The class identity you’re referencing here explicitly notes it’s not a purely ranged class. The identity if the spec is beasts and nature, ranged weapons are an auxiliary element of hunters now.
Or does the mage core identity have something in there that acknowledges it’s not purely a spellcasting class as hunters do?
Agreed.
If you actually want something to change, the least you must do is to provide the feedback necessary for anyone to learn what you want. If you don’t say anything, don’t expect a change.
Feedback =
Say what it is that you do not like.
Say why you do not like it, what negative it presents when playing.
Say what you would want instead/how you would want it to be changed.
Say why you want it to change to your suggestion. Why you think it would make for a good addition/change for other players as well, not just yourself.
Again, if you’re unhappy with a part/element in the game, but you don’t say anything. Don’t expect it to get better anytime soon.
These forums are here for feedback and for discussions.
I’ve seen people say that they opt to flag/report posters that speak for the return of RSV. Claiming that it should be considered trolling etc.
People talking about how they want RSV back and why, are providing feedback towards making the game better for themselves as well as many others(yes there are many players that want RSV back). I agree that we should not advocate for the removal of an existing spec just to get the old one back. But that does not mean that we’re not allowed to voice our opinions as to what we would like to see in the game, in the future.
You/some might not like this topic, but there’s nothing wrong with talking about how to get it back as well as what it could be in the current game.
This i agree. Why they never choose to do this is a good question.
Do they feel like if they add a 4th hunter spec, they would ‘need’ to do that with other classes as well, which is not something they even feel like doing?
Well, there’s plenty of ways to survival if the goal is to keep breathing and walking.
Get to a safe ground is one. So does building your own safe house. Of course, humanity still dreams of controlling nature.
Went through the same phase myself as well. Sitting in a dumpster state for an entire expansion is hardly one’s idea of fun, but such is life. Most of ‘old school’ us still don’t really like the new spec, but at least we agree that it was much more improved than version 1.
Just because we adapt to the changes doesn’t mean we are ‘doormat’ to be walked on. We equally voiced our own displeasure, our feedback and of course, our rants as well. And many of us certainly still prefer to go back ‘how thing was’, and we are vocal about it.
But you know what is also not a virtue? Making a scene and
picking fights with everyone who disagrees with a particular point of view. That is definitely not helping your community, or even garnering support for your particular cause.
Being vocal and firm against certain changes doesn’t mean we need to do it in a condescending or demeaning way. The manner of how you present your argument is as important as the reasons, and sometimes even more.
I agree on this. Different opinions deserve an equal say/voice.
I think the core problem is the manner of how it was conducted, which becomes an issue when personality and temper flairs up.
It is good to have passion. It is bad when passion turns into ‘right and wrong’ when others think differently.
I showed support by still going on. I hope that Blizzard saw that I was willing to meet with them halfway. My biggest beef was MeleeCraft and I was very vocal about PvP balance where melee doesn’t just win almost all the time. I hope that Blizzard has taken the good time they didn’t spend fixing it here and now on making SLs neither MeleeCraft NOR RangeCraft. The latter would be vengeful but melee would not put up with it, even though they didn’t give two holy damns about the plight of RDPS.
Four years is enough time. It’s long enough. An indie team could have been contracted by Blizzard to fix what’s broke in that time and perhaps even far less.
Does indeed brings up a question of ‘what are you all doing’, given the amount of resources they have available. They even stated they hired more developers on the development team - which naturally, we would expect more output/content coming out.
I wonder has the team become ‘too big’ that instead time and resources are spent on creating content, they are spent on internal power struggle instead.
In queue The Office - Blizzard Edition.
Too many Michaels and Dwights and not enough Jims and Pams, and the Phyllises, Angelas, Stanleys, Kellies, Merediths, Oscars, and Kevins just go along with the flow that Michael and Dwight have made. The Ryans(new guys) and Creeds(class weirdos) are useless in their own naivete, and poor Toby would represent whoever Blizzard has put in charge.
What they as devs think or not, I have no clue about.
Ofc players from other classes will complain about them not getting a 4th spec as well in case Hunters got theirs. This always happens, no matter what gets changed or added for a class other than their own.
Keeping from adding a well liked, unique playstyle which already have strong thematic ties to both the class as well as the game in general, not to mention that it has already been in the game before, not adding it purely because of what certain players would say in regards to their own class…I don’t know really.
Personally, I couldn’t care less if another class got something added. I don’t play that class.
I believe that you should consider the following when determining if an additional spec is justified for a class:
Does it fit the core class fantasy in general?
(…as portrayed in WoW)
Does the new spec present a theme that both has a connection to the core fantasy as well as a focus on a unique aspect of that class which the other existing specs aren’t already providing?
Ofc Lore and game fantasy can be altered as time goes on.
But, if a playstyle/spec has no real connection to anything we can already find in the game then, it should not be added.
Does the new spec/playstyle come with mechanical advantages as well as weaknesses which aren’t already present within the class?
If we apply these criteria to a potential new RSV spec for the Hunter class:
Thematic fit - It focuses on enhancing ammunition/arrows by using poison, animal venom, explosives and even a bit of magic.
The spec would also be about improving hunter traps. Both existing as well as perhaps a new one.
The spec would/should also be ‘optionally’ dependent on a pet. As pets are a core fantasy of the class as a whole, we should have the option to rely on one.
Note: option, not requirement.
Uniqueness/identity - It would focus on elements/aspects within the class which other specs ‘dip their toes into’ but aren’t exploring on any deeper levels.
Lore/the game - We’ve already had a predecessor of this playstyle in the game. And you can find countless characters in multiple areas where they make use of/improve ammo and arrows but also traps.
The class, strengths and weaknesses - RSV was always about, and should be about DoT(damage over time).
