I never played RSV, but i always heard that it was getting to a point of no use, so at least it’s pretty fun now.
Cammykins, not just RSV, but also MM is at a point of no use. It’s both ranged specs that have been destroyed. Today’s Blizzard just hates archers.
5 Likes
MM has kept it’s identity when compared to SV, but is underused and weak compared to other specs.
1 Like
They could also make it the most amazing Healing spec in the game. That doesn’t change the core issue of the spec being at its core designed to be something most Hunters don’t want from the class.
Most Hunters picked the class to play a ranged spec. It doesn’t matter how good the melee spec they shoehorned in may be. The only thing that matters is that it isn’t ranged which was originally the whole point of Hunters.
They stuck to the ranged specs, rerolled, or just quit. There are a whole lot of formerly regular posters here you don’t see around anymore and I’ve had a couple personally tell me they gave up on the game due to Survival.
Just to fill you in: Survival, since becoming melee, has consistently been one of the least popular specs in the game. The first melee iteration of it last expansion turned out so badly that they essentially had to remake it again in this one and compromise with a whole lot of ranged aspects. Anyone with any sense could have seen t his coming back when they announced melee Hunters back in 2015 but there was a whole lot of blind hype around the Legion expansion and any and all criticism was shouted down until it was too late.
13 Likes
sadly yes /10
That is your opinion.
Nothing else.
Adding a 4th spec to classes is not an “all or nothing-deal”.
It should be done where it makes sense for the game and where there’s something missing.
Like what they did with druids in MoP.
Withholding an entire playstyle/spec from one class, just because they don’t have anything for all other classes as well, is a bad reason if anything.
By that logic, there would be no 4th spec for druids right now.
By all means, if they wanted to add something like that to the class then, fair enough.
But the error was in removing an existing spec just to “make room” for the melee-spec.
Meaning?
Sounds like an argument made up by MSV-fans that could not be happier about RSV being removed.
Yep. This.
Agreed.
6 Likes
This just in… Bepples and Ghorak do not speak for most hunters. That thread that Ghorak links over and over and over has a whopping 60 likes or so. Please quit insinuating that you speak for most hunters and proclaim everyone is just clamoring for RSV back.
1 Like
You’d be amazed how many of us want ranged surv back. My hunter sits in a corner now. When they removed the spec,…they really hurt hunters best raiding/pve spec. I tried all the other variations of survival and hate them. Legion surv was clunky and never felt smooth, bfa it runs smoother but doesn’t do what ranged version did
13 Likes
Please do link one single post from above here where I’ve said or hinted at something the likes of which.
The only thing said here, is that most hunters(players who choose/have chosen a hunter) do so because of it’s focus on ranged combat(with other elements as well ofc).
That’s not us “speaking for” anyone else.
Thats simple logic and deduction, considering the history of the class and even it’s present being. And design.
And since this class is the only class that does focus on said ranged weapons, in the entire game…
I mean…when they removed 1 out of 2 of the specs that actually focused on the weapon itself…what did you think would happen?
Did you honestly think that all hunters back then would go “Oh, we get a melee spec instead of a ranged one? Awesome!” ?
And?
Same as I said earlier, it’s not an “all or nothing-deal”.
Not every single hunter out there has to like a particular spec.
If this was a big factor, again, there would be no melee SV.
Why? Because proportionally, very few like and play as it.
Does that mean that I’m going to ask for the removal of MSV? NO.
But still, for some reason, you seem adamant to keep us from getting RSV back as an option. Even when it can be done while still letting MSV(or other specs) also remain as part of the class.
9 Likes
Lets assume that you are correct, 2 ranged specs are enough, and that there are too many specs as is. Presumably then, 2 melee specs would be sufficent? 2 caster specs as well? It would certainly reduce the number of specs to balance!!
I’m always curious why 2 ranged specs are plenty, but I never get an answer when I suggest only having 2 melee or 2 casters??
10 Likes
Because that would actually require the removal of entire classes as they are now 
But yeah…if it should be no more than 2 of each then…it has to be done.
1 Like
@Bheleu,
That’s exactly my point. Why should there be paladins, warriors, death knights, demon hunters; mages and warlocks, etc. But only 1 ranger? And now only 1/3 of the specs focus on ranged damage?
