A sniper is a sub class of hunter lol.
Sharpshooter… marksman…
That’s how that works lol.
1 Like
I would rename this spec to Tracker (with pet) and make MM pure sniper for correct terminology.
How does that make sense?
Your main abilities are called aimed shot and steady shot. I don’t think a tracker is focusing on aim. That is what we call a sniper/sharpshooter/marksman.
If you were hunting deer would you use a hunter or a sniper?
2 Likes
If you were deer hunting, would you want your pet to spook the deer?
1 Like
Considering a sniper is a hunter… and a hunter also uses a long ranged weapon… aka sniper. lol.
You aren’t even trying.
So you would call military snipers hunters?
2 Likes
Well… They are hunting aren’t they?
They are posting up. In camo. Trying not to be seen.
Tbh I don’t know why you are arguing this lol.
2 Likes
I am actually really sorry that you are losing something therapeutic to you. I understand completely doing things in games that people may not understand as a way to digest issues, sort thoughts out, dwell on the darker things in a healthy way, and cope with a hard reality or truth. I do this a lot by decorating houses in ESO or building up a stockpile of certain items as the basis for world building in SWTOR.
But I also have to say that as a hunter main I have been begging for this exact change for a very long time and not really daring to hope that it would ever happen. See, Marksman for me was always about doing it without the pet and using your gun alone in a world of magic to do what others could not. I, for one, am very tired to have to rely on pets for survivability in delves or the like.
To me Marksman was the sort of Archetype of Sylvanas and the pet having archetype was always Rexxar. I’m really sorry if you have to switch to a more Rexxar-like character to have your therapy, but a lot of us had to deal with having a pet for a very long time when we wanted to be Sylvanas. And if you didn’t run it, you were more poorly optimized for solo content. Your story was harder.
3 Likes
Why does a hunter have to be Sylvanas? They are not dark rangers. They could have made another class for dark rangers.
5 Likes
Where are you getting this weird self made definition of hunter?
If any spec is fitting of “ranger”, it would be mm. But thankfully we have hero talents that make specs hybrid.
Look at the class name it says “Hunter.” Does it say “Dark Ranger.” on it?
2 Likes
Who is asking for it to be balanced? Using a pet for MM would be like using a voidwalker for lock. For outdoor/solo content mostly/RP.
Thanks for proving my point.
Source?
Do people play MM to be petless, or do people go petless because it’s meta?
Which is why literally no one is against removing hero from the pet and putting it on the hunter. It should be done for other specs too so you don’t have to bring a specific type of pet.
So you think voidwalker should be removed then?
And yet removing demons from them would be a terrible idea.
Because of the utility…
It isn’t a bad example. Those are the two classes that have perma pets for all specs and as a baseline feature of the class not tied to any spec. You literally get a pet before you pick a spec in retail.
How are new players going to feel. They log into the game. They go tame some boar hell yeah this is my boar I’m gonna name him Hoary. Then they hit level 10 and think “oh hell yeah being a marksman sounds awesome” and suddenly they can’t use Hoary anymore?
This is not good design at all.
Petless can still be meta. Just like not using voidwalker is meta.
In endgame yes.
It got added back in because removing it upset people. So it’s just blizzard repeating history. Obsessed with making the same mistake over and over again.
It hasn’t. You have yet to give even a single good reason to remove pets that hasn’t been effortlessly rebuffed.
Good think literally no one (Except blizzard with the eagle) is saying MM should be forced to use a pet or that lone wolf should be removed.
Which means make the choice that makes the most unhappy and the least unhappy. this is incredibly simple stuff.
Funny because a lot of hunters actually DO use dogs to help them hunt.
And yet hunters still can’t dual wield melee like rexxar.
6 Likes
The way hunter pets currently interacts with MM (in 11.0.7), is bad. Needing 2 globals and a 3 second channel to lust, then waiting another 5 seconds before you’re doing full damage is not fun, nor is it good for the spec. As a result of this, if the MM has to lust, they only get full value out of 75% of the bloodlust.
The currently proposed 11.1 changes fix this problem, and therefore are an improvement in my book.
2 Likes
It doesn’t. You can play a hunter pet. No one took that away. You can be Rexxar if you want. But uh Quiver has a point. The class is based on the D&D ranger. They get druid spells but are otherwise mostly trackers and if they have a bow at all they invest heavily into using it well and typically use it in conjunction with a longsword or just use the bow. At least in 3.5 and pathfinder 1e. You can have a pet if you want, but it distracts from your focus to invest in it so they are largely used for utility like scouting.
But not everything.
There’s some quarry where you leave the dog at home so he doesn’t get in the way.
No, but they can use melee.
Paladin also doesn’t say protection, retribution or holy.
Yet those are playable specs…
Just like playing a sharpshooter, aka mm.
Rangers are a TYPE of hunter. But that should go without saying.
Tell me how to dual wield as hunter?
I addressed this.