All those class had gotten changes that change how they are played. All those class were split, one group hating and the other loving.
Black arrow isnt a hunter thing, they tried it but certainly wasnt part of hunter. An attempt to bring Dark Ranger Sylvanas moves into it.
Your argument made it sound more like : ““Hunters suffered more than anyone else because I hate the changes they made to it, the other classes didnt have bad changes… since I dont care about them nor play them.””
Thats not what was said at all your twisting my words. All i said was no other class had a spec changed to point that completely changes the core to a different style. No class went from melee to ranged or ranged to melee, except hunter. How spec plays rotation etc has nothing to do with it except the core of how you play spec. No mage went from casting fireballs to swinging a two handed sword or use sword and shield.
Reading.
Yes they did had change to core.
You’re right, but its a change like any other. It isnt bigger than another just because it affect a different thing.
It has everything to do… it is the CORE of the class… its how it is played. Go say that to the spriest that hate new void form, to demo lock missing their demon form… they will all spit in your face.
I agree with this one for sure. Combat rogues got screwed over badly, plus they messed up the other specs too so sub was ruined too. That is reflected in the statistics for that class. They are in a really bad spot. I can’t speak for the other classes, but I’m pretty sure Rogues got the worst of it after Hunters.
This is the lamest argument a person can make. “Only the developer decides therefore all empirical observations of the class must be tossed aside because whatever Blizzard says must be true.”
I am capable of observing game mechanics and deducing aspects of those game mechanics. The idea that players are incapable of doing this is silly. I am saying about the class what Blizzard said about the class for the greater part of WoW’s history. Now they changed their tune, and guess what? A huge chunk of the Hunter playerbase left as soon as they did that, and they continue to leave. We know this as a fact. We dropped from 12.7% total playerbase to 8.6% total playerbase. I am not saying that Blizzard is incorrect when they say that the Hunter class has a melee spec now, because it does. I am saying that prior to it having a melee spec the class was much better off (and yes, it is a melee spec. Are the auto-attacks melee? Yes? Then it’s a melee spec).
Other design decisions about BM and MM have made them lacking too, and I’m not really of the mind to just roll over and toss my hands up in the air because “Blizzard is the one who gets to decide what a class vision is.”. If the current state of the Hunter class is the result of Blizzard’s current ‘vision’ for the class, then that vision is garbage, and we have the numbers to tell us that that is very likely true.
I want Hunters to go back to being the amazing class that it was, like in the days of Cata and MoP. I know lots of Hunters share the same opinion. Really happy that you love this new ‘melee SV’ that they shoehorned into the class at the cost of actual Survival, but at no point, absolutely no point, was it ever necessary in the slightest to delete Survival from the game. If they wanted to add a melee spec, they could have done so, and just not deleted Survival. That is what this “msv vs rsv” discussion is about: ranged SV and bringing it back.
You can take delight in your new Hunter canon all you want, but it is irrelevant to the discussion. The problem is and will always be the removal of SV, the empirical data and observations about how the class was better of before that new Hunter canon of yours, and how and when ranged SV can be returned as a fourth spec (preferably alongside fixes to BM and MM) to hopefully usher in a day where the Hunter class regains its former glory and former playerbase.
Source/citation. What time period are you talking about, where is the data from, what were the parameters? Without context a stat isn’t anything more than a number. So far you haven’t said anything besides conjecture. You are making a claim so it falls on you to provide sourcing and context if you want to be taken seriously with stats.
You can’t just use a stat and state your own feelings about the issue as the determining factor. The drop you stated is proof of nothing except people swapped classes or left the game.
Never said you weren’t. I’ve been doing the same myself, we simply disagree with the result. I happen to align with blizzard’s current vision of sv. Our feedback plays some role but ultimately the creator gets to decide what the vision is. All you have deduced is that you dislike the spec and think it shouldn’t have been reworked. Your feelings have nothing to do with the actual performance of the class. Yet you double down on that feeling here:
Saying it was better off is your opinion. Personal taste and performance/balance are two separate things. Ion said himself that they are happy with how the spec performs, and although it’s a niche spec there are people playing it at a high level and enjoying themselves.
Saying the auto attacks are melee therefore it’s melee isn’t an argument to what I said about it being a hybrid. You are overly simplifying things to make it convenient to your argument. There is no question that sv is a melee. I said that it has many ranged aspects despite it’s primary being a melee weapon. Point being it’s a spec with ranged utility no other melee is capable of because it’s a hunter spec.
Now this is where you derail:
My opinion isn’t irrelevant and neither is yours. It’s condescending to think that this thread and discussion should be about your agenda and feelings otherwise it’s irrelevant. The OP started this off by saying:
I came to this thread to talk about sv. I enjoy it and think it’s in a good spot, but it needs needs some tweaks mechanically to make it smoother. I talked about the class fantasy and how I viewed it. I even said that a 4th would have been the easiest way for them to add melee in a smooth way. They had other plans and reworked it. Their reasons made sense to me. The past is the past and we are here now. You are not happy, I am happy. Keep in mind you were the one who initiated this conversation with me in response to my initial post.
If you have anything constructive to say I’ll listen. However, if you keep repeating it should never have been deleted, and that any opinion outside of your agenda is irrelevant — than you have failed to understand how a discussion works and I won’t waste any more time on you.
Clearly you don’t have any Sub Rogue friends…
Sure, the spec wasn't "deleted" but it may as well have been. It's soo far removed from the spec that those people loved, like what you're experiencing, and they feel the exact same way.
Still a melee rogue.
