Adding a 4th spec, when Blizz cannot even properly balance the three current specs, will hurt BM and MM. RSV wouldn’t exist in a vacuum. Other specs would inevitably have time taken away from them in order for you to get what you want, and you’re being disingenuous if you claim otherwise. Therefore, you don’t care about the damage of having a 4th spec to BM or MM, and you’re doing the same thing you accused him of.
Uhm…
When it comes to balancing specs, the issue wouldn’t really be this but rather about how much focus and resources is spent on expansion-specific temporary systems containing borrowed powers. Especially considering how many there are now in SL.
If we were to go from 36 specs up to 37, or more specifically, from 3 hunter specs up to 4, this won’t magically break us. Will it have some form of impact? Yes, ofc. But in comparison, it would be a small one really.
If they add RSV as a 4th spec, we would still be more-or-less in the same place as where we are now, when it comes to balancing. Depending on where they put their focus/resources(how much) in the future.
Adding a 4th spec ofc won’t help the current situation of balancing or certain individual elements/abilities needing a redesign, but unless they actually take a step back from the focus on temporary systems and borrowed power, nothing will fix the issues with other specs.
The consequences of adding more specs/classes haven’t been a deterrent in the past for the devs, why should it suddenly be one now?
And no, it’s not the same thing btw. Not even close.
3 Likes
Some people are still frickin P.O.'ed about what happened Survival, I personally would be inclined to quit if they did that to BM. If blizz were to introduce a Hunter Tank (or Heal) it would need to be a completely new spec that didn’t remove abilities from the other specs.
Eff No to screwing with BM. DPS now. DPS FOREVAH!
1 Like
As I already said, they can’t balance the 36 specs they have, adding another makes it exponentially more difficult. And your opinion isn’t fact. The difficulty devs have had in balancing has been proven out over 17 years. This supports my stance, yours is merely feelycraft, wishful thinking.
This is a flat out lie. There is a resource cost, and adding another spec means the same amount of time now spread across 4 instead of 3 specs. It’s also beyond disingenuous to say hunters would be in the same place, and follow it with, “Depending on where they put their focus/resources(how much) in the future.” You’re regurgitating what I said, which proves my point not yours.
Other than separating druid into feral and guardian, name one time when they added another spec to an existing class. You literally know they would have to take the same hunter devs and now have them have to work on 4 specs instead of 3, which would directly hurt across the board. Unless said devs suddenly learned how to balance better than they currently do. Explosive Shot is now MM… that would require change. Lock and Load is now MM… that would require change.
It’s exactly the same, you want what you want, and to hell with the cost to the other specs.
You’re talking as if adding a 37th spec would suddenly break everything…
If you have proof/data to back up your claim of how bad it will be, provide it. Otherwise yours isn’t more of a fact than anything else.
Also worth pointing out is that for a lot, it’s blatantly obvious how the devs aren’t even focusing that much on attempts at balancing. It’s not about how they “can’t” do it, but more about how after a certain point, they don’t even bother trying.
We’ve never had perfect balance in this game, not even close. Adding 1 more spec to the pool won’t magically change that fact for the better, nor the worse. AGAIN, will it have an impact? Yes, sure, but not nearly as much as you’re implying.
It’s not, because you’re assuming that the amount of time the devs sink into a particular spec each expansion/patch/etc. is a constant…
There are MANY variables that determine where resources are diverted, and how much time is spent on a particular part of the game.
I didn’t say that…
No, because I wasn’t talking about the specs themselves…
This wasn’t what I was comparing between myself and Metroîd. Nor should it have been for you…
Do I disagree with your notion that adding a 4th spec to the class would severely impact balancing etc.? Yes.
Do I disagree with your notion that it would have some form of impact? No.
Metroîd is dismissing the arguments and explanations for why it’s justified to bring RSV back based on his personal way of playing the game, a way which in realistic terms does not even focus on the actual design of the class, and what it intends for the class to be like.
Comparing that to what I do when I disagree with you about the impact on balancing another spec would have vastly different to the above.
2 Likes
Sure, right after you provide proof that adding another spec won’t impact the current specs.
This is blatantly false. The only way this is true is if Blizz hired/added another dev to the hunter class. Otherwise, and far more likely, the current hunter dev(s) would have to do more work, thereby devoting less time to the current specs to work on RSV.
Lastly, you can tell yourself you’re different than Metroid, but you and Bepples are just like him. You just happen to do it for RSV as opposed to MSV.
I think that makes it pretty clear that he isn’t claiming it won’t impact current specs.
3 Likes
I’m not sure how much clearer I can be about this…
Here it is again.
I’m NOT saying that it won’t impact the other specs.
I’m saying that the impact it has won’t be as severe as you’re making it out to be, because you’re looking at it the wrong way(partially).
Eh…no, it isn’t.
Can you honestly say that they spent the same amount of time on Survival, going into Shadowlands, as they did with Marksmanship? Or Survival, going into BfA?
Both specs got things added to the game with re-purposed lego effects, soulbinds, conduits, and what not.
However, Marksmanship got a partial redesign to it’s core playstyle, along with several talent redesigns.
Meanwhile, Survival had some numbers tuning to a select few talents, that’s it.
Does that sound equal to you?
Let’s go back even further…
Going into BfA, Beast Mastery saw very few changes altogether.
Marksmanship saw quite an extensive overhaul from it’s Legion-iteration.
Survival also saw many many changes, to the point of a partial overhaul as well(and as a reminder, going into SL, Survival saw no mechanical changes whatsoever, just some numbers tuning).
I ask again, do you honestly think that the amount of time they divert to a particular spec each expansion is a constant? Or is it moreso the fact that they divert time and resources to where they think it’s needed, and how much depends on what they think is needed?
