Survival was not popular when ranged. It was niche for expose weakness or preferred in BG pvp (oddly but ok). I have Rhok’delar, therefore you must trust. You guys are getting too cutting with eachother.
4 Likes
I’m just going to point out the idiocy of you trying to estimate how many people “liked” something… as if you have a magic ball that can tell you how many people played it because it was over-tuned versus those playing it just because they liked it. Note, most people in high end raiding play the spec performing, like has nothing to do with it.
In short, you’re playing semantics. You just don’t like it being pointed out.
2 Likes
You are aware that there were expansions between Burning Crusade and Legion, right?
It got unique ranged mechanics and abilities and became a popular spec in WotLK, then remained as such until the 2nd tier of WoD.
The popularity of a spec in raids is a function of both damage and playstyle appeal. It’s not one or the other.
Ranged Survival was not usually overtuned but was usually a popular spec.
In fact, in Siege of Orgrimmar BM did more DPS but more people played Survival.
13 Likes
We’re not talking about the version of SV from Vanilla/BC. But the one that came after, and with that, the core concept of DoTs. The core which lasted up until the Legion pre-patch.
Think Bepples said it well enough.
And no matter how you look at it, there IS a difference between us estimating that RSV would be a fairly popular playstyle for the class, based on actual history, as well as when taking into account what it is many players are looking for in terms of playstyles and mechanics in e.g. content, when compared to Entreiri’s a$$pull of a comment that the only players who liked RSV are the very few who also post from their alts just to bump said posts.
10 Likes
Was he lying or is it just that you don’t agree with him? You also lose all credibility by doing this also because you simply can’t say you do not agree on something thats opinion based.
4 Likes
Its weird how the MSV info on the fantasy says
“An adaptive RANGER who favors using explosives, animal venom, and coordinated attacks with their bonded beast.”
But you’re spending most of your time in melee lmao. Real ranger like.
You and me both. I won’t return to retail without it.
I completely skipped BfA, and I will skip SL too. After Legion launched, I tried to find an alternative to my hunter, but I wasn’t able to fill that void with any other class or spec.
I didn’t quit out of protest (although I wanted to). I quit because the game wasn’t enjoyable without my main of 10+ years. The removal of RSV ruined the game for me. I know damned well I’m not the only one, but I have yet to see any “Why did you quit” emails from Blizzard that were discrete enough to specify class design as the reason for quitting.
12 Likes
I have a few honest questions to all the MSV players, why are you so against even the idea of a 4th spec that brings back RSV play style, especially if it isn’t going to affect you at all?
Why so aggressive towards fellow hunters giving feedback and simply asking for something that was taken from them to be returned?
Why are you against players having more options as opposed to fewer options?
7 Likes
No. Like it the way it is.
3 Likes
Yes, it is a function of both damage and appeal. That said, it’s a flat out lie to claim you can somehow parse out how many people liked or enjoyed the spec versus those who played it due to performance. Hence, Ghorak is playing semantics, which was my entire point. Both sides are playing semantics to try and validate their points, and it’s silly at best.
3 Likes
To claim that he can somehow estimate the number of players who liked rsv based on any past numbers is a lie. There is no way in the world to break out those who liked the spec versus those who played it for performance. Nor can you account for the significantly different and reduced playerbase.
My agreement one way or the other is irrelevant.
3 Likes
When have I ever actually mentioned a specific number? All I’ve said is that RSV was a very popular/well represented spec in the past, even during low performance periods(mid-late WoD, again, being the exception, for obvious reasons). And no, during low performance periods, it wasn’t the most played specs of all classes. I never said that.
But once again, if you account for the length of the periods of low representation and work your way up to the peaks, you can find the median(the middle % of representation in between those extremes). And that median, tells that old RSV, was in general, one of the more popular specs in the game. Not the most popular, but it was on the upper half, to say the least.
Taking that into account, combined with what it’s modern playstyle/theme would be about, and what many players are looking for in terms of class mechanics for e.g. content, and more, it is fair to say that it most likely would be a fairly popular spec, even today.
You’re trying to equate my estimates with what Entreiri said in his post, where he claimed that it was only the few of us RSV-fans that actually want it back, and we use our presumed alts in order to make it seem as if there are more of us than there actually are.
In truth, that’s not him(Entreiri) guessing. That’s him, making a statement(presented as a fact) based on nothing but his admitted despise for the spec. And how he also despises us for advocating for it’s return.
So again, NO. What he is doing, and what I’m doing, aren’t the same thing.
Not…even…close!
5 Likes
I don’t know what else to tell you but find someone to explain to you why you can’t make a laundry list of assumptions like you’re doing in this post and pretend it is anything remotely close to an estimate. It’s pure conjecture.
And I’ve already said both sides are throwing out hyperbole, so not sure why you keep bringing it up.
p.s. you don’t need to mention a specific number. You’re use of the word estimate is an attempt to pretend it’s based on some form of math and methodology, when it isn’t. If you actually did what you said above, you would know sv was indeed a relatively low rep spec other than periods of spikes. Note, I enjoyed rsv, but it was never as popular as some people pretend in this revolving argument.
