Because this is blizzards game and I didn’t see anyone saying they wanted to rip old survival from players. They had the data and made a change they found to be best.
Obviously they haven’t as a plethora of us love new survival.
Or ya’ll can kick rocks.
Again, says you. You don’t dictate when and how some plays or mains something.
I’ve told you before and ill tell you again, being rude about wanting what you want just pushes people to the opposite side. I told you this years ago and you’re still here; bitter and destitute.
This is deflection, anyway, because the question is why it’s acceptable for us to get that treatment from Blizzard but it’s unfair if it happens to you. If you’re going to avoid answering and just copy-paste the question back at me I can do the same.
When you say that my position is “remove this spec and add the one I want.”, that’s the implication: I’m the one that wants it as opposed to everyone else. When in fact a lot of people enjoyed and preferred ranged SV.
No, in fact having a ranged weapon v.s. not having one is a fundamentally larger and more significant difference than that between different types of melee weapons.
Your argument depends on endless false equivalencies and deflections to normalise melee SV and downplay the absurdity of the situation so you can continue getting special treatment ¯\(ツ)/¯
I disagreed on the nonsense point that BM is not a fully capable ranged weapon user.
They actively sought out to diminish the representation of the archetype in favour of something else. So yes the “attacked” language perfectly fits.
What actions would you described as “attacking” a fantasy archetype in a game?
Because it’s significantly different. I still consider the main categories to be casters v.s. weapon users, but ranged weapon users are an important distinction.
Yes I do skim nonsense/insincere arguments. They’re not worth any more effort than it took to type them out in the first place.
It’s the consistency of SV’s low population.
What’s your argument going to be next time MM’s population is as decent as it was, say, last season while SV is still in the dumps like it is every season?
If “preferential tuning” means “the spec has an insurmountable advantage across all damage profiles including having access to damage profiles that are totally locked away from other specs”, then yes that’s bad. However I did say “in some areas”. It’s fine for things like one spec having good spread cleave while the other is good for clumped cleave.
That’s two seasons out of 14 since SV was melee.
Did you support how that season-specific tuning influenced SV’s gameplay?
I’d prefer at least one spec to keep full mobility, yes.
The difference is ranged weapons did used to have that representation and then lost it.
Like I said: 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.
You say it’s my “head canon” that they’re different yet thousands of players develop specific preferences for Hunters v.s. casters so evidently it’s your head canon that says they’re equivalent.
It’s literally what they did. They took away people’s spec. There aren’t many ways to more directly screw over players than that. To say otherwise is gaslighting.
Reasonable people don’t ardently defend demonstrably terrible design decisions.
Yes it’s good if SV remains a whirlpool of misery. They made their bed, they will lie in it.
If the designers and melee fans didn’t want that outcome they shouldn’t have screwed over existing SV players and stole their spec.
I do play my character even after playing retail a lot less this expansion.
Bepples-Frostmourne
They might not have asked for it (although some did), but they were certainly happy it happened and celebrate the outcome.
Blizzard almost certainly did not make the change based on data. Even from the day of its announcement it was clear that very few Hunters would play it, so any data would have said it was a bad idea before they went ahead with it. Data since then only proves it.
They routinely find excuses to ignore data that’s negative to their case across all sorts of aspects of the game so it’s totally in character to rush into a decision that actively went against what an analytical approach would have recommended.
Lol “plethora”. Did you miss the part where it’s an infamously unpopular spec?
“No please keep giving me special treatment”
Yeah, you choose what to main, and you clearly haven’t chosen Survival Hunter. Why is that?
Are you the immature tone police from a few years back who thought the peak of internet humour and snark was to end every post with “Periodt ”?
