The two themes and playstyles are conflicting and forcing SV into MM limits both MM talent choices and old SV player choices. Blizz also already tried that in Legion and failed spectacularly.
To be clear, I understand a 4th spec is unlikely. I still believe that to be the best solution to a problem Blizz themselves created.
From what I’ve read on the other Forums a lot of MM hunters would be glad to get the SV stuff back out of their spec too. (Not only did they ruin the class for those that Like RSV but messed it up for a lot MM hunters too.)
Yep, that was part of the point I was making. MM is meant to be this sniper with controlled burst windows.
SV was a munitions expert / arcane archer that used DOTs and procs for fast paced reactive gameplay.
The two do not match up well together and appeal to two distinct different themes. SV being stuck in MM is an absurd notion, when really it shouldn’t have been deleted in the first place.
I legitimately wouldn’t be surprised if they have it planned for another rework down the road.
It got back to back reworks, all of its legendaries are recycled azerite powers, it got zero changes going into SL, and has been left to wither at the bottom despite Blizz having to know it needs buffs right now.
It seriously wouldn’t surprise me if the reason it’s getting zero attention again is because they plan to drastically change it again. Whether it stays melee, ranged, or whatever is anyone’s guess.
I mean, it was entirely predictable. We have one ranged weapon focused class. They removed one of the only three specs that even used them. BM focuses more on the pets which leaves the fantasy of being an archer (never mind the various kinds of archers) left to be fulfilled solely by MM. In exchange we got a confused melee spec that thematically is confused despite the stated reasoning for SV being removed was because it was supposedly too similar to MM.
Like, I don’t want other people to go through that. But the reasoning behind the rework to begin with was absurd.
didnt misunderstand anything, rather pointed out how wrong he is and how flawed his logic is in thinking that it’s possible for there not to be a bottom 3-4 specs as that’s not possible with ranking charts.
Dude, his issue is that the same 3-4 specs are at the bottom ALL THE TIME. Do the same 3-4 specs have to be at the bottom EVERY TIME? Of course someone has to be at the bottom, but it doesn’t have to be the same specs EVERY TIME. Are you getting the difference here?
What I think is ironic is a lot of the people that have come up with the fallacy of the old range surv was hardly played compared to the melee version don’t get is . If people played the range version less then they do now, would surv still even be a playable spec today.
This take would make sense in a period accurate 100% historical warfare game. But it doesn’t hold much water in the heavymetal fantasy album cover that is Warcraft. I mean there’s crystal spaceships with world killing laser beams, doomsday plagues that are lethal to the living and the undead. And… oh yeah, magic. No one should ever be fighting face to face with swords and bows but we still do.