I’ll never stop posting about ranged survival until they bring it back or I die.
10 Likes
I’ll never stop posting until I die or Blizzard responds to the RSV complaints.
I’m pretty certain I will die first.
Seriously, have they said anything at all since the “Let’s Talk” threads three years ago?
3 Likes
From what I recall, Feral being able to tank and DPS within the same spec was creating issues on the design side of things. Which makes sense since a buff or nerf to one could affect the other if done carelessly. The same principle would have likely applied to new abilities/cooldowns. As such, I’d argue the change was done for utilitarian reasons rather than playstyle or fantasy.
All this sounds like is that those suggestions would require a lot of work to make them feel different/unique compared to existing specs within those particular classes.
Indeed. I was responding to someone who was attempting to downplay them as minor variations of existing specs, when in reality there’s more to it than that.
Much of the core theme/fantasy of the old SV and many of the required abilities/effects tied to it, are already in the game files. It has already been developed once before.
This is a fair point. I’m sure you can redistribute certain skills to make melee survival and ranged survival their own things.
The point we are trying to make is…why?
Personally? With all the stuff that has been cut from WoW during development (Azjol Nerub, the Neptulon Raid, the tons of things cut from WoD, to name a few) combined with Blizzard’s attempts to shorten the time between expansions, time is not on their side. There’s also the resources angle, because while the Feral split had a reason to happen, adding back a deleted hunter spec needs a really good reason with a very clear benefit to justify it.
This is why I mentioned than you’d need to have it be the selling point of something, and the only thing that makes sense to me would be to sell an expansion on expanding the current classes by giving everyone (except druids) an extra spec. This has a downside, because while hunters and a few others would benefit from that (shaman, paladins, mages, possibly warlocks), we’ll be scraping the bottom of the barrel for the rest (Demon Hunters, Death Knights, Priests, Warriors, Rogues and Monks) because they have little to no room for growth in terms of concept.
What if WoW dies 1st?
I used to love RSV, my old main used to swap between that and LW MM all the time as my two favorite specs in the game and I hate that it was taken. While I did really want a Melee spec at the time I expected it to be BM with a Rexar like play style.
That said I think it’s too late to change MSV back, If anything people should be asking for a new spec that brings back the fantasy they miss for RSV.
That is what people are asking for.
5 Likes
This would be an issue for any spec that contains multiple different playstyles/themes. The role-part, doesn’t actually matter there.
For example, would you say that the merge of Assassination and Subtlety for Rogues is warranted? I mean, both are dual weapon-based melee specs relying on combo points and energy. Sure, they have some different mechanics and interactions but, you can just put the core of Subtlety in as talented options for Assa.
Or, let’s take Warlocks. Isn’t it about time that we merge Destruction with Affliction? Just give Destruction the core DoT-abilities from Aff as talents and it’s all good.
I’m sure those former specs could still be sufficiently explored in full(and properly balanced) if made part of other existing specs.
And while were at it, let’s do the same for Mages as well. Let’s merge Fire and Frost. Heck, Mages even had Frostfire Bolt a while back. No need for Fireball or Frost Bolt to even exist anymore really…
(No, I’m not serious here, not even close. Just making a point.)
My link in the reply further up would be one way to do it. Would it be perfect for everyone? Most likely not.
But it would make for a modern version of RSV which still resembles what the old RSV was all about.
They have claimed that they are shifting away from that philosophy. That things should come out when they are done.
Any reason why we shouldn’t hold them to that? I’d rather take things that are well developed, well designed and unbroken but it takes a bit longer to make that happen, as opposed to much of what we’ve seen for several expansions now.
I mentioned several justified reasons in my previous reply. Not to mention what a lot of others have said as well.
Fair enough if that’s how you see it. But like I said earlier, adding in an extra spec isn’t an “all or nothing-deal”.
It doesn’t have to be all classes at once or none at all.
