In the non-profit world we have a phrase for this. It’s called “But we’ve always done it this way” and they ruin the organization usually.
If they tried it and failed in Legion, hopefully you can learn from that and improve on things. But Success isn’ final; Failure isn’t Fatal. But the argument that Hunters are already pigeon-holded into DPS only, so let’s shake it up a bit isn’t unreasonable.
I also liked the old survival mechanics better.
BM will always be my favourite even though it is easy. I play other classes with complicated rotations, so having a couple of toons on easy mode is good for me.
Actually most of those sound pretty good to me. Ive been pushing for full gunslinger outlaw for a while
Ive been hoping they got rid of lone wolf. Since dps is so much higher with it i lost both survival and mm one for going melee and one cause i cant use a pet i want to use cause its huge dps loss to use a pet.
It’s been said here several times, but I absolutley love survival as it is right now. Easily my favorite hunter spec. But for those who want the old spec back, I seriously hope they improve MM and BM playstyles to compensate. They’re both just so dull, it’s a shame.
I will just repeat this again(despite that both sides seem to be “locked” into their mindsets anyway).
-I get why those who like current MSV would not want it to be removed.
-I get why those who like the playstyle that RSV provided would very much like to have it once again(this includes me btw).
The argument we/many have been engaged in for the better part of the past 4 years now, is quite frankly, depressing at this point. And the mindset that goes with the ranged vs. melee debate(this includes the WoW devs btw).
The fact that so many still after all this, are so locked into the mindset that it has to be either melee SV or ranged SV but it cannot be both?
Arguing that current SV should be reverted back to ranged I would say is a waste of time, purely because of how it was implemented. Because it was the devs who chose to implement it despite what the players wanted. Despite the fact that the players did not ask for that change.
And again, not doing anything(not returning ranged SV as a playable option) will not solve the issue. It will keep a large portion of the Hunter players from being able to play the spec that they loved.
Reverting melee SV to ranged, would allow RSV players to once again play the spec that they want. But it would result in MSV players, not being able to play the spec that they want instead. Again, not a good solution.
As for RSV in itself…
Anyone saying that it wasn’t unique enough or did not fit the Hunter class fantasy, or that it was just a version of MM(or BM? 
), anyone saying things like that, I would argue lack the imagination to understand what it was that actually made RSV feel distinct. What it was that made RSV the spec that so many players loved. What it was that set it apart as a unique playstyle, both thematically as well as mechanically.
Ofc weapon-based specs aren’t capable to divide their playstyles by the magic schools tied to each spec(part from DKs who are about as much casters as they are fighting with weapons).
Rogues as well as Warriors are in pretty much the same position as the Hunter class is when it comes to weapons. So, how do you add uniqueness between specs based on such classes? By mechanical diversity, and for hunters, by making specs focus on using pets to a varying degree.
The above, is not all that there is to it ofc, but it’s a base.
Neither of the current hunter specs are good at dealing with multiple spread out enemies at once(multi-dotting).
The ranged SV spec we had, is pretty much the only logical fantasy/theme that would allow us to gain a spec/playstyle where we would be good at multi-dotting. At least in a way that makes sense, thematically.
Why?
Because of it’s abilities.
Explosive Shot, Black Arrow, Serpent Sting and even looking at certain past traps we had as Hunters(like Immolation Trap).
Combine the above who are all DoT-based abilities on their own, with other passive or active effects/talents that could allow us to build up either damage dealt or the duration of those DoTs, and we would be more than fine on the multi-target front.
And also, these things, would make for a spec/playstyle unlike anything the class currently has(neither BM, MM nor MSV would play/feel the same as that).
And most importantly, just to repeat, that new spec/playstyle would still very much fit the general class fantasy of Hunters.
This is exactly why it is justified to add in a 4th spec option for the Hunter class(combined with the fact that the old RSV spec was taken away in the way that it was).
WRONG. It had very much it’s own identity. It was a mobile, ranged type. The problem with current SV is it has no soul nor identity. At least let them have a ranged attack.
See I argue with that, MSV very much has soul and identity. You are the spear in hand, toe-to-toe hunter of the wild, you have all the tricks and traps for whatever you hunt. While others leave themselves open with bows and guns you press the attack and close in on your prey, if a fight becomes to much you back off allowing your poison and traps stagger your foe. Unlike BM your pet is more than a meat shield, you charge in there and stand beside your companion even having flanking strike where you both attack from either side of your target.
Also just for fun try survival but with a bow, you can’t use raptor strike or carve but it still plays the same outside of that, it’s pretty funny smacking someone with a bow using flanking strike or changing on a fly in PvP from attacking with an axe to suddenly kiting with a gun.
We got two other specs for ranged, leave my melee spec alone!
We got twelve other specs for melee, leave my ranged spec alone.
