Sure, but it would still be a magic based DPS class and not a physical DPS spec. It would need to be magic based to differentiate itself from MM, otherwise the design would be really redundant with MM.
It is considered a physical dps, just like warrior and rogue.
This is not even remotely correct, RSV and MM did not play similarly at all. One was like a turret and one was very mobile.
3 Likes
Its literally the meme of why it was made fully melee again in the first place. It was too similar to MM that even about half the hunter population stake this claim.
1 Like
No i didnt play similarly at all sorry if you think so youre just trolling
4 Likes
MM and SV, along with BM, all played identically in Classic and BC barring some passive differences (e.g. BM got +20% attack speed in BC while the other specs didn’t). After that point they reliably and consistently diverged in playstyle and identity each expansion. Some people (such as the lead game developer Ion Hazzikostas) claim they started different and got more similar over time, but we call them stupid people. The divergence of the Hunter specs over time is objective fact.
By WoD the differences were substantial. There were still identifiable similarities (e.g. every spec having a short-cooldown signature: Kill Command, Chimera Shot, Explosive Shot) + elements shared by the base class like Deterrence and traps but they had recognisably different styles.
We can debate until the end of time whether they were different enough. They were certainly closer to each other than modern specs, but the standard of spec differentiation back then was lower than it is now. We can also debate whether that’s a bad thing, because while we want different styles of play from specs they’re also part of the same base class and identity so they really should be sharing at least some elements.
What’s always missed, though, is whether the approach they took was the right one. Melee SV fans will say that the specs were too similar and that melee was the way to fix it. Putting aside whether there wasn’t enough distinction, let’s accept that as true for a moment. Why, then, couldn’t they just iterate further on SV as a ranged spec?
I was going to write more than this but it’s already going off-topic so I’ll leave it at that. Given how melee SV has turned out, what we lost to get it, and the fact that the specs diverged significantly each expansion, why was making SV melee the correct choice?
5 Likes
P.S. Focusing on the apparent similarity between MM and SV is a red flag that exposes inexperience with pre-Legion Hunters. By WoD, SV and BM were far closer in their gameplay than SV and MM. They both had a 6 second signature, they were fully mobile and lacking casts outside of Cobra Shot, they were both more characterised by sustained damage rather than cooldown burst, and the pace of the specs was similar.
The reason people focus on MM and SV is because they either didn’t play Hunter back then or don’t remember, so they focus on the outwardly obvious thematic differences instead. They notice that BM was highly centred around pets while MM and SV were largely independent of pets, so they irrationally fixate on that.
Yes, this includes the Blizzard developers as well. In Legion they put someone in charge of class design that was so genuinely and helplessly incompetent that he was shuffled off to Hearthstone development before that expansion was over and they’ve basically been dealing with his mess all across class design ever since.
6 Likes
It’s been 8 years of you writing essays, acting like you know better than everyone else (including the developers), and continuing to smugly assert, incorrectly I might add, how much better you understand the Hunter class than everyone else, developers included.
Get some therapy my guy.
8 Likes
I played Hunter at max level just one expansion before Leg and Bepples has earned every possible award. The only time I’ve seen post-Leg successful was when it can stay ranged the longest time, whether we’re talking 9.2 or 10.1. I have personal in-game friends who can tell you how amazed they were that I could spam nades. I’m actually pleased that the grenadier gameplay is picking up.
But the idea was that we lost Deterrence and other nifty core SV abilities, to mention we also lost a lot of core BM Aspects. My main argument since Leg was that MSV failed in its range type as a melee. Every other melee spec kicked its can. Unfortunately the weird mad scientist gene-splicing chimaera project of MM taking in RSV was largely a failure also. I will argue that, especially after having looked at both talent trees in Cata, MM and SV are completely different ranged plays.
BM would have been the best spec to go the melee way, as pets themselves are melee-oriented and people who handle animals need to have a certain closeness with them. Not to mention that BM is the more “Druidy” spec that seeks to adopt and attune to the ways of animals more. It would have been a better way to make BM a melee spec that can still do some things at range.
But SV has always been supposed to be a TRAPPER that uses improvised weapons and accents of the environment, while all of the archery mastery then goes to MM. SV and MM would never find itself in melee if it need not be, but a BM need not fear melee with a trusty beast.
The developers should design the specs congruently with this.
1 Like
My ideal version of Survival did very well for many years. The developer’s ideal version of Survival isn’t even decided and their attempts to find it have all been flops.
So, yeah, evidently I do understand the class better than the developers 
2 Likes
I just dusted off my hunter for season 2 yesterday and I can say without a doubt that SV is better in 10.1. The no CD SV build blasts surprisingly hard and is pretty damn fun.
1 Like
It would take a couple of semester hours to get it, I think. Freshman orientation would be harder to get through than learning the Hunter class and its history. I’ve seen a lot of Gucci SV talent designs and ideas from people here on the forums already. It makes what Blizzard did with post-Leg SV look lazy, even if I liked WFB.