Doesn’t matter. If numbers are important, than rSV should borrow things from ret and beast mastery
if you don’t want something to happen based on it being “not likely” then you should stop asking for RSV to come back, as that’s is also “not likely”
the video you linked said “hopefully they build more on that” in regards to serpent spread and black arrow. seems like they’re doing that so everyone wins. seems like serpent spread is literally 1 talent to add to marksmanship.
you can also play cata classic too! seems like beples is having a good time
tell me exactly how? if it’s more than the frequency of auto attacks, please go on and tell me the significant mechanical difference.
comparing one class to another class using your own logic is not a false equivalence. you assert 1-10 is the “core foundation” of a class but then say it doesn’t apply to other classes with your constant goal post moving
ridiculous thing to say that you continue to be unable to define. what “Special Treatment” has SV gotten that other specs havent gotten?
are they fully capable just using ranged weapons or do they need to rely on pets?
was sword and board DPS “actively attacked”? was pre legion shadow “actively attacked?” was combat rogue “actively attacked”? was SMF fury “actively attacked”?
what level of niche fantasy archetypes need to exist in the game / be given weight to so it’s not considered “Actively Attacking”?
probably directly saying “this is a dumb fantasy archetype” which they haven’t done for anything
so your specific preference gets to exist in its own snowflake distinction for no real reason so you can continue to feel slighted? sounds like a reasonable perspective
gotcha, so you just gloss over things that hurt your feelings or you can’t respond to and then justify it at insincere. is this because of your ridiculous ego where you think you are correct all the time or is this something else?
so does a 3 dps class need to be a revolving door of popularity? do you think there’s ever a world where BM is Not the most popular hunter spec in contemporary wow?
if yes, wouldn’t that be annoying having your spec be buffed/nerfed based purely on player population to fit an arbitary metric?
if you think BM will always be the most popular spec, what is the other option? MM and SV trading back and forth who’s least popular? is this done on a per expansion basis?
does this popularity metric apply to the entire game or just hunter? with 39 specs in the game, it’s only “fair” if each spec is 2.5% played. is there an acceptable deviation to you?
so it sounds like BM should probably be reigned in a bit, no? that would probably help the class numbers.
yes and? that was less than 1 expansion ago
I don’t really care about season specific tuning because it’s a season based game. 9.0 has no barring on my enjoyment of the game in feb 2024
right, so BM will always be the most popular hunter spec (and among most specs in the game) because of the full mobility and full range and safe playstyle. that means to you, MM and SV must constantly change which is 2nd place or else it’s bad.
how is this an important difference? surely you see this as “attacking” others fantasy preference, as you’re dismissing that others dont exist at all
right, just as how aesthetically, two daggers are a world a part of a giant hammer; or aesthetically a storm wielding shaman is aesthetically apart from a cat.
do reasonable people freak out for 8 (about to be 10) solid years?
do reasonable people cheer when a spec they dont like or play is nerfed?
do reasonable people make things up like a spec getting “special treatment” but at the same time say the spec gets no attention so it should be reverted?
sounds to me like the only whirlpool of misery is you lol
You’re responding to a comparison between ranged specs. If I shoot Arcane Blasts or Arcane Shots, the only difference consequent to weapon type is autonomous periodic damage (auto-shot)… and that’s assuming the first doesn’t have Arcane Familiar.
Why the goal-post shift? Your response has next to nothing to do with what you’ve quoted, a comparison of weapon types used among melee specs (to other weapons used among melee specs), separately, weapons used by ranged specs (to other weapons used by ranged specs)—noting that the particular weapon type doesn’t matter, only how constrained the user’s positioning is, and be that due primarily to range or cast times).
I’m not seeing this up there, only the idea that what attracts players to BM is less the fact that it has a string or stalk on its (pew/boom)stick than that it uses beasts and performs weirdly well for how little constraints or challenges it faces.
All that being said…
Have to agree with all this. We just seem to take differing conclusions from it.
Yours has been that RSV therefore needs its own spec for its special ranged attacks, distinct from the existing ranged-weapon focused spec with special ranged attacks. To me, it already points out that MM is overly constrained, with some wanting it to be more WoD-esque, some wanting it to be more Legion-esque, and some preferring it to be a less jank version of what it’s been since BfA. That’s already a large spectrum covering about as much playflow difference —likely also even difference in vibe, etc.— as would necessarily exist between RSV and MM’s core thematic threads.
The question there is whether RSV shouldn’t have access to Aimed Shot, period, for fear of balance forcing it, nor MM should have access to Black/Explosive/Incendiary Shot, period, for fear of balance maybe making it preferable, etc., forcing a cut between those two sides of the same coin.
