“Only one of the specs of the class doesn’t follow the class identity so it’s OK!”
14 Likes
You said that nonsense just for the upvotes by bitter boomers didn’t you?
5 Likes
I would be fine with this, I love classic hunter. Having both options is awesome. I reallllly do miss old survival though
6 Likes
It doesn’t follow your class identity champ. But then again there is no account for taste. I mean I’m replying to a goblin…
1 Like
Yeah MM really does stick out, but it’s got such a history I think most people get where it fits in.
Fixed that for you.
7 Likes
For who? Nobody plays survival. It’s the least popular spec in the game.
9 Likes
In Leg it was dogcrap. In BFA, it was gourmet(from the good stuff you’d feed a dog) dogcrap. Critically, the spec lacks what every other melee has. SVs have no true immunities, no active mitigation, and less CC. It’s really a melee support spec, which means if you roll with the right people(and the right people have to want to let you roll with them), you would do well. But an SV by itself in a vacuum sucks, pun absolutely intended.
I do argue that it was better in BFA because most of your abilities can be cast at range, and you have Eagle Aspect that’ll let you do Raptor Strikes at range. That is good because range provides versatility in itself(you can start engaging anytime you can within 40 yds). Kill Command is a big improvement over Flanking Strike, as well as its rotation being a big improvement.
But make no mistake that SV is focus bait. A savvy SV can bug out when things get hairy for him, but time that is spent running away is time not spent on actually contributing DPS. Where I would rate it, the spec does better than melee specs that are discontinued, such as Hance and Sub. So I would say it’s the worst melee spec people are playing competitively.
It wasn’t just that SV shouldn’t have been melee, it never was a GOOD melee. That’s the irony of something that’s new; something that’s new is supposed to actually be GOOD. SVs need the comps more than the comps need them. It’s a two-fold failure for sure.
5 Likes
For most of BFA it’s been the highest DPS hunter spec for raiding. Still nobody plays it. There are 13 other melee specs to play, nobody is interested in Survival hunter. People play hunter because they want to shoot a ranged weapon.
6 Likes
True. I had meant for PvP. But are we sure about PvE? I’m certain MM would have been a competition SV couldn’t handle in that.
3 Likes
But Survival is literally one of the best PvP specs at all, and certainly the best hunter spec. What should it be better at that wouldn’t just make it objectively overpowered?
3 Likes
This is a minefield. If they’re considering it, maybe a compromise? Why not restore Survival and provide the class a 4th spec for it’s current melee iteration.
I’m sure someone will find a way to disagree despite adding something that won’t affect someone who dislikes it. Can’t win them all, I suppose I can enjoy the reach around that argument will require since it’s not a proposal of change, just addition.
5 Likes
Honestly, I loathed Survival in Legion. I was super pumped at the idea of Survival Hunters being a Melee Hunter but couldn’t really get into how complex and clunky they were. BFA’s are in a lot more enjoyable place, for me personally, and I really like them.
Honestly, I really would hate to see Melee Survival removed. I would rather see fourth specs become a thing so that both styles can co-exist together somehow.
I played a bit of Survival Hunter in MoP and it was by far my favorite spec for Hunter back then so I do get the desire to see it back. Surely its possible to reach a happy medium with both sides winning by having both formats exist.
Just my two cents.
11 Likes
B-but I play Survival from time to time… Well, I guess Papa was right… I’m a nobody after all!
Understandable. We all have our preferences.
There’s ofc room for a melee spec/fantasy within the class. No doubt about that.
My problem was never with the idea of a melee concept, but more about the way in which they implemented it. And what they took away just to “make room” for it.
They should’ve gone for the 4th spec option from the start. No one(almost) would’ve complained within the hunter community if this is what they did instead.
Ofc, by today’s standards, if we want RSV back it needs further iteration to fit modern design philosophies and design models. But anyone saying that it had nowhere to go and nothing could be done to further define it’s niche/fantasy, and that it would always just be a version of MM…
All that is required, is a bit of imagination and investment in what the spec catered to.
Granted that no future design could ever satisfy everyone, that’s impossible. But I like to think that many players would want to see it return. At least that’s what it have sounded like for the years where we’ve been without it.
8 Likes
Thats pretty selfish. The game isn’t about you, and it isn’t about me either. So you don’t care about survival having fans in its current state? Only you, yourself and you?
Personally, I actually find BM more fun since I solo more, but blizzard either flipflops and makes a lot of melee survival fans upset/angry but anti-survival happy…or stays the course and it is what it is, and makes melee survival fans happy and the other side unhappy.
The best course of action is to not play survival if you don’t like it and play other specs.
5 Likes
I have recently picked up playing a Survival Hunter. Its a blast! God forbid a game actually be fun to play right?
3 Likes
That’s awesome!
Now let’s hope that we who love(d) RSV can get our spec back as well so we can end these discussions.
4 Likes
Melee hunter is fun, but it kind of gets old after awhile. How about a compromise? It may sound stupid or crazy, but it does fit a hunter class fantasy. What about we bring back ranged survival, with a melee execute phase? A hunter hunts his prey from afar, then goes up close for the finishing blow. This would ultimately solve this melee vs ranged with a compromise.
As much as you, as a FOTM Warrior reroll, think melee is God’s gift to class design, the Hunter class was explicitly defined as a ranged class until Legion rewrote it out of necessity.
You know what’s maximally selfish? Pushing for a popular ranged spec to be effectively removed from the game to fulfil a fringe melee niche, which is what the melee Hunter folks did.
You’re implying it’s a 50/50 split when it really isn’t. Ranged Survival fans were more plentiful and were there first.
People around here have heard this line plenty of times but evidently you haven’t, so here goes:
“Live and let live” ended when ranged Survival was replaced with a melee spec.
I picked this class in the beginning and, as they further defined each spec’s identity, I came to like Survival the most. That’s the spec I mained until it was removed. Neither BM nor MM play like Survival did, very few people play the current Survival, and I’d wager most of the ones that do don’t specifically like it because it’s melee but rather in spite of it. This "whoops, sorry, guess we removed your spec, can’t go back on it now because it would be just as ba really doesn’t work, and it reeks of melee favouritism.
P.S. Are you the DK who, a couple years ago, claimed that ranged Survival never actually went away and the full playstyle was available via MM talents?
Given that most of this class prefers ranged specs, the people in favour of ranged Survival are, in fact, concerned with making the game fun to play by providing a spec that Hunters actually enjoy.
It really wouldn’t. Personally, I wouldn’t accept any spec with a forced melee aspect, and I doubt the melee players want to play a spec that is only melee for one specific part of the fight. It’s a great way to make both sides unhappy just so they can turn around and say “see? we still have some melee for Hunters!” (i.e. tokenism).
9 Likes