Now, to be fair, I consider, say, MoP RSV and late-WoD RSV pretty different, but in the latter case it doesn’t seem difficult to replicate the button-pressing involved there with a choice node and the occasional selection between talents / talent-paths not synergetic with each other (so you take one or the other).
WoD RSV was, what…
18s(?) DoT on a 24s, to be used whenever available,
Complexity: Don’t use on something about to die. Be able to see your cooldowns.
6s DoT on a 10s CD, with bonus free charges as long as you followed step 1,
Complexity: Don’t use on something about to die. Be able to see your cooldowns.
Kill Shot when able,
Complexity: Be able to see when it saturates and when it comes off cooldown.
Fill with generic spender until you would otherwise be reduced below 25 Focus, or 55 Focus if adds are about to spawn in order to use it when they appear, and
Fill with generic builder to stay above the aforementioned thresholds?
Modern MM’s core rotation isn’t a hell of a lot more complex, to be fair, but for that reason, too, you can pretty easily swap out the 24s use-on-refresh CD for the 20s use-on-refresh CD and have moved only from the target needing at least ~12s of life left to be worth casting to needing at least 2s of life left.
Similarly, one could have a choice node between Precise Shots and, say, Honed Fire (each [normally] instant shot decreases the cast time of your next Aimed Shot by .33s), move Serpentstalker much further up in place of some current bloat-talent, give the ability to spend more than one point towards Lock and Load (perhaps allowing it a change from DoT ticks, allowing for funnel damage — which RSV particularly didn’t have anyways, since its proccers were CD-locked, but would have fit it) and/or compliment with a further Hunter’s Advantage talent (perhaps replacing Lethal Shots) to give Aimed Shot a chance to refund charge time based on DoT damage dealt to the target (counter reset with each AiS), and a second point on or below Serpentstalker’s Trickery to allow it to apply via every attack (though perhaps with split duration after 2 targets in the case of Multi-Shot).
At that point, you’re again hypermobile, automatically and immediately DoT-applying, and following basically the same APL as before, but with a powerful opening shot and the ability to choose between a truly instant shot or just one that costs no excess GCD time. The only change is that your 10s CD does single target damage and (a bleed and) poison DoT instead of single-target damage and a fire DoT, and you get your resets from your DoT applications —plural— instead of a single DoT application that’s already CD-locked.
Sick and tired, atm, so I’ve doubtless made some typos and whatnot there, but, the gist of it is that I just don’t really see RSV as being more easily integrated into MSV or BM than into MM. MM’s already functionally quite close in its core kit. If this were XIV, one would have just reskinned the actions and called it a day — RSV secured.
The “problem” was solved when they added Death Knights, Monks, and Demon Hunters. They did not need to also take a Hunter spec and then make the only added ranged class a nonsense compromise with one of the specs being a bothersome support spec instead of a real DPS.
So why change it to melee when inevitably that would lead to most of the class abandoning it?
If the pet was the important part more people would play SV.
You know it’s not a binary “good” and “bad” representation. The representation can still be good without being the best.
Ranged SV is by far a more common request.
You don’t see the likes of Liquid Maximum and Preach Gaming advocating for melee BM, but you do see them talking up ranged SV.
And yet it’s still a smaller difference than that between a ranged weapon and a melee weapon.
That’s not just a cosmetic fantasy difference and I’ve never met anyone else delusional enough to try to portray it as such. It’s a critical difference in capability.
So what would a failed spec rework look like in your eyes? How few people would have to play it before people could reasonably call it a failure?
Yes, with a borrowed power set bonus that had a PTR value left on making it the most overpowered DPS spec in the game by a mile (or at least on par with the similarly broken Destruction) that also obliterated the spec’s gameplay flow and playstyle in favour of Wildfire Bomb spam and proc fishing.
Is that what it takes to make people play melee SV? Because that’s not somtehing that can realistically stay in the game.
It doesn’t. You can still have a fun gameplay from a priority system with some damage cooldowns. People have had fun playing the same spec design in other tiers. The primary issue right now is there are too many downsides v.s. BM with no upsides.
The problem here is you’re assuming people want a carbon copy of ranged SV from 2014 with no updates, no further depth, and no more exploration of the archetype.
Legion got a lot of things wrong with class design but one thing it got right is it increased the depth and customisability of every spec. We went from a talent system that was classwide with limited spec-specific options to each spec getting its own talents and abilities. The amount of spec-specific mechanics skyrocketed.