Given that any declaration that a given build would never be played no matter how much one prefers its gameplay because of performing 1% worse would generally have to apply also to a spec, that doesn’t seem that reasonable to me. And, in an a more ideal world, I’d say that’s not a fear worth making an arbitrary cut over, but given the quality and frequency of Hunter changes… that seems a fair concern, if not for also being a reason never to play MM/RSV even as its own spec.
If so, Munitions should get its own spec, and you now have two specs emphasizing ranged weaponry, two specs emphasizing beasts, and (overlapping) two specs emphasizing special munitions. A little weird that MM would have zero bleed from BM, but that’s okay or can even be sorted if some bloat were removed, Lone Wolf revised, and a couple more talents made choice nodes.
A bit of a carousel, but with a good bit of symmetry and customization. If we’re not going to give BM and MSV more build options anyways, that’s probably our best option. Not my favorite, but far better than the current.
Ya in df they really did a good job with it. See a ton more survival hunters then mm in dungeons and open world so i guess rhe popularity is going up!
Also dont mind the beps much. That person always comes in hot with negativity whenever melee surivial is mentioned. Not worth have a discussion with. Its like someone who complains a show got canceled checks when legion happened ALMOST 8 YEARS LATER.
HOLY HECK HOW CAN ANYONE STILL COMPLAIN ABOUT SOMETHING 8 YEARS WHAT KIND OF GRUDGE ID THIS FOR A VIDEO GAME THIS ISNT HEALTHY ITS AN OBSESSION AT THIS POINT.
Well he has a few years left before classic mists comes out and he gets to play his fav version of surivial but honestly if he hasnt gotten over a video game change in nearly 8 years i dont think anyone can have a proper discussion.
I think this is a good discussion point to branch off of.
Clearly there is demand for multiple styles of ranged weapon user, at least in gameplay flow. Cata/MoP MM was focused on maintaining consistent single target damage, then popping off with huge burst when you had procs available. WoD MM was focused on constant stick-and-move casting. Legion MM was a pure turret, relying on procs (unless you specced Sidewinders, which is a whole different story) for your big hits to do decent damage. BfA/SL/DF MM is in this weird in-between space where you have some of the mobility of pre Legion, excellent AoE potential, but very little single target burst (which IMO is the niche that comes to mind when you say Marksman - one shot, one kill).
With RSV (rot damage, high mobility) and BM (pet-centric, ranged support) in the mix, that’s 5 different core gameplay loops that support ranged weapons. There is zero reason we can’t have all 5 of those archetypes available, and with some variation available in each archetype for things like ST vs AoE, burst vs sustain, etc. Add MSV and that’s essentially 6 Hunter specs.
If we are restricted to a single class with 3 specs, the obvious answer is to roll 2 archetypes into each spec, and choose with choice nodes.
BM and MSV share many abilities already, and both have heavy focus on the pet, so they are a natural pair. Maybe a choice node between Raptor Strike/Cobra Shot, Carve/Multi-Shot, and Beast Cleave/WFB.
Current MM could be combined with pre-Legion MM, since both involve limited Aimed Shot hardcasting. Choice node between Chimera Shot (the old ST version, not the new 2 target version) and Rapid Fire, and another choice between Lock and Load and old Master Marksman (the Ready, Aim, Fire! mechanic from Cata/MoP) would get the job done.
That leaves old RSV and Legion MM, which are polar opposites, except that both had massive spread cleave. So have Aimed Shot (or whatever it’s called) and Explosive Shot (or Incendiary Shot, to keep the existing class tree Explosive Shot) as a choice node when you first pick the spec, then Marked Shot and Black Arrow (or whatever you choose to call it now with DR hero talents being a thing, the 50% uptime single target DoT that procs ES resets) as a second choice node, with Sidewinders and Serpent Spread as a third choice node.
This would be an absolute balancing NIGHTMARE, and I don’t think that degree of flexibility is likely to come to Hunter unless they start throwing “subspec-level” choice nodes all over the place, which is a much bigger overall game design decision, rather than how to adjust one class.
and why shouldn’t we? I liked old survival but love the new one in comparison. That’s not any players fault.
They did. They have the data, they have the numbers. \Regardless of why they changed it as they can do what they want, they did so based on information only they had.
That’s their prerogative. Cry em a river.
