I’ve always felt this is a weird argument. A spec name shouldn’t really be taking literally or then Arms Warrior would need a redesign, and more. Not to mention SV never was the “best at surviving” hunter spec
Play on words, just as a melee spec it should be designed like a melee fighter. A shorter cooldown on defensive spells, having an active heal, and Turtle not stopping damage. Survival has gaps in it defensives and needs to be worked to close them.
1 Like
I don’t know, I mean yeah I wouldn’t mind better defensives Hunter (as a class) has had historically rancid defensives and we just got more. I’d still say SV is the most defensive Hunter spec rn as we can make use of the 10% leech way easier than the other specs.
That being said, yes, totally give SV an extra defensive BM/MM dont have
Even Bepples and I are not 100%. I will let MSV stay IF it can prove itself in the mean-dog-mean world of MeleeCraft. Just like Apocalypse Now and SC Brood War, don’t go for it unless you are going ALL THE WAY.
And Stukov DID go all the way, as we know from SC2. But SV wants to act like it can still stay on the boat/bcruiser.
So as a card-carrying member of the RSV Party, I can reach across the aisle on some compromises. In a way, I’m a “more moderate” RSV politician. But Bepples has never argued against me on anything, if only because I agreed with him on the history of SV and the Hunter class. He doesn’t mind that I can tolerate MSV being a thing, but Leg outright DESTROYED the Hunter community. Leg might as well be the America 1964 moment of WoW, the Hunter class being a JFK of sorts.
So he’s not the hero we want but he’s the hero we need? Beeples is Batman?
1 Like
So we’ll flame him out, because he can take it…
yeah op wtf you saying bro. also wtb SV buffs
It was their initial idea, at least, going into Legion. What they actually did, you can barely call it a try really. Considering what they did to the few abilities they did in fact move over, the gameplay they promoted as a part of MM in Legion did not in any way resemble what old SV was. If anything, they went out of their way detaching each respective ability as much as they could from its former place within the SV loop.
MMs primary/main theme is, and have always been to be a sharpshooter and skilled archer(ampt at handling the weapon itself).
Wind Arrows, different arrow types to capture the essence of proper aim and distance to target etc., dedicated “aimed shots”, reflecting the portrayal of someone focusing on hitting that perfect spot, rapid fire which reflects the idea of someone who’s fast at reloading and firing.
I’d say it all fits that intended theme/fantasy perfectly.
The magic, while not the most prominent theme, nor should it be, have always been a part of the class. And it has always been portrayed in a way which makes for a neutral approach towards how its utilized. It has never been for the purpose of making us actual spellcasters. Regarding Wailing Arrow, specifically, we’ve already discussed this…
They added Wailing Arrow solely for the practical purpose it served on the basis of its functionality, how it allowed our ranged specs to bring some niche, but useful utility to a group setting. Without the silence effect it provides, they would either have reworked it to a different theme, or not included it at all, going forward from SL.
So, if you look at the middle of the MM tree/Right side of the tree, Black arrow and explosive shot (old version) do not fit. However, there are quite a few ammunition-themed talents on the left side no?
I don’t see how more fluidity in ammunition is bad for the theme of MM. Again, it’s never going to happen but I do see that there are some slightly similar themed talents that could be squeezed.
We’ve got:
On the MM tree:
Wind Arrows
Heavy/Light Ammo
Wailing Arrow
On the Base Tree (Because nothing is safe in design and we deserve a base tree rework too so it’s not so bottom heavy)
Explosive Shot (Current)
Serpent Sting (Viper’s Venom)
Arctic Bola
There’s a lot that could be moved if we consider a full hunter rework. Now I’m not saying it’s fitting of your extremely strict sniper fantasy but I could see them doing it.
But if you want your nostalgia hit back for RSV fine, go take it and run with it. In an effort to not run this conversation back to RSV MSV again I’m going to refrain from continuing to speak about this.
And another hunter forum thread morphs into a MSV vs RSV thread…there can be no other conversation.
4 Likes
Their the glue that holds all of MSV community together. They take all the focus and narrow it down to one point.
RSV was about using exotic ammunition to get the job done. It used explosives, poisons, and magic to fight. MSV is still close to what RSV had. Still uses explosives(WfB), and poison(ST). The class designers argued that RSV didn’t have a theme, yet managed to capture it in MSV. Guess swinging a stick around is what it really needed to differentiate it.
If you don’t want the post to be over in two replies than yeah it will lead into that.
2 Likes
How is “different arrow types” any different from “specialized ammunitions types” that RSV people want? Using different arrows is the same if it’s poisoned or to “capture the essence of proper aim”.
This is straight up magic. Not a mage “enchanting” your arrows, not using any sort of fancy alchemical wildfire bombs, this is just straight up conjuring arrows out of wind.
It just needs a more clear identity. If people think current SV is too “messy” then that easily applies to current MM too. All there is to it.
