I raided as a hunter from vanilla until BfA and played SV whenever it was fotm (before Legion it was roughly the same muscle memory between MM and SV, BM was slightly different). After the Legion rework I raided mostly as BM or MM. This has nothing to do with me enjoying the WotLK - WoD version more, it was simply more convenient to play ranged specs with better uptime when you need to focus on boss mechanisms (in mythic raids at least).
My point is, PvE parses aren’t a relevant sample to judge a spec popularity. It targets a small portion of the playerbase in some specific content. The other sample we have (PvP) is never taken into account for some reason.
If you want to know if players enjoy SV or not you need to make a survey there is no other option.
In what other setting would arguing based on how you think things should be (despite obvious logical contradictions there in) somehow be more useful than arguing based how and why things actually work?
You’re like a flat-earther accusing others of nitpicking or bullying you when you use that position as the basis for your suggestions. Noting how something is blatantly and wholly wrong is not some “achtsually”, especially if you’re arguing from those misconceptions.
yup! that’s what I’ve been saying, the game isn’t realistic because realism doesn’t have a place in a fantasy RPG where you routinely fight building sized enemies
Was it ever really realism, given that we could carry literally thousands of arrows at a time in that quiver? (Or, you know, some 10+ tons of stuff in our bags?)
¯_(ツ)_/¯
Final note on trying to make reasonable lines in the sand regarding realism.
Tbh, I’d agree with Ashrynn that more physically/technologically based classes should maybe be held to higher standards of realism (rather than necessarily devolving to technomagic anyways)…
…if the result of mixing chemicals to make an explosion of a given gas yield or ‘strength’ and using magic to make an explosion of that same gas yield or ‘strength’ weren’t identical and if there were actually something in the lore, in-game discussion, tooltips, or animations/visuals that would indicate a difference in how said explosion is contained, etc., or that somehow friendly fire onto one’s party was, in fact, somehow realistic even while a lack of self-friendly-fire were not.
Like, I don’t want the seemingly straightforward spec to be shooting ghosts out of its pistol or to summon giant laser cannons or whatnot. A ‘degree’ of realism definitely has a thematic place in video games, imo, if only to allow for some specs that don’t get people’s pet peeves or otherwise appear an eyesore. But it’s obviously just going to be a reskin, and while it’s worth preempting some of what apparent incongruities would otherwise annoy people, that still ought to be viewed in the context of other “purely” physical classes, in which case we have people wasting kinetic force to spin in circles, being too angry to die, etc., none of which are any more scrutable than magic.
Or, more simply, one ought to consider the result, too, not just categorically excuse any result on the basis of magic when that result is identical to what you would find fault in, because chances are that, in the end, “It’s all magic? Always has been,” outside of mere choice of visuals.
But, anywho, how's Survival been fairing for you all?
On SV, I’ve usually been pulling ahead of people with 600-1000 io and 10-15 ilvl over me, including BM Hunters unless we’re consistently doing 10+ mobs per pull or syncing only to the Power Surged BM’s . But, Hunter’s just an alt this expansion anyways and only came back a couple months ago for at most an hour of gaming per day, so… limited sample size there, haha.
Still, kinda feels like the recent buff was maybe overkill, with only an increase to our high-target-count AoE damage and certain other little pain-points having really been necessary?
So you are part of the big majority of players who played SV till the moment it got reworked as melee, and from that point you migrated to MM or BM.
Parses may represent a small minority of players if you will (althought you can include Heroics and mythics + aswell), but it’s data avaible that can be compared with the previous data, or even up to date data from Parses in Classic… And while is not a 100% accurate statistic of how popular a spec is, it gives a more or less fair idea of a spec performance and representation PVE wise in the game.
Is data provided by active players logging their PVE activity.
I wouldnt trust a survey in this community; have you see what happens everytime Blizzard makes a survey? Did you see how much trolling vote was happening few days ago when they open a poll to vote the tierbonus of the next season?
The reason you provide for migrating to BM or MM is what happened to many players, who were used to play Ranged DPS, and they didnt want to play Melee dps. Thats the reason many choose hunter on the first place instead of Warrior, or Rogue, or Enh Shaman, etc… Back in the day rerolling was way harder than today tho.
