Damn what a absolute chad. This guy gets it
but no for realz, people really got to let go already. Its tiresome and it just causes drama and nothing productive comes from it.
2 Likes
And where’s your evidence for this? Because, quite frankly, it’s been pretty clear on these forums that the opposite is true and this just reeks of projection.
4 Likes
Neither. I’m pointing out that your particular warrant there isn’t very solid.
Personally, because Hunter’s lore precedents are so varied and indirect anyways, I prefer to build around them very liberally while trying to maximize what the class does differently from others in terms of what all it allows (not just what it doesn’t). To me, that would generally mean allowing Hunter to get some additional value out of meleeing, even if it’s not typically worth it unless specced into, at which point one is simply opting into a different kind of mini-game (further uptime and risk management, but with additional raw mobility and a few other small bonuses). I don’t think SV should ever have been forced towards melee, but I do think all but Marksmanship should have some occasional benefit for going into melee range.
- I think also that, ideally, Hunter should support that dual-weapon use (via having both melee and ranged slots, using a handcrossbow or hatchet, etc., for melee while a ranged or melee weapon is equipped, respectively, or reduced GCD costs from weapon swaps). In either case, though, I think those keys should have ranged:melee mirrors (Multi-Shot <> Carve [no CD], Cobra Shot <> Raptor Strike, etc.) and swap automatically based on range or equipped weapon.
For context, I like mostly quite enjoy DF MM and SV gameplay-wise, even if I think the first could use some small polish and the second a better tree and an extra integral (not merely tacked on, pre-buff, or “use on CD”) infrequent rotational button or two. I do not much care for BM, find it ridiculous that some on these forums want to simplify it even further, and didn’t much care for WoD RSV for a similar reason—to me, its ceiling was just too damn low. I suspect, though —so long as any “I just want to run-&-gun and have no weaknesses” crowd don’t get their way— that a returned RSV could easily reach at least the complexity of, say, MM, at which point I’d be happy with it.
1 Like
Wing Clip and Bursting Shot are good examples of melee utilities but I think any instance of Hunters having to depend on melee damage is problematic.
It’s kind of how Hunters in WotLK work. It’s more damage to include Explosive Trap in the rotation, and you can buff its damage with Trap Mastery and Glyph of Explosive Trap. It’s only every 30 secs (down to 24 with Resourcefulness in SV builds) and the DPS gain is to the order of 500 dps which is maybe 5-8%, but even then it means you want to be close to melee range for most of the fight and it feels like being less of a ranged class. It also wasn’t just SV: all Hunter builds including Marksmanship would have to do it too.
Trap dancing can actually be pretty fun but it’s the type of goofy classic-era mechanic that I’m happy didn’t persist beyond that era. I remember how much we were clamouring for Trap Launcher which was meant to be in 3.1 but Blizzard had to delay it to 4.0 and create Black Arrow instead (back then they actually communicated with Hunters regularly). It’s fun to have control over it at first but then it gets jarring when you encounter the bosses where you can’t do it due to hitbox weirdness (Sapphiron, Maexxna) or it’s more dangerous to to mechanics (Patchwerk, Thaddius).
Ultimately to me those sorts of melee dependencies feel more like they’re limiting the class rather than giving it more tools. When I think about the sort of Hunter I want to play I remember my gameplay on Brackenspore where Survival was a great fit due to its mobility and range. Versatility is key.
I do still think they can achieve complexity even for a spec with full range and mobility. They actually almost have it with BM now where to achieve full damage potential there’s a lot of CD and proc management and even some limited multidotting with Barbed Shot (although BM’s complexity largely depends on a lack of secondary stats and as the expansion goes on it gets easier and easier). For a hypothetical ranged SV it would depend on having an extensive toolkit and procs to manage as well as multidotting/damage funnelling. Of course the main problem would be achieving complexity on single target since multidotting wouldn’t apply there.
3 Likes
I always thought that if we ever got a spec that fluidly swaps between ranged and melee it would be SV. Either you weapon swap manually or the game does it automatically. Then to encourage the bulk of SV’s damage to be mostly melee you would have raptor strike/MB do a bit more damage than the primary shot (i.e… lets call it something lame like “Survival Shot”). So the trade off would be do less damage but you are generally safe because you are dpsing from ranged vs do a bit more damage but you are dpsing from melee.