I see plenty around and plenty have commented.
says the person whos been crying for special treatment for years. funny.
Again says you. the only person who dictates what i main and when is me.
What’s immature is crying about something for years and staying bitter about it when it doesn’t happen.
Thinking about it, I wouldn’t mind if they brought a version of Legion MM back without the Vulnerable mechanic. I liked how flashy it was compared to what we have now. I liked Sidewinders. I liked Windburst. I didn’t mind Marked Shot. I was kind of hoping they would consider Legion design with a shadowy flair for Dark Ranger.
Hot take: the amount of people that like something in a video game is a pretty good metric of success, actually.
It’s a lot more likely than reasonable than asking for a 4th spec on a pure DPS class.
It’s not an adequate replacement for ranged SV. People like Max are happy that at least something is being done, but a better outcome would be getting ranged SV back.
I just think it’s notable that multiple notable WoW personalities have said that ranged Survival was a great spec and a favourite, yet certain people on this forum and the discord still like to pretend it’s some distantly niche preference while everyone else is on the melee SV train.
Ideally modern WoW would be better than previous iterations in every way, not worse in some ways.
Is this a bit?
Ranged weapons allow you to be ranged which is a major capability difference v.s. melee weapons. You don’t get a major capability difference between different types of melee weapons.
I don’t say it doesn’t apply to other classes? What I actually said was that is that the Hunter situation isn’t comparable; in other classes you have differences like changing from sword-and-shield to two-handed swords. With Hunters you have a class designed around ranged weapons until level 10 where one of the three specs asks you to throw away the ranged weapon in favour of melee.
If a Rogue spec took away Stealth at level 10, that would be a similar situation. It would also be bad.
Getting given someone else’s spec.
They fight at 40 yards with a ranged weapon. They’re fully capable ranged weapon users.
Sword and board DPS: to an extent, yes actually. They should bring back Gladiator. Although it’s still a more limited scope than “ranged weapon user”. The rest are just relatively minor variants of existing archetypes.
We’re talking about the basic concept of using a ranged weapon. There were 3 specs for that, now there are two. That’s not a priest that uses shadow magic having its talent tree rearranged or a fury warrior being made to dual-wield. that’s a 33% reduction in this game’s expression of ranged weapon archetypes.
They did declare that Marksmanship and ranged Survival were interchangeable and removed one of the options. So yes they attacked it.
Believe it or not I’m not the only person in this game that considers ranged weapon users to be distinct.
No, like I said, I skip nonsense arguments where I think the person isn’t being sincere. I apologise to anyone who actually was being sincere and the nonsense they posted was genuinely the best they could come up with, but that’s their problem and not mine.
I think they should strive for each spec to be relevant.
I think they definitely shouldn’t throw their hands in the air and say “oh well there will always be a less popular option so might as well replace one of the existing choices with something overtly exclusive and niche”.
Yes maybe they shouldn’t have given BM the best 2 minute CD burst as well as all the other things it had.
I like Call of the Wild, but MM’s cooldown should be much better.
So? Are we banking on them buffing Wildfire Bomb by >80% again any time soon?
You know if the saving grace of melee Survival was the one time they hyper-buffed Wildfire Bomb and thus made the spec a necessary pick for all PvE content, they could just make a ranged SV spec that has Wildfire Bomb and do the same there. It doesn’t have to be melee for that.
Avoiding the question.
There have been times when MM is just as played or more than BM. I don’t think it’s a deathknell.
Yes, BM will usually be the most popular, but so what? That’s not an excuse for melee SV being in the dumps season after season.
I see the lack of wand specs as Blizzard not having thought about it or gotten around to it. If they had a wand spec and then removed it, that would be attacking that archetype yes. That’s what they did to ranged weapon users.
Those actually aren’t a world apart. Ranged weapons are a significantly different category.
Reasonable people oppose bad decisions even if a lot of time has passed.
The way Survival Hunters talk online makes me think otherwise. It’s always doom and gloom until someone says maybe it was a mistake to make it melee, at which point its wagon-circling time again.
It’s directly related to what he posted, in fact. Even if we’re just fixating on the mechanical reality of auto-attack frequency, which isn’t even the primary distinction: all those melee weapon users have auto-attack. Casters don’t have it at all.