I would have love to hear what do you think it is needed in term of changes of adjustments to make current SV playstyle, a more appealing spec to play.
I was under the impression you were talking about a ranged weapon v.s. a melee weapon used by a physical melee class like SV. But even compared to casters, ranged weapons are an important thematic distinction. So I’m not sure what you think it proves to abstract away any thematic and mechanical distinction and say “well it’s all just ranged DPS, right?”. If we’re in the business of pointless reductionisms I could also say that every melee class swings one or more sticks to do damage so Survival doesn’t provide anything unique.
Ok? And Survival is still proportionally much more active in classic than it is in retail, so what’s the point? Even combining multiple retail difficulties and M+ representation, you don’t get a lot of activity for SV.
Back then, no they didn’t. BM solo specs and MM PvP/raid specs usually did not take trap mastery.
It’s only more common for MM PvE now as a result of theorycrafting + ranged Explosive Trap being available, which it wasn’t in original WotLK. Even then, SV has the better trappig because it also gets reduced trap CD from Resourcefulness.
No, the other specs did not retain access to Trap Mastery after talent grids. Trap Mastery and Entrapment became SV-specific passives in MoP.
CC traps proccing Lock and Load was actually very important for PvP usage as it gave a lot of opening burst. It’s yet another trap interaction that the other two specs didn’t have.
Because SV had the clear trapping focus. It had multiple spec-specific mechanics that made it the trapper spec.
You can believe that if you want, but I’ll just chalk this up to yet another delusional headcanon of yours. I remember these coming up a lot when you posted on Tanais.
There’s no evidence that there was any popular sentiment in the Hunter playerbase against having three ranged DPS specs back then, and when they deviated from that formula Hunters by and large avoided the new spec and Blizzard admitted that they expected that outcome.
So yes it does seem Hunters were fine with how things were.
It doesn’t need to be as popular as BM to have good representation.
Just last season it had good representation even if it wasn’t as high as BM.
So, yeah, MM does better on average than SV.
Not enough to be a compelling option v.s. BM.
SV needs a lot more of a boost than MM does.
SV already had good performance and now it’s been buffed by 4%, yet its representation still sucks. It needs game-breaking performance to achieve middle-of-the-pack representation. People don’t play it otherwise.
Actually I already said several times that it needs to have something that makes it compelling against BM. It used to be the cooldown burst but now BM has that too. So it needs something else.
A good start is sorting out the Lone Wolf situation once and for all. It’s been a problem for several expansions now. MM takes a big penalty to bloodlust especially on AoE, BM does not.
There have been plenty of times SV does more damage than the others. The only time anyone ever plays it is when it does game-breaking damage. As much as SV Hunters salivate at the thought it’s not a good idea to keep this spec perpetually in overpowered absolute-requirement-to-bring-to-any-competitive-content status.
The problem is deeper than damage.
I’ve pointed out the problems with Lone Wolf for many years.
What I disagree with is the idea that the spec needs to be totally remade from the ground-up. A few small changes can go a long way. Look at BM’s status right now; that was from a few modest talent updates. MM’s post-launch maintenance has been pathetic to non-existent.
The entire contention is that SV isn’t fully capable at range, so in fact it’s a perfectly relevant and fitting way to interpret things. You’re the one running off with your own bizarre alternate definitions of what constitutes a fully-capable ranged weapon user.
We already went through it many times but you have a heart attack about it every time.
Yes, it’s a combination of how the class is designed and marketed at the baseline level, including the class icon, the presentation at character creation and the level 1-10 experience, the core capabilities and class tree, and the fact that Survival has to be given an animation-only ranged weapon for it to make remote sense in the class. This is all not to mention the entire history of the class before Legion which was explicitly centred on ranged weapons.
We’re too many expansions in to continue pretending that everyone else other than Bepples sees Survival as a fully realised and fitting Hunter spec and they’re just waiting for the right damage buff to all jump in. The class is still seen as a ranged class and Survival is still seen as the odd-one-out.
Unholy is also very unpopular. I guess this is irrefutable proof that people don’t like pet-based melee specs?