I really like the idea of melee survival. The problem is everyone is spending time complaining about wanting range survival back and no one is giving proper feedback on melee surv. Like it’s not coming back anytime soon. Why not try to make the melee spec fun and unique and good?
They are giving proper feedback, Frost DKs are getting the optional 2 hander back in the next expansion I hear…If we ever plan on getting that 4th spec, we need to keep hounding Blizzard.
For those that are more pessimistic about the 4th spec option, getting it reverted is the only option(not my take, but there it is)
“We want ranged survival back!” “We want a 4th spec!” “Melee survival sucks!”
That’s not proper feedback. And that’s literally all of the survival posts. While yes I do agree with bringing back the old survival play style whether it’s a 4th spec or whatever it may be…I think there could be more positive feedback on melee survival.
As I always say, the creators are not exempt from criticism nor are they always right. Remember that Blizzard at one point through it was a brilliant idea to give paladins a summoning spell. Likewise in Legion they gave MM Black Arrow as a standalone ability instead of integrating it into MM’s gameplay. We shouldn’t operate under the assumption that Blizzard is infallible.
Admittedly, Survival is in need of refinements. This is true for the two versions of the spec we’ve seen (Legion and BFA). Better baseline interaction between its abilities/mechanics would be nice, as would be changes to how the Mongoose Fury mechanic works (and make it baseline instead of a talent). It’s not a horribly broken spec, but it’s also not a masterpiece of design.
It’s going to have to come from the melee survival community…so that’s ON YOU.
And the thing is I don’t think ranged Survival is coming back anytime soon. So it’s everyone. Fight for the 4th spec but the whole “Ranged survival blah blah” need to stop. Yeah frost DK’s got 2h back but thats not reworking an entire spec again for the 3rd time.
Making melee survival better should be the goal. Not adding ANOTHER spec that Blizzard has a hard time getting right.
Our goals do not align, the sooner you come to grips with that. The sooner you can start posting whatever spec improvements you are looking for.
If you are asking for ME to come up with improvements for MSV, it would START with a bow…sorry. I am trying to be as supportive as i can be asking for a fourth spec.
You don’t fully understand the unadulterated seething hatred I (and others) have for MSV, nor do I expect you too.
You’re going to need to get with your MSV brethren and put together a list of things you want for you spec. If you are going to play that spec, it SHOULD at least be good. Asking others to do it for you? Well then you get what THEY WANT.
Re-check all posts on the matter then. Because that’s not all that there is.
Many of us here who are asking for RSV back have little to no interest in current SV. Do you really want us to start posting feedback towards what we want it to be like?
Note that I’m not specifically talking about removing the spec. I’m talking about the fact that specific feedback towards improvements to an existing spec(such that are still in line with the theme of said spec/playstyle), it’s best to get that feedback from players who are actually invested in that spec.
I’m not entirely sure what you’re referring to with “Ranged survival blah blah” but if we stop posting about wanting it back, if we stop pushing for it to return, then it certainly won’t.
RSV back as a 4th spec isn’t “reworking an entire spec again for the 3rd time.”.
It should be the goal for those who are interested in playing it.
You speak as if you know this for certain.
Also, “has a hard time…” ? RSV isn’t in the game so we have no idea whether they can get it right or not.
Any time someone tries to talk about the current iteration of SV the same few whiners come in and ruin the threads. Maybe if the blowhard whiners stuck to one thread instead of turning any talk of SV into a we want RSV back it wouldn’t be at this point…
Hes hand picking some data and making his own personal conclusion and saying thats the reason. Despite having multiple factors occurring during the period he has chosen.
Because thats how life is, how humans are. Take 100 people, 80 of them LOVE current SV, 20 hates it…
Well guess what, you might hear from 2 or 3 ppl that SV is good, but you’ll hear non stop all 20 people complaining. Those that complains are always the loudest even in minority.
Another thing to note, these forums are NOT a good scource of feedback. Personal opinion clashing with other personal opinion. People using fake / modded information and etc… its all you’ll find here.
It is if you’re trying to get msv back to rsv.
It was in the game until legion. And if they took it out then they clearly didnt like it. So if they brought back a spec like old survival it wouldn’t play the same. Like you know that right? Blizzard would make it a different spec.
And I do know this. Look at msv now. It came in legion and it was a mess. Bfa reworked it again a d now it’s in a way better state but it still needs alot of work. So if they brought back a spec they took out and changed it up then of course it’s going to take awhile before they get it right.
The rest of that reply of yours is focused on adding a 4th spec to the class.
Why add this into that?
You said “Fight for the 4th spec but the whole “Ranged survival blah blah” need to stop. Yeah frost DK’s got 2h back but thats not reworking an entire spec again for the 3rd time.”
So…we are fighting for a 4th spec, but you want us to stop with the “ranged SV blah blah” and provide feedback towards current SV(melee), but reworking SV for a 3rd time isn’t the same as simply adding an option for 2h frost DK.
Okay? This sentence doesn’t make any sense…What’s your point there?
Why even write that?
Whether they liked it or not, we have no clue about.
They said “that it was sort of like MM but with more traps, or different arrows”. The most likely reason they took it away was because they just wanted to add a melee spec to the class as that was an easy way to add more diversity(a different approach to the concept of diversity).
Would it be exactly as it was in for example MoP or WoD? No, ofc not.
For one, we no longer have a talent design where talents are shared across all specs. We need talents that are designed to further explore what a particular fantasy/theme focuses on.
As for gameplay, you could easily design the core of a modern RSV to play like it did in the past, with talents only adding to that core.