It should be based on individual classes, what is missing from them. What strengths could be argued are missing for a particular class. What weaknesses.
And so on…
1 Like
We currently have a similar case with SV though. Again, people want back ranged SV, yet others wish that they still had exclusively melee SV. Now SV is just a ranged/melee hybrid mess, and we have something that doesn’t even resemble the original ranged SV and deviates from Legion’s melee SV. A spec was completely deleted, which was the other option that Blizzard could have taken when splitting Feral, but they didn’t. So why should Feral get to keep their spec that was around since the beginning of the game by making a new spec (Guardian) but Hunters were forced to lose their spec that was around since the beginning of the game?
Again though, they already implemented the 4th spec, and that spec was melee SV in Legion. The time and resources were already spent. They just also deleted an already existing spec in the process.
There would need to be numbers tuning, but I am not convinced in any way that Blizzard doesn’t have the time nor resources to afford one spec of additional numbers tuning.
Not all that much. I posted a thread a while back about how it could be re-implemented, and aside from some new talents it wouldn’t really have to change all that much from what it was in MoP/WoD. The only thing that would require it to change is Blizzard’s desire to beat it with a stick and delete/remove things until it felt like a hallow experience just like current BM and MM.
No, it just doesn’t prove anything. It is an irrelevant observation that doesn’t contribute anything of value to the discussion.
They were designed with some melee in mind. It’s just that that melee was not the focus of the class. It was merely an aspect of the class, like traps and mana. That doesn’t mean that we should also have a spec that doesn’t use ranged weapons or pets and instead fights exclusively by dropping traps on enemies in melee range.
1 Like
In general, how do you feel about the balance of the classes right now? Warcraftlogs says Survival Hunters are the least represented spec right now, and are there any concerns about some classes or specs?
Ion : Overall I think we are satisfied with balance. There is always people who perceive themselves on the lower end, and no matter how good the balance is, no matter how tight the difference gap between the specs, probably lower is always going to feel frustrating about that, and people are going to be vocal about it. We understand that, but I think it is an ongoing process. We are never just sitting back and saying: “ Alright, we are done. It’s ok if some specs fall behind. ”
Representation doesn’t necessarily matter as much, I think. We knew with Survival Hunter that we were making a niche spec. It is a melee spec for a class that has traditionally being range. I think that a lot of existing hunters, they are all hunters because they want to be a range class, and so we don’t necessarily expect them or want them to feel like they should be changing; but for new players picking up that class, it is an intriguing option; and we have seen a lot of Survival Hunters doing extremely well at very high levels of play. So the fact that they are not playing as often, I don’t think reflects upon their potential so much as it just does where the audience is at right now. That’s not much of a problem.
3 Likes
Some people sure, others are asking for MSV to be removed
I think that is a very accurate depiction of where sv hunter is right now. The spec is fun and strong in pvp. I’ll report back when I cap this hunter and go into some m+.
Of course some of the hunters who picked the class for ranged only won’t appreciate the niche, and some will be salty from losing rsv, but ultimately the spec does hold it’s own and can compete.
Sv brought me back to hunter which I hadn’t played since vanilla-cata. I run improved ss, guerrilla tactics and wildfire infusion so the ranged aspects of the spec really shine when I’m on the move. Being able to kite away from other melee or deadzone them while keeping pressure and uptime is a huge advantage.
Overall I think sv is in a good spot right now. It’s not broken op and it’s not weak either. Feels pretty well rounded and definitely underrated/underrepresented. Aoe in pve is probably the most clunky aspect but a talent change and some haste can fix that like other classes.
2 Likes
Very cool, but the current state of melee SV couldn’t be less relevant to the problem of ranged SV being removed. Melee SV could be the best spec in the game and it wouldn’t matter. Ranged SV shouldn’t have been deleted just to allow it to exist. Blizzard should have implemented it as a fourth Hunter spec or a spec in a new class. Under no circumstances should a spec be removed from the game.