They’ll probably play it more than melee SV, lol.
Yes I am because I am Always Correct™
Ranged Weapons aren’t a niche concept. They’re an important part of any fantasy universe and see a lot of attention and play.
Yes SV fans tend to circle the wagons. I’ve run into many Hanwolos in my day to confirm this.
They’ll complain all day when soliciting buffs but the moment anyone questions the merit of melee Survival the wagon circling and fanatical fanboyism begins.
Words cannot express the hilarity and predictability of someone who doesn’t play melee SV ardently defending melee SV online.
As a reminder, you are saying this in regards to a reddit thread without this happening and it made you confused and upset that people don’t act like you.
You’re acting like this doesn’t exist in WoW?
You’re also acting like the premier ranged weapon spec sees a lot of attention and play while also complaining that MM is ignored AND you’re ignoring it has barely any players currently.
egotistical delusions
just like affliction? oh wait…
Unholy is more popular than 13 other specs. What are you talking about? Are you confused?
This whole paragraph is nonsense and you know it lol. Like all your arguments you pretend your ideas of class design exist purely in a vacuum. The 1-10 experience is a baseline for specializations to build off of. That’s why they’re called specializations because you specialize. Every spec in the game is different than the 1-10 experience. You’re ignoring the class tree and spec tree are both independent trees as well.
But this is irrelevant because it’s a melee DPS spec. You’re crying that it’s not “fully capable with exclusively a ranged weapon” but ignore how BM also isn’t fully capable with that, as it relies on its pet, just like SV relies on melee damage.
Which is fine, but many players more passionate and invested than you don’t think the current playstyle is fun or allows much room for design space.
Why is this a problem? Do you think Havoc would be played as much as it is without it’s “game breaking damage”? Why do you think people play DPS classes without unique utility?
again I ask…who cares? you’re the only person ranting that player count matters. should BM’s status as an outlier also be fixed or is that not a problem?
that’s funny because both make up a very low player count for the hunter class. almost identical!
so it needs to do game breaking damage to be more appealing than BM? I thought that was a big problem for you.
that’s my point it’s never as high as BM and unless the “game breaking balance” that you complain about is in place it never will be. Is this a problem to you?
irrelevant to my point. you cry that people that play or like SV aren’t “TRUE” hunter players based off of your own feelings. Pretty sure SV is a hunter spec whether you like it or not.
how lol. is a stave a more thematic distinction than a sword/book? should we start worrying about the concerning low amount of thematic distinction when it comes to XYZ?
Then I wouldn’t be responding to the idea that ‘a Mage and Hunter are inherently different due to weapon types’ despite such being impossible for Survival vs. other melee classes.
If an SV melee weapon cannot in any way distinguish itself even when given functional differences, just because a spear is a length of steel on a length of wood and a sword is also a length of steel, etc., then it makes little sense not to apply the same logic to a bow vs. a staff —a length of wood that performs magical and sometimes attacks vs. a length of wood with a string that performs magical or (as Ash put it) magic-like attacks.
Which has nothing to do with what I said. I noted which has a more frequent rotational place for traps. From the moment Black Arrow was allowed to crit, there was less of a rotational place for traps on SV for the simple fact that Black Arrow shared a cooldown with Immolation Trap and Explosive Trap and outperformed either until higher target counts.
“Until” =/= after.
???
And, yes, they absolutely did have access to Trap Mastery until MoP.
Why is this a response to a comment on PvE rotation?
It’s literally still written right there in the classic database and the version logs. They shared CDs. Unless you used Black Arrow for less than 20% of the opportunities in which to use it, you had fewer offensive traps than the other two specs, because Black Arrow replaced that niche.
Which is because Black Arrow was, by developer explanation, explicitly made to do… because they couldn’t develop Trap Launcher in time and had to settle.
It’s not. Its middle of the pack. Its play rates just swing greatly with how strong Frost (especially, builds like Obliterator) is, much like MM does with BM and SV, or any other DPS spec does when a competing less finnicky/risky spec outperforms the more finnicky/risky one.