Or keep it, as long as we get our 4th spec option.
what we need is another Mail Wearing Ranged DPS that has both a Ranged Weapon Specialization and a Caster DPS Specialization as well.
Yeah, just screw whoever likes rogues as what their class has always been defined to be, right?
No, it really isn’t long past time to start dumpstering rogue specs like they did with Survival. If Survival has proven anything, no matter how much you like it, you must admit that changing the intended audience of a spec out from under the people who are currently enjoying it is a huge mess. I think you can thank Survival for guaranteeing that they will never try anything like that again, including what you described.
That last claim is ironic. Look at how many people are downright gleeful that the former ranged Survival players lost their spec. Do you think they have “respect and consideration” for Hunters?
Do you even know how Survival works? Having Lone Wolf would require significant changes to the spec; a rework, even. Your focus generator, your mastery, and your major cooldown are all pet-based. This is on top of it being an absolutely horrible idea from a class identity perspective. How on earth will it still be a Hunter spec if it lacks a ranged weapon and a pet in any capacity? No, making it a talent doesn’t make this better.
At no point before Legion was Survival intended to not use its ranged weapon. Yes, this includes pre-1.7 when Lacerate was its final talent. Specs back then were not meant to fully define your identity and playstyle; most of that was in the base class. Survival was the tree that was intended to make your utility better and make you a little less useless in PvP. It did not make you a melee DPS in the same way as Legion SV did, totally lacking a ranged weapon.
Non-playable WoW lore characters, while they can contribute to a playable class identity, do not define it. That was defined by Blizzard at the game’s outset. Rexxar’s existence as a “melee Hunter” justifies a playable Hunter as much as Tyrande justifies Priests that use bows.
What benefit is there of a melee spec in a class with two of the most unique, mobile ranged specs in the game? The only two that use ranged weapons, might I add. Literally the only reason ANY of you can justify it being melee is as a token distinction v.s. the other two specs so you can say “see? it’s totally different!”… ignoring the fact that specs are not meant to be totally different from one another.
As for the benefit of SV being ranged: we had 3 ranged weapon specs because we want variety, choice, and depth when it comes to exploring ranged weapons. Ranged weapons are a significant part of any fantasy RPG, yet here in WoW we only have ONE spec that focuses on ranged weapons to any capacity, that being Marksmanship (BM, of course, focuses primarily on the pet and very little on the ranged weapon). While it might make sense to you that we have 1 spec that handles that, consider that we have THIRTEEN specs that use melee weapons.
We aren’t asking for 13 ranged weapon specs, but we think its fair that we have more than one spec so we can fully explore ranged weapon archetypes and providing variety and choice for people who liked ranged weapons. If you like the idea of being a long-range sharpshooter who likes lining up the perfect shots, you go MM. If you like being more utilitarian and opportunist in nature, adding effects to your shots to get an advantage, you go SV. That both provides great choice in ranged weapon archetypes and plays into the core Hunter identity really well, which is being a ranged attacker (https://i.imgur.com/kBVr5Uc.png).
As I said above, Lone Wolf Survival is dead on arrival. The only way to make it acceptable is if Survival were ranged. You cannot have a Hunter spec that has neither a ranged weapon nor a pet because that would cease to be a Hunter entirely, and it would require significant reworking to how Survival works. If you are concerned about flexibility and you want Lone Wolf for Survival, you should be right alongside the people asking for Survival to be a ranged spec again as it should be.
Yes, there are requests for Lone Wolf Survival. They should all be ignored. It is unacceptable when considering what Hunters are meant to be. We have minor things like traps and aspects that are common to all our specs, but it’s no secret that the two defining elements of what makes a Hunter a Hunter are ranged weapons and pets. There needs to be a REALLY good reason to go without either one of those things and there is NO justification possible for going without both of them. IMO it is indicative of the lack of attention or care the people playing Survival have for the Hunter class identity when they ask for Lone Wolf Survival. It is clear they don’t want a Hunter spec but something else entirely; something closer to a 3rd Warrior DPS spec.
Yes, ranged Survival did have Lone Wolf when that talent was first added in WoD. But ranged Survival was, you guessed it, ranged, so it was acceptable. It made sense that a spec with low pet dependence to begin with could choose to go without it for some situations. Like I said to Rea, if you want Lone Wolf for Survival you should be asking for Survival to be ranged first.
Just quoting the tantrum so people can still see it after it gets inevitably deleted.
And I’m entitled to say your opinions on the spec’s identity as well as that of ranged Survival are uninformed and delivered from a position of ignorance.
Do you not see a problem with someone like you, with an evidently extremely low level of investment in the Hunter class, making demands about what the class and each of its specs should be?
This is one of the major problems a lot of us have with melee Survival. Are we all trying to make a spec for Hunters, here, or for a different group of people? Because the attitude of people on the forums as well as that of Hazzikostas strongly suggest the latter.
