Reception on survival hunters?

Classes Hunter
81

As someone who likes niche specs I beg the differ. Enhance breaks your whole narrative as it’s squishy nature makes it annoying in open world. It only gets good as you gear, while other specs like BM, ret, dh fly by with ease at any gear lvl.

Edit: and while bm might be slightly better in open world, harpooning around throwing bombs out and decimating enemy’s in open world pvp is WAYYYYYY more fun then a brain dead spec. And I would know lvled two hunters one all surivial and this guy lvled all BM. Not much of a difference only noticeable when I was getting ganked and found myself dying more as a BM then survival.

82

I commented on it because I have been seeing it a lot over the past 2 years and to me it’s indicative of desperation to find anything good about Survival. You evidently like flexing on people who play less than you; what does it tell you when some of the best praise people can come up with for Survival is that it can kill world mobs fast?

I see in your edit (why do you keep posting and then adding like 50% more to the post in an edit?) you are once again straying into the “ackshualleeee SV is better” territory because you’re incapable of bringing yourself to admitting SV might be worse at anything. In case you didn’t know because you spend all your time chatting in cities rather than playing, BM has this little thing called Dire Beast: Hawk for world content which blows anything the other specs have to offer out of the water. Incredibly powerful uncapped AoE that can wipe out huge (20+) packs of mobs in seconds; packs of mobs BM is more capable of dealing with because, of course, BM easily collects mass amounts of mobs at a time to its pet which heals itself with leech from Beast Cleave and Stomp (still uncapped, BTW).

Besides; its PvP strength mostly came off the back of incredibly favourable PvP-specific tuning v.s. the other specs (BM was nerfed to living hell at the very start of BFA) in instanced PvP as well as favourable PvP talent design. Even with the laughable templates for BM and MM most people opted to play those specs everywhere outside of rated arenas.

P.S. I just checked; I have 353 days played on this Hunter and 87 days played on my original Hunter I stopped playing in WotLK, adding up to 440 days. According to Scabber logic this gives me unparallelled authority on the Hunter class although Scabber’s “Ghostcrawler’s best friend” card might make up the difference.

…ok? There is relative strength in the ability to kill mobs? This doesn’t change the fact that it’s still trivial to the point of irrelevance. Besides, if your focus is on relative strengths BM is far better in this area than Survival (no, not just “slightly”).

Portraying BM as braindead is big talk from someone who’s entire focus in this game is evidently questing mobs. I wasn’t going to go there, but you went there first.

I’m also sceptical of this “SV is a world PVP god” talk. Maybe I’ve just played against terrible players, but I’ve had not much trouble beating world PvPing SV Hunters as Marksmanship let alone BM. BM is capable of monstrous cooldown burst out in world PvP and it can do that while constantly moving at range; no Warrior charge ripoff needed.

3 Likes
83

Ain’t a single soul reading that wall of aggro text.
:woozy_face::ok_hand::smoking:

84

That’s not the best praise the best praise and the reason I started playing survival was it’s amazing in pvp.

You wrote a lot there about me trying to praise survival. I’m not it’s middle of the pack in dps but still extremely fun in pvp and open world stuff.

I use the term fun a lot to push a point that it’s subjective and even if the numbers aren’t there it’s still a fun time.

As someone posted before a chart showing survival drop popularity while it went through the major change but let’s not forget so did sub. And sub didn’t go through as drastic of a change. In bfa survival did better then sub despite being niche. I know u have a burning hatred for melee survival but it’s a fun time and unique.

And a little personal advice, instead of derailing every survival thread you could try just ignoring them or putting in actual input on helping survival which isn’t lost like you think it is. And then people of MSV would be more then happy to support adding RSV back as a forth spec.

85

Sub got absolutely kneecapped after the Zul fiasco. They were incredibly strong in Uldir, and then literally never worth playing thereafter because of how badly they got nerfed.

Shadow, MM, Demo, Affliction, Fury, Balance, and Enhancement also received major revamps at the same time. Every single one of them was more popular than Survival in both Legion and BfA. Also, Sub was pretty substantially more popular than SV during Legion, the expansion directly after both received major reworks.