In an alternate universe where ranged SV remained, it would have seen a Legion rework just like every other spec. It would have kept some basic building blocks like Explosive Shot as a signature and Lock and Load as a proc mechanic, but it would have seen an influx of unique talents and mechanics plus further iteration of existing ones. For example, at the end of WoD there was a borrowed power from the Archimonde trinket that made Black Arrow have a cooldown reset mechanic. This meant you could Black Arrow multiple targets when it procced (and when you had the focus), meaning more Lock and Load procs and more funnelling into single target with Explosive Shot. A hypothetical Legion ranged Survival would have definitely had something like that as a core mechanic. WoD also ditched a new Lock and Load charge system in beta (likely when they made the final behind-the-scenes decision to abandon ranged SV), as well as an abandoned spec-specific cooldown.
It might sound like it would have been a lot of work, but funnily enough it would have taken far less effort than what they ultimately went with and it also would have produced a far better and more widely enjoyed result.
So it’s not enough to go through MM’s talent tree and replace talents, add toggles and stances, or whatever to have a half-baked representation of the ranged SV archetype. That means you just have a watered down fake spec with no potential for iteration and exploration. It would also likely restrict MM’s ability to iterate because they would then have to juggle all the “vanilla MM” stuff with the “fake ranged SV” stuff. This is all to protect a melee spec that most of the class doesn’t care for. It’s a nonsense so-called “compromise” where in fact only one side is doing all the compromising while the other keeps 100%. It only makes sense to people in that faction who received the mother of all preferential treatments i.e. being given someone else’s spec.
to add something new to the class besides another mobile rdps hope this helps
you didnt answer my question lol do people chose to play bm because of the pets or choose to play bm because of…barbed shot and cobra shot?
im waiting for you to define what acceptable representation is? every time I ask you say “well whatever survival is 1% so it’s bad”
so?
something that doesn’t functionally work?
something they need to rework every other patch (shadow priest, for example)
yes people tend to play DPS that does high damage, hope this helps. isn’t this why you say MM has low player base now?
not what I’ve heard, but anecdotes
how is this a bad take? people keep asking for hyper mobile ranged dps specs. do you think they’d include hyper mobile 40y specs? feel like more 25y specs is a great way to introduce more ranged weapon specs that you claim to care about. DH could get a bow using spec from 25y, rogue could, etc
We didn’t want this though, we were enjoying our ranged damage spec that wasn’t as focused on the pet as bm was and instead was more focused on what we were doing
Hasn’t msv had a change almost every expansion? I regularly see people asking for the Legion playstyle of it for example
RSV was popular even when it wasn’t the top dps though and most classes don’t have to have one spec be astronomically higher in dps in order to gain some play
We’re asking for one spec, range survival. Playing a ranged class that is significantly less ranged than other ones doesn’t feel good in my opinion. Honestly I feel like we could take the playstyle of msv and put it on dh as a third spec and it would work. But again, as fun as more ranged specs would be, what we really want and are asking for is for ranged survival to return
every spec in the game has received a change almost every expansion?? what are you trying to say here lol. are you trying to say it’s been reworked every expansion? I’ve told you this before, it’s the same since bfa
I think you’re confusing MM here
can you source me on this? i’d be interested in seeing RSV being the most played when it wasn’t much stronger than BM
Not assuming that at all, no, only that if —per the post I was replying to— choice nodes, and perhaps talent shuffles, would be permitted (and necessary even to make for a good RSV in its own SV tree) anyways, that MM’s core seems plenty flexible to those demands. The big change is just… having a second charge on your 10s CD baseline (instead of only on procs).
Don’t get me wrong; I would have loved to see this — it would have saved me from having to play Legion MM.
But… if it takes a borrowed power giving a chance at reset to your 24s-ish CD (change that to 20 and it still sounds so new and unfamiliar, surely) to reach complexity beyond hitting your CDs on CD (and maybe storing up to ~50 Focus before fresh adds and a Focus-spending CD together)… that doesn’t signal a need for immense expansive space. That’s… a single, and rather generic, talent.
Which is not to say that singular talents can’t make a world of difference. Anger Management Fury can pretty different from Reckless Abandon Fury, as can Annihilator Fury from builds that avoid that talent. Certain borrowed powers, such as to entice a full-cast Pyroblast… really changed things up for a bit.