6 Likes
quit my hunter and changed mains. blizz killed the class.
10 Likes
@Yura,
Yeah they definitely fudged it up. I’m glad that MM is still here though.
6 Likes
How, pray tell, would you sufficiently differentiate another archer class (or even a spec) from marksman hunter?
A bow is a bow, you only shoot it one way. There’s not much else to it. There’s no foundation to create multiple variations of a class from. Marksman has the entirety of bow/gun/crossbow usage covered. Honestly, even beast mastery only uses the bow to support pet damage.
Yes, there’s multiple caster and melee classes in the game, but they each play differently and focus on different elements/combat styles. Mages and warlocks use different magics (other than some slight fire overlaps), as do balance druids and elemental shamans and shadow priests. Warriors and rogues are complete opposites in combat style, Paladins and deathknights mix opposing magic types with melee combat.
Without a massive overhaul to both the weapons and the class(es), there’s no way to add another bow/gun/crossbow user that feels unique and set apart from marksman hunter (or bm hunter). We dont have different ‘elements’ of bows, and unfortunately blizzard did not sufficiently differentiate the ranged weapons that we DO have. From the beginning, they SHOULD have made guns, crossbows, and bows all have drastically different qualities and features, from armor penetration values to ranges to accuracy to reload/firing times. Then there might’ve been room to make multiple ranged weapon users.
At this point the only ranged weapon user that we’re ever likely to see added is something based on thrown weapons, but guess what: Weapon throw is already available to rogues, warriors, and demon hunters.
People need to stop comparing classes this way and start comparing specs. What we had before was two ranged specs and a ranged/pet spec. Survival and marksman were too similar to one another, with the only thing setting survival apart being a couple of traps and some melee abilities (and the mix of ranged/melee abilities probably also made it more difficult to balance adequately). What hunters did not have was a melee spec, so they used that to set survival apart.
Personally, I like survival as it is (though I could, honestly, do with more melee abilities and less reliance on bombs and traps). I have an orc hunter that goes in with a 2h axe and smashes faces alongside his dire wolf, and that’s fun and fitting for the character theme. An orc playing legolas with a bow doesnt make any sense to me at all.
2 Likes
@Nightlynx,
“I have an orc hunter that goes in with a 2h axe and smashes faces alongside his dire wolf”
Pet aside, this is warrior behavior.
6 Likes
I don’t personally know anyone who likes that they made survival melee.
That said, if they did it to beastmaster the spec would be unrecognizable. I really hope that’s off the table, I prefer to spit out my pet, fire from afar (often while moving, nice perk), and I totally play it because it’s the most mobile ranged class. Making it melee would literally kill it as it stands, I’d rather a 4th spec than anything like that.
To me Beast Master is the most iconic of all hunters, as is of course. Funny my brother who’s thinking of returning, first thing he did after asking about AR requirements was whether survival was still melee, apparently he had one (I’d forgot) and wasn’t happy when it changed.
8 Likes
@Telescope.
To each his/her own I guess.
1 Like
Here’s one design-concept for RSV. I mean sure, it would be based on using a ranged weapon like MM, but it would not play anywhere close to the same way as MM.
(It’s not just about if you fire a ranged weapon or not.)
Not even close.
Marksmanship focuses on a theme surrounding archery/sharpshooting.
Mechanically, your abilities; most of them; have a cast time. Which for MM simulates the idea of someone aiming their weapon for varying amounts of time.
MM focuses on hitting that perfect spot, to cause serious injury in an instant.
You ask “what could be different from that?”.
How about a spec that focuses on weakening the enemy over time?(DoTs)
A spec that makes use of animal venom or explosives or other poisonous effects to slowly but steadily, kill the enemy(By using enhanced ammunition/arrows).
A spec which masters the use of traps, and allows for their true potential to be revealed?
In other words…
A Munitions Expert and Trapper.
That is what the old SV served as the basis for. And what potential it has for the modern game. If only someone decides to explore what it could be made into.
Not sure what iteration of Survival you’re referring to here.
But it’s not the RSV people are asking for to come back.
Yes!
6 Likes
So because you want ranged survival back, you’d ruin the class for all of those who enjoy having a melee spec?
1 Like