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.
4 Likes
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.
1 Like
We got two other specs for ranged, leave my melee spec alone!
We got twelve other specs for melee, leave my ranged spec alone.
6 Likes
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:
- You should be ranged to start with and spec into melee. Hazzikostas has admitted that most Hunters do not like melee and Survival’s representation since Legion has thoroughly proven that. Plus, if you could talent being into ranged, that would be 100% mandatory for all forms of content.
- That talent should be for BM rather than SV. Melee Hunters and pets are inseparable, so it only makes sense to put this playstyle in the pet spec and allow Survival to do something else.
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?
6 Likes
But… but… I enjoy my BM hunter. To me, she’s tons of fun.
1 Like
there where and are far more melee specs around it added LESS choice in ranged specs
3 Likes
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.
2 Likes
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.
8 Likes
then you clearly played with bad hunters
2 Likes
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…
5 Likes
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.
1 Like
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.
The original survival spec was a blend of both melee and ranged attacks. I wouldn’t be against survival getting some more ranged attacks, but it should never be 100% ranged like BM or marksman.
The flow between melee and ranged combat is what always made survival fun, especially in pvp. Currently, it’s mostly melee with only the crossbow-fired serpent sting or aspect of the hawk boosting raptor strike/mongoose bite to 40 yards for a short time (and of course kill command and wildfire bomb being semi-ranged).
An extra attack or two using the hand crossbow would be nice.
I use to use old survival for PvP and haven’t tried the new version much. I will say that from what I’ve played it could’ve just been a forth spec and they could’ve kept the old survival. I like both version but miss the old one.
3 Likes
YOu are right so why don’t you get a petition going to get Blizz to make one of the Mage specs and one of the Lock specks into a melee spec . How dare the yhave 3 range specs it is too much .
5 Likes
You can’t remove a spec, though hunter had survival changed, but you could add a fourth spec and it could be melee.
Mage could get Battlemage spec which is melee/ranged hybrid. Maybe your spells do different things depending on which range you are so a ranged spell would turn into a melee spell if too close.
And they could give Warlocks back the demon form and allow them to tank with demon armor or something. Maybe you sacrifice your demon and you merge with it and gain some of it’s abilities.
It’s a deflection tactic. When people start hating on SV on account of ranged SV no longer being a thing they turn around and say “well why not just make BM and MM more fun instead?”. It is intended to both deflect blame away from melee SV and also imply that the ranged Hunter specs are all interchangeable and expendable, which was core to the reasoning of making it melee in the first place.
Just for fun, you should try it with other specs. I remember when Guillotaur made a thread facetiously suggesting several melee specs should be changed to ranged. People playing those specs turned out and rioted about how he needed to respect their spec choices. It’s interesting how suddenly that matters when you’re talking about melee specs, but ranged players can apparently go jump off a cliff for all this community cares.
The great thing about modern Hunters is you can do this as BM; just dip in and out of melee. You don’t HAVE to sit at ranged the whole time. So if your only qualm is this thematic nature of being in the fray, why not just do that as an existing spec?
Aside from the harpooning, of course, but it’s not like BM lacks mobility. Just disengage in!
This might sound like me being facetious but I’m really not. This is honestly what I think the people like you should do. Why do we need an entire Hunter spec dedicated to the schizophrenic whims of melee players who like to… “dip in and out”? (which is not something Survival does, by the way, because you want to be in melee range as much as possible).
It is not “perfectly okay” when it costs Hunters a spec choice. This stopped being a “live and let live” situation the moment when an existing Hunter spec was essentially removed and all its players were evicted to make the melee spec happened. Your preference came at the expence of the preference of people like me. You didn’t give a damn about that, so why should I respect yours?
It is literally impossible for me to empathise with the position that someone actually chose an explicitly ranged class (and I really do mean “explicitly”: https://i.imgur.com/kBVr5Uc.png) for the melee aspects. That is unreal. Therefore I don’t believe you, especially given that sticking to melee weapons was flat out never a viable option for the class in any form of content all the way from Vanilla to WoD.
Some people have a bit more investment in the class and Survival in particular (when it was ranged) than… the levelling experience and a bit at max level, so hopefully you can understand why we get a little peeved when Hunter tourists like you pop in and talk about what the class should and shouldn’t be.
This is nonsense and you know it. What you’re trying to do here is find justification for melee Survival by appealing to nostalgia and it’s not working, particularly because you’re depending on a thoroughly revisionist view of the class.
Survival was never about deliberately running into melee. It was about holding up better when you got caught in melee and, most importantly, getting back to ranged ASAP. This is why we had things like Entrapment and Improved Wing Clip. Running into melee, especially in PvP which was SV’s original focus, was a thoroughly stupid idea which would neuter both your fighting and ability to survive (pretty bad for a spec named SURVIVAL, wouldn’t you think?).
Bandaiding the current spec with ranged attacks will do nothing but highlight how much of a farce the forced melee aspects are. Until SV can hold up while being at ranged 100% of the time it has not lived up to its past as that’s what it was able to do in EVERY era of WoW up until Legion. So stop pretending that it was a spec that weaved in and out of melee because it’s breathtakingly dishonest.
These are all cool ideas but only if, like you said, they do not come at the expense of existing specs.
I think a melee Hunter would have gone badly regardless, but if it came as a 4th spec I would never bother talking about it. The core issue most of us have with melee SV is how we lost a spec in order to gain it, so to defend melee SV people go to ridiculous, dishonest lengths to discredit ranged SV.
7 Likes
I explained in the post, a bow by logic is not useful in close range, believe it or not hunters carry melee weapons such as spears.
No? How does a warrior sound like someone who switches between melee and ranged? The whole idea of the warrior is staying on your enemy and quite literally overpowering them. Survival brings things hunters had before, against a warrior stay close enough they can’t charge, a mage dance around them and when the root and blink keep attacking.
Remember Rexxar was the hero they used for the hunter class. 
Enjoy being upset and throwing more tantrums while people continue to have fun.