A modder team of such could collaborate and revive the class, even for free(or for comps, such as free food, lodging, and other goodies). Better that this would happen for Retail than for a private server…
1 Like
So well it was only popular for a patch
You know as much as any youtuber promoting their own crypto
LOL YOU CANT EVEN TELL REALITY FROM A JOKE POST.
yes I meant that screaming because the sheer amount of delusion here is more unhinged that the alphabet mob on twitter.
7 Likes
Cool! I’m currently at ilv 439 and I’m managing to get an overall of 125~150k. Getting much more damage than other classes with the same ilv including meta class.
I still lack the BIS trinkets
2 Likes
Yeah SV is doing noticeably well compared to msny of my other toons, and since dusting mine off I’ve even seen a few people talk about rerolling to one or mention friends who have.
Anecdotal I know but for me its cool to see people actually want to play the spec, and its in a much better place now.
Also, nice - keep up the good work! You’re doing great haha.
1 Like
The point he’s making is that the class focuses on ranged damage through the use of a weapon(gun/bow/xbow), unlike a mage/lock who relies solely on channeling magic. And like he said, lore or ingame design doesn’t support the idea that we as hunters are actually channeling magic to any larger degree. More so, our non-physical attacks are classed as such(magical) due to necessities of game design limitations rather than anything that has to do with class lore.
Regardless, your statement that a second hunter spec that focuses primarily on the weapon has to be designed around magic in order to stand on its own only proves that you fail to understand what the primary intent with class specializations is, and how it applies to specific design elements.
1 Like
But that’s now what the RSV people ask for would be. It would be focusing on ranged damage through magical DoTs, explosions, etc.
what do you think wailing arrow is? what do you think black arrow was?
you’re really trying to sound smart here and I can appreciate that but you’re not really saying anything? RSV would not be a physical focused ranged damage dealer.
the current iteration RIGHT NOW is the mixed arsenal explosive experts people are asking for. current MM right now is the ammunitions physical ranged damage dealer people are asking for.
2 Likes
This is pedantry. The important point is obviously the use of a physical ranged weapon (i.e. bows, crossbows, guns) which makes it stylistically and even mechanically different to other ranged DPS which are all traditional casters.
As for whether MM fits it: it doesn’t. It’s still more focused around, as the name states, expertise of ranged weaponry. Aimed Shot and Rapid Fire aren’t elements that fit well either aesthetically or mechanically with what ranged SV was or what people want from it.
I like MM for what it is, but people want more exploration of ranged weapon concepts than cramming everything into one spec. We don’t do that with melee specs or casters. No one says Arms and Fury are redundant because they’re both rage-based weapon masters, and no one says Affliction and Destruction are redundant because they’re both demonic fel magic users. They have important distinctions and their existence improves the exploration of their class concepts. It’s only Hunters that get held to this different standard, and only ranged weapons which are apparently considered to be so devoid of flavour and depth that they only deserve one specs (and maybe a half more with BM who’s use of a ranged weapon is almost merely incidental). It’s not a fair standard.
We used to have SV as a ranged spec and, contrary to misinformed belief, it did a good job at providing additional depth in ranged weapon exploration. The class would be much better served if SV were a ranged spec that focused on different elements of ranged weapon themes and gameplay. We know that because ranged SV worked out really well while melee SV did not. It would have taken far less effort to just iterate on SV as a ranged spec, and even now so many years later it would still be good for the class because it would always require less maintenance and attention than melee SV while avoiding the issues with balance and appeal.
1 Like
You ask what someone wants from RSV and they give you ten different answers.
You keep bringing up spec names like it has anything to do with class fantasy, design, or gamplay. MM right now has talents named Heavy Ammo, Light Ammo, Bombardment, Razor Fragments, Salvo, Serpentstalker’s Trickery, Quick Load, and Chimera Shot. These are all “use of physical ranged weapon” and very much “RSV” feeling of “munitions expert that attacks from ranged.”
Because the aforementioned specs all use different things. You brought up Fury (dual wield) and Arms (one weapon). You brought up Destruction (in your face fire and fel magic) with Affliction (all shadowy and draining magic). The four examples you listed very visually distinct from a silhouette perspective (very important to the devs as theyve mentioned a thousand times before). MM and RSV have a very similar profile (person stands from far away and shoots bow) without any sort of visual flair. BM gets a pass as it had a giant pet and has two pets from 2016 forward.
It really didn’t though. It’s whole shtick can easily (and currently) fits into MM.
What are you trying to say here? Ranged specs still require maintenance and attention. Look at all the people begging and pleading for BM/MM talent reworks, buffs, and raid utility. Your bias is really stopping you from seeing the forest for trees, champ
2 Likes
I mean that isn’t saying much considering the performance of the other specs.
1 Like
And? I’m not quite sure what you’re trying to say here. A lot of the back and forth replies ITT a month and a half ago were saying SV would never be stronger than BM/MM because of its design when that’s been false 75% of the last 4 patches in the game. I was saying that would be the case again, and it was. 
2 Likes