2 Likes
What laundry list?
Was it always the most popular? No.
Was it a fairly popular spec in general? Yes.
Are there many current players(or past for that matter) who prefer not to rely a lot on pets for damage?
Yes.
Are there many players who like ranged weapon focused specs but aren’t fans of MM due to things such as movement restrictions, or abilities involving casting/channeling?
Yes.
Are there many players who have, in the past and present, said how they want a hunter spec designed around consistency rather than being about heavy hitters and burst?
Yes.
Are there many players who have said that they want a hunter spec that involves DoTs over other?
Yes.
Is it a fact that none of the current Hunter specs available, provides us with a playstyle/theme that covers all of the above?
Yes.
So, you tell me, if we were to get a spec that would actually accomplish the above, would it not be fair to say that it’s likely for that spec to become fairly popular?
And the tradeoff for such a spec? It would not have the same burst potential as current Hunter specs do.
6 Likes
Any time you say many, it’s an assumption. This shouldn’t be nearly as hard to grasp as you’re making it.If RSV was nearly as popular as you’re trying to make it out to be, it wouldn’t have been switched.
3 Likes
Demonology was popular and guess what they said back in WoD during a Q&A when someone asked why they are nerfing them to ground. Ion Hozzikostas response was “We simply do not want you to play demonology.” and took away one of the coolest things about the spec and gave it to DHs lmao so I don’t want to hear blizzard completely changing a spec cause of popularity.
10 Likes
Demo was not a widely played spec. You’re simply just lying at this point.
2 Likes
You bash on my way of formulating my posts when you can’t even be bothered to find out why it was changed.
So…by your own words, you just assume that it was removed/switched due to being unpopular. Or maybe you’re just guessing…
In short, the devs wanted an easy way of upping the diversity between hunter specs. They came up with the idea of a melee spec early on in the process and from that moment, they no longer cared about RSV and what it could’ve been like in the modern game(post-Legion).
Here’s the response from the interview:
https://www.gameaxis.com/interviews/interview-wow-legions-lead-class-designer-senior-producer/
Q: You guys also oversee all the other classes. Are there any particular changes that you’re most excited about?
…
Travis: And then Survival Hunter…It was another one that was missing its niche. It’s kind of like Marksman except more traps? Or different arrows? So it was kind of missing that “what is the core fantasy?”
I mean, for a dev/producer to come out and say this…
It’s like they hadn’t actually even looked at the designs and what they were about.
It was enough to look at the respective abilities/effects/interactions for each spec and you would notice that they were not the same, or even similar.
I mean sure, both specs relied on a ranged weapon, but that was about it. Look into their respective designs and it would’ve become more clear.
Kind of like Marksman, except more traps? MM did not focus on traps at all.
That was a niche tied to SV in the past.
Different arrows? Yeah, different abilities, different mechanics/interactions.
1 spec being about hardcasting big-hitters for a lot of burst potential(MM) while the other was utilizing DoT-abilities for a playstyle focusing on consistency(RSV).
So it was kind of missing that - what is it’s core fantasy? The core fantasy was about enhancing ammunition and traps. Something that MM did not focus on. Not that hard to figure out…
Travis: Having it move into the melee space and actually return to its roots that was the vanilla Survival experience.
Playing as a hunter in Vanilla with SV talents chosen, did not make you a melee hunter. It did not take away your baseline toolkit, consisting of essentially only ranged abilities.
The only reason we even had/made use of melee weapons back then was due to the design of ranged weapons having a min. attack-range.
Travis: It’s like it finally gave them a unique identity. If this is the beast companion guy that you’ve always wanted to play then you’re going to have that role.
Yeah, SV now in BfA is really unique…it’s BM but with a focus on melee combat. And yes, Legion SV was better than the BfA version in that regard.
But it’s not like RSV was the same as MM or BM back in WoD. The core specializations back then were different/unique. They catered to different aspects of the class, both in theme and in mechanics.
(BM: pets, MM: sharpshooter, RSV: munitions expert and trapper)
And then, the final quote from that interview… IMO, the most revealing one, in terms of showing their lack of understanding towards what players think:
Travis: You get more flavor both visually and also as a player. That feeling of “What is that experience that I wanted?” and it delivers a little bit more for every class now.
Well, that was a failure, to say the least…
For those of us who like ranged combat(using ranged weapons), turning one spec into a melee spec did not add flavor.
“What is that experience that I wanted?” Yeah, that experience was RSV and the focus on DoTs and Traps. But good on you devs for taking that experience away from us.
So no, it does not deliever a bit more of that now…
7 Likes
All of that, and you didn’t refute anything I said. Keep throwing around hyperbole and junk expecting the other side to take you serious. Every reply you make is littered with assumptions, while pretending the other side or me are just making wild guesses.
Cliff notes: so are you.
2 Likes
You mean the part where you said that “by many, I just assume” ?
That’s not me “assuming” anything.
That’s me, seeing players post on various forums every other day about things they want for the class(such as the examples I posted in the previous reply).
3 Likes