But by that same token… even if I add another 10 layers of complexity to RSV… it’s difficult to imagine it (A) gaining new palpable gameplay options for itself or MM from being split completely apart or —especially if the “MM” thematic thread of ranged weapons/technique usage and “RSV” thematic thread of ranged weapons/technique usage were each to offer more diverse offerings than current MM— (B) MM and RSV wanting no access to the more than likely synergetic offerings of that other thread.
I’m not calling it a compromise. I don’t think I’ve ever seen it called a compromise.
It’s just that anything that could make the theme/aesthetic of RSV (or that of single-target MM, for that matter) more mechanically interesting than hitting CDs on CD (and some occasional prepositioning, in the latter’s case) would be wholly new anyways and would more than likely synergize with the opposite theme here and there, to the point that they’re better off able to tap into each other as one wants, rather than having an equivalent of separate specs for big pet attacks and another for summoning additional beasts.
Tangent: I also think BM should have a lot more thematic and gameplay breadth than it currently has. It, too, seems a wasted opportunity to build out multiple threads interestingly and let them interact in yet more interesting ways.
I mean, true, and it would offer greater diversity to DH than MSV would, but… let’s face it, MSV is the easier sell — even if pretty redundant with current Havoc. (DH-MSV would probably have to be more skewed towards chasing things down and singling things out, a balance of focus damage with broad interloping harassment.)
I wouldn’t worry. They’re not getting rid of melee hunters. I miss ranged surv but am seeing more melee hunters in the wild than ever (just came back a few months ago also). Frankly it probably needs a buff. After marksman of course haha
I was thinking last night when trying out a new tactic that we were doing that for all the run in and stack on the boss crap I might as well be melee! Just a rambling rant but still… I’ve finally warmed up to melee hunters. Let’s go hunt and gather! haha
No, unless you’d say the same of BM and MM. There was Legion MSV, and then everything since.
Has it had changes? Yes, same as literally every spec of every role. But its changes since BfA are no greater (arguably less significant) than MM and BM have received.
(Though I may argue that it is the spec most prone to errors of design oversights / changes seemingly made by those who never played the spec, exempting those consequent simply to incapable coders — a la Animal Companion wrecking AMoC, etc. MM isn’t far behind in that regard though.)
“Something new” is not a good thing when it’s a poor fit for the class identity and most of the class doesn’t want it.
It’s both the ranged capability and the pet.
If BM were made melee, its playerbase would plummet just like SV.
It’s not just some cut-off of low population. It’s the consistency of SV’s unpopularity that speaks volumes.
Do you think SV’s representation now is in line with the strength of the spec in PVE content?
So ranged SV is not as outlandish a request as BM melee/tank. It’s a far more common request and it has precedent because the spec was once a successful ranged spec.
Yet another false equivalency. You do that a lot, you know. I wonder if you notice or if it’s subconscious for you.
So player adoption is not a factor at all?
MM has seen good representation without that sort of egregious overtuning.
People don’t want compromised fake ranged spec, as indicated by Max’s tweet.
Yes you are, and you do it throughout this post as well.
It’s one mechanic among many potential mechanics for ranged SV. I gave it as an example because we actually had it at the time. It’s also not generic. It would represent unique gameplay for the Hunter class.
MM got its own rework in Legion, so actually it would have been pretty easy to make SV distinct as a ranged spec.
It’s worth noting that melee SV doesn’t inherently or automatically solve these issues either. Any sort of mechanical complexity you can make up for melee SV can be applied to ranged SV, with the exception of the basic fact of having to be in melee range. Wildfire Bomb is the only part of SV’s kit with any sort of aesthetic flare and, let’s be honest, the ability that’s carried melee SV (as far as being such a consistently unpopular spec has been “carried”) in every iteration since BFA. That’s something that could not only fit ranged SV, but would thematically fit much better than melee SV.
Unless you’re specifically interested in being a melee DPS (i.e. being a handicapped Hunter), there’s no inherent value to SV being melee. And it’s abundantly clear most Hunters are not interested in being a melee DPS. Which only makes logical sense considering it’s just Hunter but worse.
It makes no sense to scrutinise ranged SV like this while giving melee SV an automatic pass.
Weird because the spec population is just as low as ever, and this isn’t something that’s up to people saying “I’m seeing them in game” but rather it’s something that’s actually tracked:
And there’s the problem: the ranged Hunter specs can fight in melee just as well. So what’s the point of melee SV?
well, it clearly works with the class identity, you just don’t like it. having 3 mobile bow users would be very, very boring.
i feel like if it had cast times, it would also plummet. the playerbase likes the melee play style
what would you call this? evasion? should each spec have 33%? is 98% player base just as alarming to you as 1%?
