you heavily implied it was the same people.
Your post is insulting, condescending, and worst of all off-topic. I can only speculate to what motivated you to make it; I hope it makes you feel better about yourself, else it is a complete waste.
–
The best description I can give to how Marks plays now is “clockwork.” I like the rhythm it has and I want to get as close to that as possible.
I’ve tried out things with the current talents and I agree with your sentiment in general. It feels like “button! SMASH!” even though there may be some nuances that are there.
The feedback here so far (or lack thereof) doesn’t give me too much hope of capturing that tick-tock flow of Marks. But preserving my pet is priority, so there isn’t much choice.
this is perfect. I love the rythym of the spec.
BM has none, none that is actually FELT, like you feel with MM.
I’m not arguing whether that’s the right or wrong thing to do. I was just saying that it shouldn’t have taken up to 10 years sitting on the fence about it. Pre-Leg, nobody knew this was happening for 11.1, so you had a choice. That’s not a me-problem or a they-problem if some in the community couldn’t decide how they wanted to do Hunter.
It was worst when WoD was old RSV’s last expac. WoD was the last time you could be a ranged DPS using a ranged weapon using a pet as an SV. So already in Legion, you were forced to pick a more-petted RDPS(BM) or a less-petted RDPS(MM).
I was really talking about those who existed as Hunters back then, not really first-timers beginning with DF.
So this wasn’t off-topic at all. You presented a max 10-year-old conundrum. If you had just debuted in DF or TWW, that’s one thing. But then again, knowing why MM is going in THIS direction actually takes LEARNING THE HISTORY.
I went PTR just to test the changes. I love petless MM, always loved, so I’ll remain MM (with Surv as off-spec), but I wanted to try Dark Ranger BM with single pet and no summons.
Testing it, it felt very functional. I don’t know how competitive it is, but at least felt fun. You are constantly shooting things, but also ordering your pet to attack, which makes the pet feel more like a partner of the Hunter than the previous “fire and forget” MM pet.
Post-update, BM will have Cobra Shot, Barbed Shot, Black Arrow (Kill Shot), Explosive Shot and Barrage, so quite a good amount of shooting. You can also have Steady Shot but I feel taking the talent to turn it into passive Focus regen is better. I imagine it’s very clunky to include Steady Shot in the rotation.
The last time I played BM in any capacity was in Legion, when Dire Beast was the focus regen and you were locked into having two pets, so I didn’t like it at all. It felt like I was the Zoo keeper rather than a shooter. But this post-update BM feels a lot like MM Hunter was in Cataclysm and MoP (remember that back then you’d only use Aimed Shot when it proc’ed instant cast).
Again, I don’t know how competitive it is, but for casual and solo play it felt solid. Also, I didn’t feel like there were too many leftover talent points when I chose to focus on shots.
I’ll try it a bit more later when I get back from work.
Well this sounds promising. I’ll have to get PTR set up so I can try it directly instead of “pretending” on live.
From your description it sounds workable which should be fine. I don’t need to get into super sweaty territory pushing big keys (at least not with the hunter).
For some reason I can’t post a new message, so I am editing this one:
So I set up on the PTR and went to the training dummies. The results were disappointing.
I am sure Blizz’s “right” way to play Beasts is the crazy herd build, so going the single companion route with shot talents is really underwhelming. It still has the “smash buttons” feel and lacks cadence, feeling sloppy in comparison to current Marks.
While I’m willing to take a performance hit to keep my pet, the difference in output was also remarkably bad. On the live realm as Marks-Sentinel with pet I get ~600k on the training dummy. On PTR as Beasts-Ranger with single pet she was topping out ~335k. I am sure I can chalk some of this up to lack of familiarity, but not near 50%.
Very disappointing.