Yes I linked it because it was noteworthy that there are still a lot of people that miss ranged SV. And yes, usually online and especially on WoW reddit, SV Hunters circle the wagons.
It’s not explored enough in WoW primarily because we lost one of the specs that represented it.
I think it gets neglected by Blizzard because there aren’t any class developers that are interested in ranged weapons. That also explains why SV went melee in the first place.
Its M+ representation is pretty low.
Actually I know I am correct.
Yes and SV doesn’t do that. It diverts from it.
Yes, it should be ranged instead.
This still is and always will be incoherent and insincere, by the way.
I don’t like most suggestions for MM because they usually boil down to turretting Aimed Shot all day. Maybe that’s what veteran MM players want, but the spec should be more than that.
Representation is a function of both performance and appeal, with performance being the bigger factor. Usually performant specs have higher representation but it can be the case that a performant spec has low appeal or a less performant spec has high appeal.
For example, SV in Shadowlands S2 did the highest damage of the 3 but not enough to overcome its bad appeal. It then got the most overpowered tier ever in S3 and that was enough to overcome the bad appeal. Going into DF it still had good performance but no longer high enough to overcome the bad appeal.
The people who had to lose a spec for this one to exist.
And yet last season MM representation was a lot higher while SV was not.
I don’t think it needs game-breaking damage. I think it needs to be reliably competitive without a long list of downsides.
It doesn’t need to overtake BM entirely. Didn’t read the rest.
Actually it is relevant. Hunters were fine with having 3 ranged DPS specs.
how lol. is a stave a more thematic distinction than a sword/book? should we start worrying about the concerning low amount of thematic distinction when it comes to XYZ?
[/quote]
Because ranged weaponry i.e. bows, crossbows, guns have been staples of RPG/fantasy combat since forever?
A mage casting spells augmented by the presence of a staff v.s. a Hunter shooting with a ranged weapon are different modes of delivering damage. Aesthetically they’re a world apart. To say they’re equivalent isn’t a sincere argument.
That was in Cataclysm, by which point traps largely took a backseat for all the specs. The only time they got used was on big AoE pulls where they would use Explosive Trap… with SV having the much more effective trap.
So while I know it’s important for your contrarian needs to find a time when ranged SV was the least trap-focused of the three specs, that time doesn’t exist.
Your original post I was quoting said:
They didn’t have “even access to those features” because SV had exclusive access to Trap Mastery and Entrapment that made its traps a lot better.
Because it’s still relevant to SV’s identity as a utilitarian and a trapper.
SV extensively uses Explosive Trap in WotLK classic. It’s much more dependent on it than MM is. As MM you can even get away with not having Trap Launcher and not bothering with Explosive Trap.
It’s true in the original WotLK this Explosive Trap approach was more rare, but it’s also true that MM trapping practically didn’t exist back then either.
Black Arrow was for situations where you couldn’t trap the target, because Lock and Load was an important part of the spec and there were situations where you couldn’t trap to get it. It did not make SV less of a trapper.
In M+ it’s very underplayed. If I were being contrived I could argue that this is evidence that people don’t like melee pet specs, just like apparently it’s the case that MM’s low representation in this particular season means ranged weapon specs are unpopular.
This is my actual main. The forums got confused when I transferred from Barthilas to Frostmourne, so I made a placeholder Hunter on Barthilas, levelled it to 70, and applied the same transmog so it looks the same on the forums and has my entire post history + favourites.
so what’s your point? people like both playstyles? you’re losing it lol
it’s got the same amount of “exploration” that many fantasy mainstays have and more so then others. I don’t see your point. why should ranged weapons have more fantasy representation than anything else?
it’s got the same sort of interest many other weapon type/fantasy archetypes have? I think we’re missing a stealth archer type. that’d be cool for rogues.
clarify what you mean then before you make a generalized statement DPS DK in general have pretty low representation in m+, yet oddly both are seem more than MM. hopefully they get a rework
ego driven delusions
no…it builds on it. I am fine having this same back and forth a million times, but it doesn’t divert from the 1-10 “core experience” anymore than fury diverts from warrior or outlaw diverts from rogue or frost mage diverts from mage
nah, it should stay melee. they can add a 4th spec. or add a 3rd spc to DH. or you can play cata classic, or classic classic
almost as insincere as your arbitrary “well actually it needs to be fully capable at 40yard range for it to maintain 1-10 core experience integrity, please ignore how this doesn’t apply to every other spec” ?