1 Like
86

ok so I’m a shaman “main” through and through as its my favorite class even if I bench it at times. i think the main reason survival wasn’t as popular was people weren’t giving it a chance. for me I knew very little about it and never gave it a thought, I loved RSV in wrath and played a ton of it in pvp but I wasn’t upset when they turned it to MSV.

also people who play enhance always try to make it work because of being a cool elemental warrior theme. but enhance only shined in pvp in the first couple patches of legion and then the healing surge nerf (pour one out for the bois) made it dead and it still is (pvp wise)

2 Likes
87

That seems to be the fallback of literally ever SV player. The only argument is that people never gave it a chance, that it’s unpopular because it has a bad rep, that the peeps hating on it have “never given it a try”.

It’s all BS. It’s literally just presuming something, then taking it as established fact with zero evidence, and then hinging the entire argument on it.

You can believe whatever you want about why SV is unpopular, but without data one way or another, that belief is simply wishful thinking. The data shows that the spec is unpopular, period. You can make claims about why all you want, but the fact is, the spec has never had more than a ~2% representation in any raid tier since it was revamped. It’s high point was 1.34% in BoD. In fact, the only raid tiers it has exceeded 1% raid representation were Uldir and BoD, and both of those it was at ~1.3%.

You can claim undertuning. You can claim bad rep. You can claim that it was never given a chance. But all of those are still just suppositions, literally guesses and wishful thinking, with no data to suggest they are a more likely explanation than the many others that have been put forth.

It’s also worth noting that two of the primary points SV enthusiasts bring up to defend the spec’s poor representation, that it was not given a chance because of how it was introduced (and at what cost), and that it’s melee without a reason to be brought over other melee, are also arguments against it ever having been implemented in the first place!

Seriously, look at the representation chart (link, if you don’t have it handy). No other spec has been as unpopular as SV for that entire period of time, despite near on half the specs in the game having received major reworks in Legion, and several more (and/or again) in BfA. Even Sub, which you point to, was the most popular of the rogue specs in Nighthold, ToS, and near-equal to Outlaw in Uldir before the heavy-handed nerf in 8.1. Heck, even Arcane is making a comeback now, in addition to having superior representation in literally every single raid tier since Legion.

That all said, my bitterness about MSV’s origins aside, I’m not actually advocating for it to be removed (well, usually, depends on my mood). RSV should come back, but it should either come back as a 4th spec for hunters, or SV’s gameplay, as closely as it can be, should be transplanted to a class where it makes more sense, like DH. Change the ability names and animations, but keep the gameplay as close to existing as possible, complete with Mongoose Bite.

Frankly, I’d be fine with either one. Something tells me that moving it to DH is more likely than a fourth spec, if for no other reason than the whining other classes would put forth that they didn’t get a 4th spec too.

2 Likes
88

This is 100% the case. WoW players give “consensus” opinions way too much weight generally, and the consensus is that melee surv must not be a good spec because so few people play it.

Long-time hunters obsessed with being Legolas are deeply opposed to it and very vocal about it, but I’ve seen loads of people on my server pick up MSV coming from other classes and find it enjoyable.

Fresh eyes seem to enjoy MSV a lot more than “veteran” eyes and I suppose that makes sense; I absolutely loathe what rogues and monks have become in the last couple of years, despite having previously been infatuated with both classes.

Some people get really stuck in their ways and opinions after playing the same class for years on end, to such an extent that they don’t even consider that they might enjoy it outside of their feedback loop.

89

Surv is literally designed to be a niche pvp spec. One part of that claim is directly stated by the developers, the other is easily observed by its honor talent loadout, which realistically forms a huge basis of where the specs skill ceiling potential comes from.

Should it have an alternate build better designed for pve? It totally should, it deserves that. A build to allow a ranged playstyle or a move to stop class buffs from being a thing for melee would both be great at making that happen.

But it’s intellectually dishonest to think pve statistics offer a fair judgement of what surv is and where it stands. Surv is a callback to a time when most classes in the game had specs that were clearly designed for pve or pvp rather than both.

1 Like
90

It should be a 4th spec. If I wanted to throw grenades, I’d play D3.

And one thing that no one in WoW has ever said “You know what this game needs more of ? Melee specs.” Especially a melee spec that does nothing a rogue or warrior can’t do better.

2 Likes
91

Oh wow, another post about Survival that devolved into a shouting match between 2-3 morons. How original. Just play the spec for a while and find out for yourself how it is. If you don’t like it, don’t play it. If you like RSV go play on a private server, because it isn’t in the game currently. Arguing like “grown up” children likely won’t change that.