This is actually a half-decent idea. However, two major differences:
Call me crazy, but we should be saying this to the people who wanted SV to be melee in the first place. You know, because the class was ranged first, the ranged-preferring players were here first… just a thought.
I can assure you that Hunters at large would not tolerate adding token utility or whatever into Survival to bribe Hunters to play it. They already tried this with traps and it did not go well. If melee is that flawed a concept that you have to bribe people to accept it, it’s time to rethink the spec being melee to begin with.
Go play one of the wealth of melee specs, including the one you’re posting from. We need more ranged weapon specs in this game and Survival as a melee spec has done nothing but flounder in obscurity.
Nope. I said this to the others, too: you cannot have a Hunter that lacks a ranged weapon and a pet, period. It would cease to be a Hunter.
What makes Arms stand out from Fury? What makes Subtlety stand out from Assassination?
There were differences between the ranged Hunter specs, you just ignored them because you are uninformed. Melee SV is the waste of space here as hardly anyone likes it enough to play it.
Maybe you should get better reading comprehension. What he said is that if you are going to argue that the three Hunter ranged specs were the same thing, and he takes those same set of standards and applies it to other specs in the game, you need to prove how he is wrong in his application of that standard otherwise you need to admit that standard is wrong.
And in the game design world we call your attitude “change for the sake of change” and it often ends badly. Change needs to stand on its OWN merit. It’s not automatically good or bad. You don’t just randomly decide to throw out mechanics that work really well and replace them with new, experimental mechanics that are already a tough sell on paper. Many game franchises are hampered by this sort of non-committal design method.
Plus, we are not in the realm of hypotheticals when it comes to Survival. It succeeded and worked really well when it was ranged and was played by many. Now that it’s melee, it’s permanently one of the least popular specs in the game and is defended mostly out of pity because most people see it as the “scrappy underdog”. Plus, look at all the toxicity it has caused. It was a negative change, and it isn’t getting any less negative as time goes on.
This is deflection, for one. Survival is the spec at fault here, not BM or MM.
Secondly, the people who played Survival in the past are not interested in a better BM or MM. That’s not going to cut it. They are interested in the playstyle they lost to return, and that’s not going to come from the other two specs.
I stopped here because what you are doing in this post is spin-doctoring. You’re not actually saying anything here that has meaning; you’re just dumping descriptions that sound cool to you and hope it floats. Plus, what you’re describing sounds far more like a Warrior and not a Hunter anyway. It’s like you just took Arms Warrior and tacked a pet on, which kind of describes Survival’s design direction pretty neatly.
How does it make sense to abandon your ranged weapon to… “press the hunt”? One would think that having the ranged weapon is what keeps up the pressure in the hunt. Furthermore, how does it make sense for SURVIVAL of all specs to be the one to do this? Survival implies opportunism, and before Legion its toolkit conveyed this strongly. What part of “deliberately not using a weapon that gives you the capability of delivering damage at range and sticking to the vastly-more-dangerous melee range” conveys “opportunism” to you?
But… but… I enjoy my BM hunter. To me, she’s tons of fun.
there where and are far more melee specs around it added LESS choice in ranged specs
How about “because it’s fun?” I like dipping in and out of melee and having a playstyle more interesting than standing far away and being a turret. Attacking with my pet, pulling out a crossbow and shooting point blank, being able to harpoon into the enemy, all really fun. In my opinion.
You aren’t the only person that plays hunter, I’m sorry. It’s fine to have strong thoughts on a class, but saying people’s preferences are uninformed is a basic misunderstanding of what a preference is. Some people like things that you don’t, and that is perfectly okay.
if they didnt want to use a bow/gun/crossbow they shoul;d not have Fing rolled a hunter in the first place, that whould be the same as me roling a priest then asking for a tank spec.
then you clearly played with bad hunters
you and many other fing fail to understand it was changed to melee spec after beeing a ranged spec that manyt many enjoyed , good for you you liek the melee version but if we changed your prot paladin to a caster dps suddenly you also not be pleased even if other whould enjoy the caster version…
My first character in this game was a hunter and I adored the class, but this was back when we had melee weapons and ammo and all that fun stuff. I felt like a true ranger back then because I had the melee option. When we lost our melee weapons my enjoyment of the class went way down and eventually I abandoned it. Melee survival was what brought me back to my hunter.
So I’m not sure I follow this point you’re making. It might be different if priests originally had a tanking ability but were stripped of it.
See above. I’m not sure about failing to understand. On the topic of this thread I am not happy that this change has upset some hunters, I’d like all of them to be happy one way or another, but I’d rather not lose a favorite spec to accomplish that.
I disagree, I hope Blizzard keeps Survival as a melee spec. I thoroughly enjoyed the leveling experience as Survival and now at max level, I still enjoy it immensely. I do like how you typed out a well thought post for your reasons.
My opinion just differs than yours.