Do you want to elaborate at all what you think would be good or just say “everyone else is wrong, the signature ability of the spec is boring”?
should we discredit what people on the forums ask for
you are not the only “group” that has lost a spec for one to “exist” though? I know we’ve talked about this before. yours was the only one that went role different, yes, but plenty of specs heavily changed how they played or are entirely different than what they were. that’s what happens when you play live service games, things change. your spec and your preferences are not special nor do they deserve special treatment
You wrote two paragraphs and didn’t answer either asked question at all lol
and yet it was a LOT lower compared to BM, like it usually is in contemporary wow. what’s your point?
so it needs to somehow entirely change the way the aoe works? it needs have its own special utility? it needs to be tuned higher? what’s the “long list” of downsides, as it stands now it’s “target capped” and “30% of the time it stands still”
so it’s okay to have a spec on a 3 dps class that’s consistent less popular than the most popular spec?
nope
thankfully they exist in wow?
outside of your head canon they function they exact same in wow aside from the auto attack, which can be replaced by a dot
ego driven delusions. “the things I dont like should be derided” is not something a reasonable person thinks
Pretty radical; grats on all your work. I regret taking such a long break now tbh. Just had to (almost) get all the sylvanas hate out of my system. This XP is awesome
So were you ever going to confront the fact that you made this up and were wrong about it or was your plan to just sweep it under the rug and quietly leave the thread?
Be honest and own up to your mistakes.
Really? Because it seems like you don’t play that character at all.
How come it’s acceptable for us to get that treatment from Blizzard but it’s unfair if it happens to you? They made a mistake, they should set it right. They should figure out a better compromise for the melee roleplayers. Preferably something that’s actually a compromise instead of “melee take all”.
I would actually say the Hunter community is now plagued with people that don’t like the class much to begin with. The melee rework was, after all, targeted at new players and rerolls at the expense of Hunter mains as stated by Blizzard. Perhaps the type of person to have 200k honourable kills but only 11k of them on their Hunter alt.
My point was that I’m not the only person in the world who liked ranged SV, like you seem to pretend.
I also think it’s notable that the post didn’t see the same ardent defence of melee SV other posts on the subreddit tend to get.
In this one, for example, a lot more people showed up to defend melee Survival.
They don’t? We have 2 ranged weapon user specs, and you even pointed out one of them thematically doesn’t focus on the ranged weapon so much. Every other spec is either a melee weapon user or a caster.
This is not saying that there should be 8+ ranged weapon users. However the 3 we had was a good amount. It made no sense to take away one of them to make another melee weapon user. Especially in the expansion that simultaneously added yet another melee weapon user; one that, let’s be honest, was about 100x more thematically, aesthetically, and mechanically interesting and appealing than melee Hunter.
Your only defense of this is pretending that the difference between different types of melee weapons, e.g. daggers and swords, is equivalent to that between a melee weapon as a ranged weapon. Which is nonsense to anyone who isn’t irreparably deluded or obsessively contrarian (Hi Tanais/Altani).
It did not. In fact it’s the only one they actively attacked to hand over more to a different archetype.
It does because the Hunter starts off as a ranged weapon user that’s fully capable with the ranged weapon at any range within 40 yards. Speccing Survival at level 10 nonsensically requires you to throw away that capability.
So we can deal with another decade of Survival being a black hole of developer time and effort that only manages to ever produce one of the game’s most unpopular specs just to please an excessively fringe niche of roleplayers? It used to be so much more than that.
It does apply to other specs and they fulfil that.
Survival takes away the basic capability and theme of the Hunter class which is being a fully capable ranged weapon user. It’s a diversion from the class baseline.
I mean I would be fine if MM was an Aimed Shot bot like in WoD if that’s what veteran MM players want as long as I didn’t have to play it. That’s why a lot of us played ranged SV instead. But if we’re going to be shoved to that spec and told that it’s the same thing as ranged SV, despite our clear decided preferences to ranged SV over MM since they were not the same, then we’d better see MM amount to something more than just an Aimed Shot turret.