Contrary to other hunter specs, this will allow the spec to present a more consistent and fluid playstyle. It will not have the same advantage of strong burst periods, but also, not the downside of low periods.
The biggest advantage of such a spec, would be the increased capability to deal with multiple targets at once(multi-dotting). Even when they are far apart.
In short, RSV, meets all the criteria for a new spec. As well as a bonus one - which is that it already has a following/players who want to play it. It’s already sought after/missed by many.
And as far as other classes go. If a potential new spec/playstyle meet the criteria above, I say, add it to that class.
Note that a spec which has a thematic and mechanical focus that is very similar to an existing spec within that class, ‘‘just based on using 2h weapons over 1h weapons’’ or some similar argument, does not warrant implementation. As this new spec wouldn’t actually be that unique in terms of mechanics. Only aesthetically/visually.
Let them add a fourth spec all day long
Just don’t advocate that they remove melee survival or you guys are every bit the jerks that you are mad at for stuff that happened years ago
More melee for hunters! We always should have been kept a hybrid dps.
RSV was never great.
MSV already provides that, so not unique enough to add a 4th spec.
Again not unique enough, thats almost the same as affliction warlock. Dots n Pet. And the CC came as traps instead of fears and alike. If you ignore the dot focus and clearly was the same as MM… few instants and 1 proc for free aimed shot (explosive). MM took a different path, but back then it was really close to MM spec.
Theres nothing really ingame lore wise… some would say Dark Ranger… but thats closer to MM with no pet. Current msv has more representation with Rexxar.
In short, RSV doesn’t meet the criteria for a new spec. With the class focus goal around that player seeks, chances for having more spec is going to very slim if not non-existant.
Exactly… RSV really just attracted the players that didnt want to work with a mechanic or have anything complex. A class with full instant casts is too easy for both pvp and pve.
You hit the nail on the head.
Since when does MSV focus on enhancing ammunition/arrows?
Since when does MSV focus on enhancing traps?
As far as pet related things go, MSV has very little that is unique here. It’s basically just abilities and effects taken from BM so…
Guessed you missed the part where I mentioned that this is about spec diversity within the hunter class, not between classes.
Besides, no, affliction lock is not the same as this would be. I know you find it convenient to ignore aesthetics and intended themes that are designed for a specific class fantasy every now and then.
Affliction lock = spellcaster that summons demons.
RSV Hunter = ranger/tracker using a weapon and is aided by a loyal companion.
It is fairly obvious that you have no passion whatsoever for the hunter class, no investment beyond playing MSV whenever you got nothing better to do.
This just makes that even more obvious:
…
Sure, by all means, ignore design elements and intentions of the spec.
Wrong and wrong…and wrong again.
There are plenty of npcs currently in the game who makes use of ranged projectiles enhanced by for example venom, poison or explosives, or magic.
Here’s Explosive Shot which is used by a boss/bosses in a raid:
https://www.wowhead.com/spell=65866/explosive-shotSerpent Sting, used by quite a few different npcs:
https://www.wowhead.com/spell=80009/serpent-stingBlack Arrow used by NPCs:
If you scroll down and check the Used by NPCs tab you’ll notice that none of them are Dark Rangers but most are actual Survival Hunters.
https://www.wowhead.com/spell=80003/black-arrowAs for general usage of ranged weapons or pets, yeah, no need to provide specific examples there…there are plenty.
So, come back when you got a better argument.
…
Another baseless statement.
You mean like MSV? It even has several ranged abilities(more than other melee specs) so technically, keeping that damage up is easier for you as you can just opt to attack from range for whenever the enemy manages to get a bit of distance.
same play style… element doesnt come to change anything.
Yes I know you are wrong, finding random NPC that use same skill clearly brings no lore connections.
You feel targeted, sorry, but thats just how rsv was back then.
Sorry my fault, I didn’t mention “Ranged” class.
Are you that blind ? Are you a zealot like Bepples ?
This is not even worth the time…
At least try to present arguments that are actually backed up by something tangible.
There are no other ranged weapon classes. There are 13 other Melee DPS specs though. That’s the point. When you lost the ability to play as a 2h Shaman you had a dozen other similar specs to pick from. Survival Hunters were left with only 2 ranged weapon specs to choose from.
As far as most hunters are concerned, hunters now only have 2 specs. Since we rolled this class to play ranged DPS, melee DPS isn’t an option.
I get what you’re saying, I really do. But the point they were getting at is that it sucks no matter what. When Frost stopped using 2hders I had no shortage of people telling me “Go play Arms or Ret.” If I wanted to play a Warrior I would. If I wanted to play a Paladin I would.
The same goes for the folks that lost RSV. I would never tell someone “if you wanted to play a ranged dot based spec, play affliction” cause you WANT to play a Hunter. Spec aesthetics and themes are a HUGE part of weather or not a lot of people play any given spec. I really like melee survival, I don’t want it to go, but I also hope people get at VERY LEAST MM talents to replicate RSV, at the very most, a 4th spec.
It’s not really about aesthetics or themes at all. Hunters are totally different to casters. Now there are only 2 ranged weapon specs in the game, 50% fewer than there used to be.
Meanwhile there are more melee DPS specs than ever before.
Yes I realize that. My point was that anytime you lose something you enjoy, it sucks for someone to tell you “play X class then”. I used Affliction as a example cause it is a dot based ranged spec, caster or no.
But I understand where you’re coming from, in that for Survival’s case it’s to a more sever degree cause they are in fact the only class that uses ranged weapons primarily.
What will they do with Lor’Themar then?
The only reason no one plays SV is because of how overtuned BM is. At the start of BfA we saw a large number of SV hunters because they were showing high numbers.