Considering your first reply in this topic, it’s not like you made an effort towards any serious discussion/conversation…
Except that old SV was designed with the approach of fitting these elements in as part of a ranged weapon-concept, with a playstyle that is fundamentally different to current SV.
Just because both use explosives and poison, it doesn’t automatically make them the same/similar.
You keep flipping back and forth between arguing for the defense of the changes they made, to arguing how they did wrong, and it was a mistake, and we should get old SV back, etc.
At this point, I’m not sure where you stand, what you’re actually after.
3 Likes
It’s all part of a common class fantasy, so, in that sense, it’s all good. Having said that, within the scope of how the devs approach spec design, there’s only so much space for individual elements and sub-themes/fantasies to be explored. The primary theme of Marksmanship is just that, the focus on good aim and skill of handling the weapon. You can’t have a full separate alternative theme included as well if you want to adequately explore the intended primary theme and fantasy of the spec.
In short, the more munition-themed elements you include, the less space you have to put in elements that focus on sharpshooting and, well, marksmanship. Obviously you could just throw in a lot of stand-alone abilities for players to choose between in order to fill their action bars, though, that by no means allow you to create a coherent playstyle with interactions and in-depth exploration.
One focuses on what type of arrow or bullet they want to use in order to have the best chance of hitting their mark in the perfect spot.
The other focuses on actual augmentations to the arrows/bullets/projectiles they use, not for the purpose of perfect aim, but for the augmenting effect to cause [more] harm to whatever enemy it’s inflicted on.
See the difference?
How does this address your initial point of MM supposedly lacking a primary core theme? This being what I responded to with the comment about “Wind Arrows”…
The identity of MM was never questioned in the past, before they started to cram in more elements that, in some form, focus on the arrows/bullets.
Outside of the devs, how they in their biased ways thought old SV lacked a core theme, the identity of SV prior to Legion also wasn’t questioned by the community. As we can see from what the devs have said over the years, it’s blatantly obvious that they don’t see a difference between one ranged weapon-attack and another, from a fantasy/identity perspective.
They don’t see how there’s a difference between a shot that’s focused on taking the time to aim a weapon, with the goal to cause harm through the impact of the shot, compared to another ability which has been enhanced with poison, magic or an explosive attachment.
1 Like
Sure, but you’re getting very narrow. By and large the fantasy would be “ranged spec that uses special ammo” and “ranged spec that uses special ammo and also aims”
Because it’s a mess of a design if the spec is using specially conjured wind arrows, externally enchanted magic arrows, explosives, different types of shots (light vs heavy ammo), precisely aimed shots, barrage of a lot of shots (volley/rapid fire). mess of a design
but that’s not what MM is about. it’s what one of their abilities is about
Maybe, but you know what I didn’t do? I didn’t turn this into another MSV vs RSV thread, which was my point.
You have a point but it’s a complete non-sequitur.
1 Like
It’s a way to describe what makes their approaches different from one another, this being what you asked for. This is literally the fundamental goal with core specializations, you want core specs to be designed around a common class fantasy, but for each to focus on a certain part of said fantasy, to allow players to engage with it, to invest into it.
The class fantasy of hunters before Legion:
Ranged combatant, using guns/bows/crossbows to fire projectiles at enemies, while relying on a tamed beast to aid in combat.
The core specs:
-
Beast Mastery - Ranged combatant, primarily focusing on the bond between the hunter and the pet with their attacks.
-
Marksmanship - Ranged combatant, primarily focusing on weapon handling and proper aim.
-
Survival - Ranged combatant, primarily focusing on enhancements to ammunitions/arrows and traps.
You can apply that reductionist view to every pure dmg class and spec in the game, and some others as well…
Still doesn’t refute the fact that the primary theme/fantasy of MM still is, and have always been that of a sharpshooter/skilled archer. Either way, I do agree, like I said before. The identity and theme of MM was never questioned before they began trying to cram multiple core fantasy concepts within a single spec.
This is what we’ve been saying all along when it comes to arguments of how “they should just add the old SV abilities to MM and call it a day”. IIRC, you’ve also made this argument in the past…
Did I ever say that’s all that it was? Not sure why you wrote this in response to what I said. That part of my reply wasn’t even focusing on MM itself, but on how the devs see the fundamental concept of a [ranged] hunter, within this game.
3 Likes
You specifically? No but your fellow MSV-enthusiasts did, albeit indirectly, through their usual rant about Bepples, which led to what it did…
MSV agents hijacked the thread because one person said Bepples (frequently banned) is abrasive and not fun to talk to?
Such a specific amount of time to focus on. 2006-2016 seems like a very odd time to focus so much on, especially when 2016-2024 has such a different fantasy and is almost the exact same amount of time?
And I’ll make it again 
Adding special ammo to the sharpshooter spec makes sense.