When I see “remove Rapid Fire” I stop reading, and it seems most MM suggestions boil down to that. They’ll complain that MM is too boring and set out to turn it to something even more boring.
“You’re not the only one that has lost a spec” followed by “Actually you are the only one that lost a spec to a different role”.
I didn’t read the inevitable false equivalencies that followed this contradiction. Survival is the only spec that totally changed its target audience overnight. Even every one of the numerous Shadow reworks was intended to at least cater to Shadow players.
It answers both your questions. I told you why people play the specs they do.
It doesn’t need to be played as much as BM. What’s your point? That MM is just as chronically unpopular as SV is? Because that would be an incorrect point.
It doesn’t need to entirely change how its AoE works. But it can’t be hardcapped at 6 targets in a PvE environemnt that prefers mass AoE. It’s reminiscent of when they made ranged SV the pure sustained damage approach before making every single raid boss a priority add burst fight.
This M+ season has a large AoE bloodlust pull in almost every dungeon. MM can’t be taking a 10% damage loss in order to provide bloodlust while also having capped damage on those pulls while BM doesn’t.
It probably does need preferential tuning in some areas. It doesnt need to be beyond 10% higher across the board like SV in Shadowlands, but it needs to have the good side of something. It should still have the bigger 2 minute burst. If it’s limited to 6 targets it better have S tier cleave on those 6 targets.
Sure as long as it’s not consistently like sub 5% of the class’s playerbase and it gets its time to shine.
Not enough.
Not a sincere argument.
Melee SV screwed over a lot of people. It deserves the derision.
How come it’s bad for you to get but it should happen to others? that’s why people think you’re unreasonable and abrasive. you never say “add a 4th spec” you say “remove this spec and add the one I want.”
nobody said this at all? you’re straight up making things up to play the victim lol
Your only “point” is that differences only apply to what you want it to apply to and you’re in a constant flux of fantasy vs gameplay mechanics for your argument. ranged weapons have extremely little difference to casters in game. the only difference is the auto attack. if auto attack frequency is enough to denote an entire classification change to you AND impact the fantasy, then objectively that applies to dual wielding specs such as daggers (very frequent auto attacks) vs 2-h specs (low frequency auto attacks)
if we are only looking at the fantasy aspect of it, then we have to apply that equally. there is only 1 frost ranged spec, there is 0 holy ranged damage specs, etc.
your argument exists in a vacuum and you constantly move the goal post to wherever you want it to be.
and you disagreed with this. am I right?
your language choice here is so hilarious lol. “actively attacked” get real. again I ask, what’s your “goal” when it comes to equity of fantasy representation? what are your classifications? “magic user” “ranged weapon user” “melee user”? why is the ranged weapon its own classification to you? if I am wrong, feel free to explain yourself, but I have a feeling you will skim this and not actually read or respond to genuine questions
Okay…so if specs don’t need to be played to an arbitrary popularity line then what’s your entire point? “MM Doesn’t need to be played more, but SV does?”
but preferential tuning is bad. right?
so game design should instead focus on a revolving door of spec popularity? SV had its time to shine less than 1 expansion ago and you’re still crying about that. I feel like you don’t really want the revolving door of popularity
not to mention I don’t even think that’s possible on the modern hunter class unless BM is reworked entirely to function more like a normal ranged DPS, and I’m sure you would lose your mind if that happened
they have more representation than many other fantasy archetypes. many fantasy archetypes have 0 representation period
okay, what’s your counter point then? or are you just going to add “sincerity” to your repertoire of “deflection, evasion” when someone makes a point that you can’t prove wrong?
“Screwed over” again with the hilarious dramatics.
you are not a reasonable person, you validate your grudge with an 8 year long victim complex. that is not something reasonable people do. you cheer if SV is nerfed and deride people who like the spec in the same breath as you saying “people dont play SV. but dont buff it. dont give it utility.”
DPS DK in general have pretty low representation in m+, yet oddly both are seem more than MM. hopefully they get a rework