He argues that because BM depends on a pet then it’s not a fully capable ranged weapon user.
Because he likes to think the pet is a more important thing to most Hunters than a ranged weapon. If that were the case, a lot more people would play SV: because the lack of a ranged weapon wouldn’t matter as much. Yet evidently it does matter to most Hunters.
Actually we have real numbers from trackable content that show that SV is just as stagnant as ever. The only nugget of truth here is that MM has nosedived in representation this season, but even still there are more tracked MM Hunters in M+ than SV Hunters. This data is a lot more reliable than your anecdotes.
Newsflash: bad decisions don’t become good decisions with time. And I see people all the time bemoan when they’re favourite show/game whatever got cancelled even after longer than 8 years.
One can have fun with ranged SV in classic while also criticisng modern WoW doubling down on the basket case that is melee SV. In fact we’re already doing that with WotLK classic.
Because it’s just melee players defending their preferential treatment.
Or, alternatively, they made the decision in spite of the data.
What makes you think your conclusion is more likely? Because when they did make SV melee it cemented it as one of the game’s most unpopular specs, whereas previously it had been popular. Was their data wrong or did they just ignore it?
No one’s disputing whether they’re allowed to make bad decisions. The argument is whether they made a bad decision or not.
“There are dozens of us!!”
As demonstrated, a whole lot of the online support for SV comes from people who barely play it our outright don’t play it, so you’ll have to do better than that. You, for example, defend it at length when you clearly hardly play it at all.
On that note, good call making your armoury profile private. I can still at least see you have 0 raiding experience despite that, though.
Apparently “don’t delete my spec” is asking for special treatment.
What content do you do on your “main”?
As opposed to getting mad when someone attacks a spec you hardly play anyway.
so maybe people don’t want a ranged dot hunter spec since affliction and MM are so low?
is it though? they only changed a spec from ranged to melee once and they seem pretty against doing it ever again, seeing as how they’ve never done it since. sounds like you are coping.
the ranged sv “max and notable wow personalities” are talking about is specifically serpent spread and lock and load. you’re kidding yourself if you think they’re talking about a modernized version
has nothing to do with what im saying. you can play cata if you want to relive your glory days
so there are plenty of other ranged options for you if the primary difference is ranged vs melee
the “design” you are referring to is just arcane shot , wing clip, and steady shot btw, which does not necessitate ranged at all. funny how the 1-10 hunter “core identity” is also designed around no active or controllable focus gain as well. or pet management.
so the same special treatment legion shadow, wod shadow, bfa shadow, shadowlands shadow, df season 1, 2, and 3 shadow all got? doesn’t seem so special that a spec changes between expansions.
SV can do this too. SV and BM are both capable at pure ranged weapon users. It’s just not optimal for either spec to focus on that.
how many dagger specs are there again?
how many frost magic specs are there again?
a lot of fantasy archetypes only have 2 specs in the game.
so every time a spec changes it’s attacked?
believe it or not, your opinion isn’t the only one that matters
by this logic nobody should respond to you since you’re clearly not sincere ever lol. you don’t have a response so you police people’s arguments to avoid a response. "concern trolling’ “deflection” are your go-tos.
this would require a revolving door of popularity. in hunters case, MM and SV would always trade off in contemporary wow.
maybe you should start a crusade to nerf BM and buff MM then, which is a lot more realistic than a 10 year tantrum with 0 payoff
maybe they’ll do this for you, but this sounds like special treatment, and you’re against that
are we banking on them buffing MM >30% any time soon?
you’re being insincere or something, maybe concern trolling
so then either SV or MM is the least popular, or right now where it’s both lmao
very, very rarely.
a wand is a ranged weapon. they should add this before they look at your RSV in the name of fairness.
in the grand scheme of things no, because we have plenty of ranged dps.
reasonable people do not do what you do actually
really? i see the same doom and gloom from every single spec in the game. why do you think this is? did you really think only SV players talk like that? or are you lying on the internet?
Ayo, the big Bepps can never let this go. He’s more than bitter; he is utterly consumed.
Meanwhile, the spec is actually very fun lol. Gameplay loop as enjoyable as ever tbh. Been enjoying it alot recently, the set bonus is fun as heck in m+
”?