I don’t care about representation in the spec though. it truly does not make a difference to me
i like how you try to call out arguments you don’t like as false equivalences or deflections when you routinely don’t answer questions or make outlandlish claims like an icon has a ton of weight behind it.
a request being common doesn’t mean it’s a good request. people ask MM to have 0 cast times. is that a good request?
ignoring my response lol. i don’t think player adoption is as much of an important factor as you do clearly.
no it hasnt. the only time it’s played more than BM is when it’s more OP than BM
you didn’t answer my question again
it sounds like the easiest solution would be a penalty for rdps being in melee.
Unless you’re specifically interested in being a fettered to a pet (i.e. being a handicapped Hunter)…
Unless you’re specifically interested in being a weighed down by cast-times (i.e. being a handicapped Hunter)…
Unless you’re specifically interested in forgoing shorter CDs, greater mobility, more layer burst profiles that leave one less able to have something for each situation by insisting on ranged capacity even when you it comes at no advantage (i.e. being a handicapped Hunter)…
They're trade-offs.
__________
A lack of range never comes without some sort of compensation, or the spec/build flounders. The presence of cast-times never comes without some sort of compensation, or the spec/build flounders. Being forced to play around a particular area (see Consecration, Death and Decay) never comes without some sort of compensation, or the spec/build flounders.
Range does not come freely unless the game is imbalanced. It is not taken taken away without compensation unless the game is imbalanced.
These are not novel concepts.
Every challenge is room for skill expression. Actually dealing with matters of (pre-)positioning, be that by cast-times or limited range, is a challenge that easily (almost innately) interacts with large portion of surrounding kit and with the fight itself and therefore has sees frequent/broad representation.
A better question is…
If you do not want to deal with challenges in positioning, what are you willing to give up to, all else being equal, simplify your in-practice gameplay accordingly?
BM is an outlier. It is not a precedent for every future-added/changed spec being able to have unrestricted (uncapped) AoE, unrestricted movement, unrestricted range, minimal need for CD management, and an abnormally easy rotation all in one generally overpowered bundle. Else it would be a precedent for challenge, content interaction, and skill-expression just being increasingly removed from the game.
You may or may not want that, as may some ultra-casual players who want to preform less distinguishably from top players by removing what gameplay may separate them, but most will, I suspect, prefer the health of the game.
That has nothing to do with what what you’ve quoted.
I never said it did. There’s literally nothing about that in what you’ve quoted. I pointed out only that if I were to have all the coolest of RSV (guerilla warfare, hit-and-run, attrition, specialized munitions, what-have-you) talents I could imagine… I’d still rather have them able to tap into the coolest MM (sniper, big burst salvos, specialized ranged technique, what-have-you) talents I could imagine.
They seem a natural synergy, and with bloat talents stripped, there is more than enough room for both in the same tree.
Let’s put it this way:
I’d be happier with two higher-quality specs capable of real breadth and choice — say, just
Wilder (coordinating with beasts outside and within, beast-summoning, enhancing beasts, with stealth, support, or sustain through choice of beast or beast spirit) and
Ranger (technique and tools, including marksmanship, munitions, and stealth)
with incredible build freedom across varied, exciting talents) —
…than I would be three lesser-quality trees per
the current muddled and not particularly gameplay-influencing BM,
bloat-heavy MM, and
a separate RSV that follows in kind.
MSV plays literally no part in that preference. It has everything to do with RSV and what themes and functions seem synergetic to it, which has little to do with advanced pet-usage or -taming and far more to do with the elements of guerilla warfare, target-sighting, etc. that’d overlap into and from MM.
It’s been one of the most controversial pieces of its aesthetic, liked by many and hated by almost as many. And it’s not remotely what has “carried” the spec since BfA. WfB is just an AoE (with increased damage to primary target).
The talents like MB, Butchery (given FrS), WfI, and their intersections are what have “carried” the spec, and even then that “carry” is just their having made obvious the interactions across the rest of the kit that they then capitalized upon.
No, no they cannot lmao. You really still in these threads derailing any kind of enjoyment about this spec? Bruh you really need to see some sun and touch some grass, SV is fun, cry some more
I mean Survival Hunters still have Explosive Shot, Serpent Sting, and Kill Shot. I play a Survival hunter regularly and sometimes I don’t even have to go melee between those shots and my bombs and Kill Command, the mobs are already dead before I even catch up.
Maybe actually try the build before you claim it doesn’t exist.