Also wow. Bepples has shown up to yet ANOTHER post about Survival Hunters with the sole intent to derail it. I’m winnin in our local betting poll so far.

1 Like
92

thats alot to read man and while I do respect ur input I’m basing my assumption just on my own experience as a enhance player who plays survival now.

I’m just saying op should try it out its fun.

2 Likes
93

Out of curiosity, how would this 3rd DH spec (let’s call it “Bane” or w/e, or you pick the tentative name) play out, in your imaginings?

94

More or less exactly as MSV, either Legion-edition or BfA edition or some gestalt of the two (y’all pick). Tame demons (I can taste the warlock salt) or soulshapes or whatever. Throw exploding fel blasts (ie. Wildfire). Burn your targets over time with fel flames (ie. Serpent Sting). Slash at your target with increasing ferocity as your hatred is fueled (Mongoose Bite). Draw out your tamed demon/soulshape/w/e’s inner anima, fueling both of your attacks for a short period (Coordinated Assault). Leap, Rush, or even fel-version-of-Harpoon over to your target. Vengeful Retreat away (DHs already have their version of Disengage). Place orbs of fel energy that burst when an enemy approaches and root them (Steel Trap) or w/e. They could base the entire thing on souls instead, keyed off of Allari the Souleater (who had quite a number of ranged abilities for a DH).

It’s actually pretty easy to flip the thematic concept without altering the gameplay much, if at all. DHs are already an extremely mobile spec, so a mobile mid-range skirmisher seems right up their alley. It gives the spec somewhere to flourish where 1) it has a lot more room to grow, without as many thematic limitations, and 2) it doesn’t have the vitriol it inherited as a result of how it was created.

Really, though, this’d be y’all’s thing. I’m not advocating for it because I want it on my DH, I’m advocating for it because I think it’s possibly the best compromise. Yes, it’d probably rub some peeps wrong on the thematic side, and that’s unfortunate. It’s a cost that’d have to be taken into account (along with peeps potentially having to level a new toon, though they could give existing hunters a one-time option at login to stay hunter or magically turn that toon into a demon hunter as this new spec).

But putting MSV on an existing melee class would 1) remove the “well why don’t you go ranged?” thing, 2) remove the animus that MSV has from replacing RSV, and 3) prevent the likely upwelling of animus from other classes if hunters instead just got a 4th spec to solve this whole craziness.

I dunno. Maybe I’m off base here, and the thematic and character identity cost would be too much. I’m trying to balance the desires of one group I know well (and identify with), RSV proponents, with the desires of a group I know rather less well, MSV proponents. I just want a solution that lets both exist, in some form or another. And I think it more likely that RSV hunters would also want to play BM and MM than an MSV player would want to, while an MSV player may be inclined to dally with Havoc or Vengeance (especially if they make Havoc not quite so 2-year-old-smacking-keyboard-randomly easy >.>)

3 Likes
95

I don’t think a single MSV player wants to become a demon hunter, my guy.
Some of us actually play races that make plenty of thematic sense as MSV as-is.

1 Like
96

i got an idea instead of move a current spec we should just add RSV to DH. change it thematically and give them the options of red eyes. BOOM dark rangers are now a thing. plus since its elf only it makes perfect sense thematically.

1 Like
97

Idk playing both areas of the game SV only sucks in PvE right now because the mechanics that make it shine well in PvP just don’t translate well to PvE but I actually think that’s sort of a good thing

Some specs would just be better off if focused on being good for one aspect of the game and mediocre in others depending on their design

Good example is frost mages in like WoTLK/Cata, didn’t pay attention to how they functioned in WoD but since they relied super heavily on freezes and burst damage from those, their mass amount of utility made it a really good spec in PvP, but the freeze mechanic and shattering in general just didn’t work on bosses lol. They eventually added more and more mechanics to try and make the spec work in PvE, and now it does but the spec is so bland now in PvP because of it.

Sometimes a spec can be well designed without needing to work well in both parts of the game and that’s ok. Certain unique mechanics are literally only going to be good in one part of the game. Survival has a ton of ranged damage and utility options in PvP that make it really strong, but in a PvE environment you’d be expected to have 100% melee uptime, plus all your utilities are effectively worthless when fighting a boss (and anything you could have in PvE is brought by other specs) so it’s fairly obvious why it sucks in PvE. There’s very little reason not to play a ranged hunter in PvE because ranged is way more valuable.