Cleary blizz did not go the route of X spec swapping seamless between melee and ranged, maybe balance issues, programming issues whatever.
1 Like
Depending on the semantics of that, I agree. I don’t think any of the specs should be balanced around taking advantage of melee features (especially anything more or less directly involving damage). I see my desired melee advantages as primarily utility features that tend to invoke as much added difficulty as they solve if they were just tossed in rotationally (and tend therefore to be ways of leveraging positional opportunities likewise granted by being mostly ranged).
It would, if it were left as that (i.e., “in itself”).
Just like Aimed Shot is a constraint for MM, the compensatory bonus of which is the spec having pretty hefty on-demand burst.
In this case, though, it wouldn’t be nearly so central or forced.
For instance, in many cases, especially in a melee-heavy (no Shaman) M+ group, you’re probably going to use the 24s CD of Countershot over the 15s CD of Muzzle, simply because that’s the rarer utility. But you have both options. No one’s going to expect MM to take advantage of Muzzle any more than we’d expect a Holy Paladin to min-max Blessing of Winter for kiting, but… it’s there, and, BM and SV may decently often find a place for it. Similarly, you can shoot the Spiteful adds from ranged to be able to slow them as quickly as possible, via Concussive Shot —but you can only do that once per 6s and it lasts only 6s— or you can Wing Clip if you happen to be close enough or prep that position (as being normally ranged helped free you up to be) and you’re not the one being chased.
For any sort of damage benefit, though, in going from Cobra Shot* to Raptor Strike … ehh. Maybe via a soft-CD, or just via a passive (perhaps even a pet-dependent one) that offers self-shielding, utility CDR, or the like. I wouldn’t mind certain builds that use a melee weapon as their primary being competitive, but it should mostly feel like an extra option that’s just… better integrated and basically zero-cost (as compared to 2h Frost or SMF Fury).
- *I personally feel Cobra Shot, if fixed to instead just be an especially swift, slightly arced shot instead of the stupidity it is now, should replace Arcane Shot, as we’re no longer mana-users and it’d help fix the wonkiness of BM’s opening talents.
I’m fine with there being melee>ranged hunter builds. I just don’t think any Hunter should go so far off that end that its ability to position comparatively freely would fall below that of a class to which that feature hasn’t been traditional. Melee is fun for its constraint, just as Aimed Shot is for its, but just as I wouldn’t force 2.5s hardcasts on all Hunters (ideally, not even quite so much on MM), even the current ranged-frequent MSV seems an excessive constraint to not be an option within an option.
Agreed. I probably gave this example before, but to me, I’d rather traps stay utility-centric, not damage-rotational*, see an interplay of traps and proximity instead be something like… Hi-Explosive Trap going off near you offers, for 2 seconds, a free use of Disengage, being able break enemy targetting against you by hiding behind an enemy frozen by Freezing Trap, etc.
To me those examples would mark features, rather than constraints. (Of course, if we consider the whole of the class, then, yes, having to use some ground-targeting skills remains a constraint. There is no feature that is, in its full context, not also going to create some manner of constraint because of its being worth using.)
- *Though, maybe let people opt in for more if they really want, since they could spec differently for problematic fights.
I don’t think BM is even that close right now (I really like high-ceiling specs, after all), but I do agree it could easily get there if it took pet actions (unique abilities, player-pet synergies, etc.) into a quite a bit more depth.
Aye. But as I’ve mentioned before, my main concern is that I don’t want to have just have a (long but) unvaried Action-Priority List. If the procs happening at a certain time can’t actually influence what you’d want to do at that moment, as to be leveraged for different gambles based on fight knowledge and expectations, then they’re not especially, to me, adding depth.
If we stick with SV being just melee, I’d really like to see a 4th spec (perhaps renaming MSV to “Pursuit” or whatnot), but agreed regarding weapon-swapping.
I suspect the latter is the bigger bottleneck.