Evidently it’s not just me who doesn’t like it and feels it doesn’t fit.
Having three ranged weapon specs would be boring to you, a melee-obsessed player, but it’s what the class had for years and it worked very well for us.
Then why don’t more people play the actual melee spec in the class?
I literally directly answered you so if you’re going to pretend I said nothing I’ll just copy-paste what I said:
It’s not just some cut-off of low population. It’s the consistency of SV’s unpopularity that speaks volumes.
This is what evasion actually looks like.
Do you think SV’s representation makes sense given its performance?
Maybe you just deflect and falsely equate a lot.
The point is that the ranged SV request has a lot more weight behind it than melee BM.
All the worst class design values stem from the foundation of “it doesn’t matter if people like it”. Hell, that goes beyond just class design and even beyond game design.
MM had good representation in Shadowlands S2. Again you’re defining “good representation” as “more representation than BM” which is a false equivalency.
It does answer your question. Is this your new bit?
There shouldn’t be compromised 25 yard ranged specs because it’s extremely bothersome and compromised from the usual 40 yard range. It’s less ranged capability than literal Vanilla ranged weapon specs. Evidently it’s controversial at best when they did it for Evoker, so it would be silly to do it again and again. That’s why you got ratio’d for your bad take.
Or they could avoid forcing an unwanted melee playstyle on the Hunter class.
These are significantly smaller compromises than a Hunter spec not being ranged so this is another dishonest false equivalency and I didn’t read the rest of this section. If the foundational premise of your upcoming wall of text is flawed I’m not engaging with the rest of it.
If the issue with ranged SV is that it doesn’t have enough trade-offs, and rotational complexity and lower burst are apparently not good enough as trade-offs for a hypothetical future ranged SV, add a couple immobile cast times for all I care.
It does. You’re implying anything they give to ranged SV could just be given to MM to create some Frankenstein’s monster of a ranged spec. MM got its own set of new mechanics and interactions in Legion that were completely separate from ranged SV. So, actually, it would have been no problem at all to maintain a third ranged spec.
If you’re going to post about why ranged SV is a bad idea, you’d better justify why melee SV is an appropriate replacement.
The rest of this section is more blabbering about how MM and ranged SV should be one combined spec, which is nonsense. Having 3 specs to explore different archetypes of ranged weapon combat is a good thing. It allows for separate design spaces and more depth in exploration of each one. Cramming everything into 2 specs, especially to make room for an unwanted melee spec, means more limited exploration of ranged weapon concepts. I suspect you didn’t start with “what would be better for ranged weapons in WoW” and arrived at “2 quality ranged specs instead of 3”, but rather you started with “what’s a more plausible defense for melee SV that isn’t outwardly advocating for taking away ranged weapon representation”.
It doesn’t matter how many people are more glued to the purely melee beastmaster aesthetic because clearly there are very few of them. Survival is a physical melee spec in a game already abundant with physical melee specs. The actual physical melee side of things is bland and generic. Besides any direct interaction with the pet (something ripped off from BM in the first place), any of those melee mechanics like Mongoose Bite could just as well fit with the Warrior aesthetic. There were never droves of people lining up to play the red-headed stepchild of physical melee specs. Rogues and Warriors existed for longer and did it better.
Wildfire Bomb is what’s unique. Aesthetically, it’s a thrown explosive which is both uniuqe and a good fit for the class that has always been well-versed in practical utility including explosives, and it has a far more prominent and flashier animation than anything else in the kit. It’s responsible for much of the spec’s playstyle complexity via Wildfire Infusion. It’s also worth noting that the only time large numbers of people ever played melee SV was due to a borrowed power that overtuned this specific ability.
Wildfire Bomb absolutely carries melee SV. The spec would be even more dismal without it.
BM and MM can fight in melee range and do 100% of their damage. SV cannot fight beyond melee range and do 100% of its damage.
The “benefit” of having a melee spec in the class is thematic. It depends entirely on people liking the idea of a melee Hunter, and evidently not very many people do.
P.S. Of course there’s the fact that it doesn’t get targeted by ranged mechanics so there can be circumstances where having an SV Hunter can be beneficial to a raid composition, but this is so rare as to be negligible. Since SV became melee it’s happened about twice, and both times you could get by just as easily with a ranged Hunter. No doubt having something like a multidotting funnel cleave ranged spec in its place would have been beneficial to us many more times than that.
Nice! So surely it shouldn’t be so game-breaking to make SV a proper ranged spec considering it’s apparently most of the way there already?