In PvP though you still play SV like a spec that’s ranged the majority of the time, looking for windows to actually go into melee range and be aggressive instead of having 100% uptime which is a really unique style and the fact that you only have 3 actual melee abilities works with this. SV actually does play very hunter like in PvP, even my positioning is nearly identical to how it would be playing ranged hunter in past xpacs but it just only functions this way in one aspect od the game. In PvE as SV you’re just literally usinf like 4-5 abilities, it’s fairly simple and it’s necessary to be in melee range constantly, it’s not shocking why it seems bad to you. But you have this naive thought that SV can just easily be translated to DH when they have completely different utility kits. Wouldn’t work in the slightest, it needs to be a hunter for it to actually be enjoyable.

It just isn’t a PvE spec, that doesn’t really make it a bad spec. There’s plenty of specs that are just good for PvE and aren’t very good in PvP. I actually even think BM isn’t a bad example of this, it’s not really mechanically challenging in any way but that isn’t very important in PvE (actually it’s really valuable so you can focus on mechanics). The same thing that makes BM a pretty good PvE spec has a history of making it toxic in PvP.

If anything I think BM and SV are good reflections how a pet oriented hunter should function in PvE and PvP respectively, their designs are actually fine for both parts of the game. The only spec that’s actually been horribly designed that I have no idea why people don’t complain about more is MM. If MM was actually enjoyable to play like it was in the past and they had a fluid transition to talents that really made it play like old SV, 99% of peoples complaints would probably just go away lol. These arguments are quite frankly ridiculous every time I read them.

For what it’s worth I’d still like to play MoP SV or WoTLK-MoP MM any day, I just don’t think it’s a horrible option for me to have PvP wise until the other specs have some real depth again - I’d be playing this one too though.

6 Likes
98

Query, is this related to Azerite traits, PvP talents, or gear/ilvl related burst? (Literally just hit current max like Friday.)

Said this in another thread but I think it bears repeating. Blizzard seems focused on the singular identity of MM as the biggish hitter sniper fantasy. Adding MoP era RSV game play at viable DPS would effectively kill this MM fantasy. You’d have fully mobile, fully ranged, fully player based damage only limited by proc chance (which would have to be high to be viable). So why play stick and move MM when you could have BM levels of mobility, no pet AI issues, and good DPS?

1 Like
99

Yeah I mean that fantasy of having MM as some american sniper type thing I swear has ruined the majority of the players enjoyment of the spec and it doesn’t even have that good of flow for that fantasy anyways.

Personally I really think MM just functioned far better when it was all about being a master of different types of ranged attacks. Rotation wise MoP version of the focus system was pretty much perfect, multiple focus dumps (albeit you got this choice mostly in PvP between choosing from aimed shot, arcane, and tranq), a signature hard hitting ability with a CD, and still having some steady magic damage from serpent stings. Multiple passives that flowed well with the rotation. SV was similar in having it’s own signature ability too, also giving up some of the on demand burst and physical damage sources for more magic damage and proc based burst/more sustian otherwise.

Their sniper idea just never has worked really well for them as far as having a coherent theme, doesn’t really work well in PvE in comparison to BM in any way since it’s not flexible, and the way it deals damage is just awful in PvP too. It mostly blows my mind that people rather not complain about this and instead are angry at SV when it’s not the reason a ranged hunter focused on ranged mobile attacks sucks.

2 Likes
100

This is partly why I’m surprised people have all but forgotten what else would be reasonably possible within a “Marksmanship” spec. Cavalry archers, speed-shooters, elvish rangers, grassy knoll snipers, trick-shots, and the like would all fall under that umbrella, no? One would think the big-hit sniper would be a build, not a be-all-end-all spec theme.

At present it’s a functional spec fantasy only insofar as it holds back any and all other fantasies that’d seem at least as fitting under its name and is the sole remaining purely ranged-weapon-focused spec in the game. “Breaking” it in this case is little more than giving it a reasonable amount to chew on, rather than limiting the entirity of ranged-weapon-focused aesthetics (i.e… aspects of marksmanship) to one vision thereof. Given that, I’m… totally fine with “breaking” it (into a larger and deeper thematic range with more involved, rather than merely limiting [see Precise Shots] playflows).

1 Like