, talking both utility and damage*.

Was the purpose of the melee-oriented talents to make you want to intentionally go toe-to-toe with your enemies? Not at all, the purpose was to make us more efficient at dealing with situations where we would find ourselves forced to enter melee range. Why? Because we had hard restrictions put on our ranged weapons, where we could not use them at all when we were closer than 8 yards to an enemy. And in certain types of content(mainly PvP), you were naturally forced to spend more time in melee range of your enemies.

3 Likes