Oh, a final bit of heresy:
I think that pets should all be immediately capable of cleave (for threat/utility purposes and ease of balance), should share Leech contribution, etc., and virtually all offensive buffs that affect you should also affect it… but also having a pet out should cost you %damage (totally worth except when you just really don’t want to bother with the pet or want to max out the dynamics of your personal burst). That deals with Lone Wolf front and center (no longer a talent, no longer MM only). And, ofc, add back Beast Training, with a tab for each of your pets available to Call and a tab for yourself from which to pick your passive and personal skill for when no pet is summoned (or use a fly-out skill to the same effect).
Hey, I don’t need to produce evidence in order to state how I feel about a situation. nor do I need to validate how I feel. But, if were to read my posting history, you might possibly perceive how badly you missed with your projection shot. Thank you though, for helping me firm up my opinion.
1 Like
Personally, I would have nothing against using a trap for damage, though, assuming it doesn’t require stepping into melee to drop it. Also, I would prefer if such traps, used to deal damage, had a longer base CD. You could easily build off of that concept by providing options/talents to modify the damage profile of the trap in question, the usability, etc.
Having said that, I definitely don’t want to see something like what we had with tar trap into flare, ever again.
2 Likes
I actually didn’t hate that. I just don’t want it ever to be a best option for pure damage, only at most for redeeming the value of Tar Trap’s utility. A similar story goes for Steel Trap; I’d like to be a great combined-utility-and-damage option, but never the best for pure damage, even if that means not using it at all for raiding.
2 Likes
‘I’ll accuse {camp with opinions differing from my own} of being immoral and immature, but I need no evidence for this because, contrary to my wording, this was somehow stated as ‘purely subjective opinion’.’
???
3 Likes
I don’t wanna be that guy but…you have enough self awareness to understand why that is, right? like there are 3 things that are always certain, death, taxes, and bepples posting in a survival thread to let everyone know how much you dislike it.
Also i like the idea, MSV thematically makes sense in my head, i mean definitely not the traditional archer but a person hunting with their dog/companion using both range and melee weapons…it just fits with how we used to hunt.
I know the post was from 5 days ago, sorry for being late
5 Likes
It doesn’t use a ranged weapon. At least not a real, fully capable one like the one you start with at level 1. It’s not sufficient.
Including the grenade?
1 Like
Oh you got him with that one! Another killer zing from the Beps.
Tell us again how the magical shadow damage Black Arrow days were the the best for SV… just like our ancestors used to do it.
6 Likes
Because Black Arrow was a cool ability from WC3 and the priority for SV before Legion wasn’t designing a literally worse version of a Hunter.
2 Likes
But… Grenades are a cool ability.
4 Likes
They are, but if the priority is for SV to fight “just like our ancestors” (i.e. a worse version of Hunter) they’re not a good fit.
They would be a good fit for ranged Survival because that wasn’t the same priority for that spec.
2 Likes
I don’t think anything in this game needs to be anything like our ancestors.
Which is why grenades are fine, black arrow is fine, etc.
This is a fantasy game. The primary goal of any class, imo, is to be fun to play. I think SV currently hits that goal just fine. Then you have sub goals of competitiveness in different modes, level of difficulty, and how it fits in the larger ecosystem, etc.
The only things that are objectively true and relevant in any of your comments is 1) you prefer ranged SV (a perfectly fine opinion to hold) and 2) SV used to be primarily a ranged spec.
Melee hunter is not inherently bad. There is no need to “justify” the design, nor can you “refute” the design. Don’t care about lore, don’t care about history (ours or the game’s). It’s all just farts in the wind.
4 Likes
It’s consistently unpopular so it seems it doesn’t hit that goal at all.
It is.
2 Likes
So you think only the most fun specs are the most played? That’s the highest form of thought you can muster? There are no other factors that go into spec popularity? Maybe give that one a little more thought?
And… No it’s not. There is no reason why a melee hunter spec is dead in the water conceptually. EverQuest ranger had melee attacks (I think, that was a long time ago lol). GW2 ranger pet class has several melee builds. And SV is currently melee and the space time continuum has not collapsed. It’s possible because it already exists in LOTS of games, including the one we’re debating. Not only does it exist, but it’s awesome!!!
“Used to be” does not mean "has to be " … You’ll get it someday. Until then, I’ll keep flagging you for trolling until hopefully one day, I’ll wake up and read an SV thread without your small mind spewing small ideas all over it.
Good luck!
4 Likes