You do know that there aren’t any “Hunter devs” but only “class devs” who work on several classes and specs simultaneously?
There’s no “Hunter guy” who only works on hunters…
I’m tired of you trying to tell other people their opinion is wrong, while at the same time basing it off of your opinion. The above is nothing but conjecture and your opinion. You’re not a dev, and therefore you don’t get to decide how it is or is not looked at.
That isn’t the point, and I think you know that which means you’re being purposefully obtuse. I’ll dumb this down… Hunter devs have “X” time to work on specs. There are currently 3 specs. The devs may not (and probably don’t) spend an even amount of time per spec. I’ve never said that, and it’s irrelevant to the point. They still only have “X” time. Adding a 4th spec inevitably means less time on the other 3 specs. It’s simple math, and not really hard to follow.
Now I know you’re being purposefully dense. This is completely irrelevant to the point. Unless they hire or add more devs (which I already discussed and you just ignored because you can’t counter it) those people still only have “X” time to work on specs. Adding a spec means less time on the existing specs. Again, this is logic a child could follow.
All I’ve done is disagreeing with some of your claims, and also explained/argued why that is the case…
That’s not the same thing.
Jesus…
Whether the amount of time they have in total is enough or not is determined by what they think is needed. It’s determined by the variables.
This includes class/spec development as well. If they think that they need more resources to get all wanted class changes into the game within a certain timeframe, then they will do what’s required to meet that timeframe. Or, they will prioritize and then follow up on smaller issues at a later stage.
You also have the fact of how “timeframe” in itself isn’t a constant/absolute either. This was proven once again by how they delayed the launch of SL because some things weren’t ready. Ofc many things still weren’t ready by launch but…they prioritized what they thought was the most critical.
You’re arguing that 37 specs = more than 36 specs and therefor each spec would be worse off. That’s not accurate, in context, because they aren’t hard-locked into working within a specific timeframe, nor are they restricted to a constant amount of resources. These things can change depending on what they deem necessary…
And yes, you did mention this yourself:
Which I did not counter because you literally pointed out why your argument does not hold up, why it’s a moot point really.
2 Likes
And you think adding yet another spec will not lead to it taking more time??? You can’t be this naive.
I don’t think you understand what exponentially means.
Exactly why it wouldn’t be considered exponentially btw. 
While your logic isn’t technically wrong at surface level, I think we could all agree it has less to do with how much resources they have for Hunter and more to do with how much they care about Hunter. Most “problems” in WoW are not from of a lack of resources. Small indie company is literally a meme. They have the resource just not the will.
5 Likes
Can you please stop trying to put words in my mouth?
I never said anything like this.
If they stick with current resources and expected timeframes, and if they are unwilling to also let go of this massively disproportionate liking of temporary systems and borrowed powers, we will most certainly continue to have the issues we can already see with the class, and with other classes as well. 4th spec or not…
One thing is for certain, if they continue to focus more on borrowed powers and expansion specific systems than they do on the base classes themselves, you/we will never see any real improvements to what you’re after. Because in this setting, that would be well beyond unrealistic, if not impossible.
4 Likes
I will say this @Metroîd , you do seem to be sincere however ignorant in that video, meaning not a deliberate troll.
[/quote] Saying what you don’t want to hear isn’t trolling. Its not even bad trolling.
Guess I never played the spec before :^) oof
I feel like the irony here is loud enough to shatter glass.
10/10 Im glad the forums have never changed. Im not reading the rest too long, so im happy for you on whatever it was or sorry for whatever hurt.
Literally only people on the forums or facebook (and that one is a stretch as its rare) ever complain about SV not being ranged. Then again the forums are where people go to complain about literally anything so.
so i feel like you either didnt read the original post or elected to read only the title and type that.
BM spec should not be a tank spec, ever. Potential touch-ups here and there not withstanding, it is perfect the way it is.
Fine Il settle for MM for tank spec. Good idea.
Yeahhh but posting on an alt with a post that is clearly intended to make it look like it was someone else is pretty trolly.
Like, you’re welcome to the idea and all, and people are free to agree or disagree with it. But there’s no need to mislead people, right?
3 Likes
Well okay you got me there. I knew nobody would buy it.
I think you misunderstood what I said there.
I meant that by the sound of it, in that video, you do really seem genuine, like you actually want to learn/understand why other players disagree with what you say about the topic of RSV.
In some ways that is. By this I also mean that in other parts of the video you come off as someone with a strong opinion about how similar the specs were, and you’re not even willing to listen to players who explain that the era you’re referring to the most, meaning pre-WotLK, isn’t relevant to the topic of RSV. In some ways, even WotLK isn’t that relevant as there were no dedicated core specs in that expansion. Those came later…
You said in the video that you started playing your hunter 14 years ago. And that you’ve always played Survival.
You started the video by saying that Survival has always been a melee spec yet before cataclysm, there wasn’t even a spec called Survival, only a talent category. And this category did not provide the class with a way to become a melee hunter by the intent of the design. It only added to the core functions of the class as a whole, those being primarily focused on ranged combat. And anything melee-related found in this category was designed for situational use only.
The core spec they introduced in Cata certainly wasn’t a melee-spec, it specifically focused on the ranged elements tied to it’s particular theme and fantasy, along with traps. It included abilities such as Explosive Shot along with optional talents like Black Arrow and more, with additional improvements to Serpent Sting etc.
So when you say that Survival was always a melee spec, is it really that hard to understand how others might think that you’re misinformed about the actual history? This also being the reason as to why you come off as ignorant.
Meaning? By all means, explain…
Case-in-point.
Did you quote the wrong segment or?
How is this relevant to what you quoted?
This right here, posts like these are what makes people think of you as a forum troll…
2 Likes
Spurgs. Spurgs everywhere.