10 Likes
How many times do you need to be told you don’t get to determine what is and is not the focus of the class. Hunters were designed to use both ranged and melee…hunters, not just SV. So if Blizz wants one of the specs to focus on melee you don’t get to come along and say melee was never a part of being a classic hunter.
2 Likes
When did anyone say melee wasn’t part of the class? Can you point out who said that cause I’ll wait.
Maybe reading isn’t one of your strong suits… The iteration of ranged SV that the few people who spam these forums want doesn’t include melee. And if you think hunter is getting a 4th spec while DH currently has 2, you’re delusional.
So, you gonna answer the question or dodge like anything you just said has anything to do with you saying people have said melee was never part of being a hunter?
1 Like
I never said it wasn’t a part of it. I said that it wasn’t a focus of the Hunter class. How many times does it need to be explained to you that Hunters are ranged at their core? Melee abilities and attacks did not define the Hunter class. Blizzard eventually acknowledged this by removing them outright. But new Blizzard, who doesn’t understand the Hunter class nor know how to design it as is evident with BM and MM, deleted Survival and replaced it with a warrior spec.
How about this. If you are arguing that this spec belongs in the Hunter class because Hunters had some melee attacks in the past, then by the exact same logic only melee attacks we had in the past should exist in it. Harpoon, Wildfire Bomb, Carve, Flanking Strike, and the modern design of Mongoose Bite never existed in the game. So if you want to prove that you are right, then show me where in WoW Classic those abilities existed in the Hunter class. If you can’t do that, then by your own logic, the current iteration of SV doesn’t deserve to exist.
5 Likes
So Blizzard knows what they’re doing when it suits your needs, but they’re inept when the decision they make isn’t one you like. Got it… this is an argument a 5 year old would make.
1 Like
For years we used both melee and ranged weps. Melee was always part of hunter. SV was reworked to use melee as a primary since the talent and weapon system changed making sv and mm too similar in blizzard’s eyes.
Bliz is happy with the niche and change along with many others. It’s a hybrid spec, it’s not even a true melee. I mean look at our talents. It’s hard to say it’s focus is melee when more than half our kit is focused on ranged attacks and traps.
The majority of our tiers offer enhancements to our ranged abilities which is the fundamental set up and pressure in our kit. Eagle converts mongoose into a ranged attack. The current iteration is actually keeping the melee aspect of hunter alive. Hunters had the deadzone and had to rely on melee for some situations. Now that the deadzone is gone and talents are the way they are, if sv was changed back to ranged than all melee aspects would be gone and clearly that’s not blizzard’s vision of the class they created.
They are obviously not going to create an entire new class that mimics hunter just for a melee option, and if they made another ranged sv spec as the 4th they’d have to build it from the ground up otherwise they’d run into the same issue that caused the change in the first place. It’s not realistic.
In the end there will always be those who lobby to go backwards, the dk forums are full of people wanting blood dps back. The same is true of others. What matters most is that the current spec performs and fills it’s niche well. Sv does that and is fun to boot.
Do you completely live under a rock? Does the word ‘Activision’ mean anything to you? Why do you think the game has taken a nose dive? Why do you think so many long time developers and blue posters quit? Do you really think that current Blizzard is identical to the Blizzard of Cataclysm and prior? Are you that naive?
But how about you actually respond to my proposition? Here, I’ll post it again for you:
Can you do that? Yes or no.
What issue? Ranged SV was loved and played in Vanilla through WoD. They could literally just copy paste MoP Survival, tune its damage, and call it a day.
Isn’t that exactly what Darkeforge is doing though? Claiming that since Hunter had melee attacks in the past that therefore SV should be deleted and replaced with a melee spec? You can’t have your cake and eat it too. Is the Hunter class moving forward or going backwards? You have to pick one, and neither of them favor deleting ranged SV for the sake of what is essentially a warrior spec to replace it.
4 Likes