Low level PvP 
I’ve been in epic BGs at level 60 with 20 Hunters, none of which were Survival. Your point?
I’m glad we arrived back at my (correct) argument, thanks.
I know for a fact that you as a “serious pver” don’t care about the concerns of casual pvers, what with your constant talk of optimization.
Welcome to the other side of the coin. Surv is a spec for surv enthusiasts. Most surv enthusiasts are pvp enthusiasts, not casual pvpers.
Can you share your DPS rotation priorities?
Because the IV one shows Raptor Strike as a “if you have time” filler.
I do agree that if I can get better use out of in Melee that there is benefit to it. I’m just making the switch from BM and it struck me as odd that they rotation notes for SV didn’t prioritize either of the (only) two DPS abilities that are melee.
From ranged, I lose my interrupt as well which is a genuine issue.
I expected this to be a Necro’d thread. LOL
Seriously it had me wondering what year we are in.
1 Like
I personally enjoy it. There’s only 3 classes now that can choose between ranged and melee dps, the others being Shaman and Druid.
Playing a melee class that’s not punished by mobility limits, that’s sort of a ranged hybrid is just the style I was looking for.
This was a good change. (;
There is always Wrath Classic if you miss the old surv spec 
1 Like
Surv has raptor strike and other melee skills in classic wow - source: me because I leveled one to 40 before I quit it. And rot damage? No wonder it was trash and got reworked and I could never make it work in WoD. They were a affliction wanna-bes and a waste of space trying to be something that already existed. DOT classes aren’t very good overall for anything but long raid fights so yeah bad spec. Bring that to M+ and you might as well be a carry.
1 Like
The whole point is that there aren’t a lot of Surv enthusiasts.
You’ve done this argument before. “The only people who don’t enjoy SV don’t play it”. Well… yeah. They don’t play it because they don’t enjoy it. That’s a circular argument.
Evidently the only way they can get people to play SV outside of a small niche like what you’re a part of is to give it brokenly overtuned damage. Even then most Hunters prefer to avoid it wherever possible. So they can either continue to overtune SV (obviously not healthy for the game), or they can look at why most Hunters don’t like it. They know the answer already.
This is still a very controversial issue on the Hunter forums. It just doesn’t often come to general since it’s just one part of the game. It still does, though, so I’m not sure why people are acting like this is a dead issue. It’s easily the most controversial class design matter in terms of division and bitterness.
“Being able to switch between a melee and ranged DPS” is such a niche and generally pointless thing that holding it as the major positive comes across as desperate. The fact that Shaman and Druid already do it just means you can get lost in those classes instead.
“Only three classes” can do it? Only one class can use ranged weapons: Hunter. Why should we be losing one of those few options for yet another dime-a-dozen melee?
Yes, people will play older versions of the game instead. The fact that the class design over 10 years ago was better than what it is now should bother you.
It also had a ranged weapon and primarily did ranged damage.
Keep revising history all you want. The proof is all against you.
Me playing SV in WoD.
https://stormforgelogs.pt/allstars/mistblade/throne-of-thunder/10-hc/all/hunter
Most Hunters opting to play SV in MoP
Please tell me more about how SV was bad, you pathological liar.
4 Likes
But how would that fair today in a world where burst and AOE damage is king and dots are awful and a carry unless raid? You wouldn’t get enough AOE damage dished out in M+ before trash died.
Did I once say remove stealth?
The implication is that Blizzard’s design post WoD has been a joke at best.
I agree, but Survival also has those as well, along with better gap closers than most melee.
So the real issue on that front is more that they weren’t given any unique utility that set them apart from the other ranged specs, and that they still have dependence on a stupid pet.
Unless of course you choose to play one of the other 2 specs at that stage.
Same with a 2H if you choose a tank spec, or a shield if you choose a dps spec.
I do get that it is jarring, but personally I would consider that low on the reasonings that justify reworking Survival back to ranged. It’s a one time thing that happens within the first 30 mins of play.
Compared to say gaining absolutely nothing, whilst losing all the benefits of being ranged.
Personally I’m not a fan of modern Survival, Legion’s design was straight up busted and you didn’t have the resources for the rotation, and BfA/Shadowlands is almost as bad with being a disjointed mess.
I know this thread has got you riled up, but I’m personally not against reworking Survival, be it bringing back the ranged version or otherwise.
Nah, it feels better as a hunter for me since I can still live the class fantasy of fighting with tamed pets and setting up traps. 
IDK they could just spoonfeed it +80% AoE damage like they do with the current SV, lmao.
Serpent Spread combined with Improved Serpent Sting gave us plenty of on-demand AoE for dungeons. SV was an incredibly good challenge mode spec.
You would know this if you knew anything at all about the Hunter past. Which you don’t. This is exposed in every post you make.
Why are you continually evading the evident popularity of SV in MoP? You keep claiming it was unpopular and you avoid all evidence to the contrary. Confront this now.
2 Likes
MoP era was clearly the best era of wow for all specs as everyone seems to say “my class was at the peak in MOP” for all classes. That was the past and you might re-experience it in MoP classic(which I’ll play for monk touch of death) but the fact that they even reworked the surv ranged showed there was a problem by the WoD era.
1 Like
No but really what year is it? All that word salad and not the information we need my man
3 Likes
Hunters should have a melee spec, but it should be Beastmaster instead because of Rexxar.
1 Like
Possibly unpopular opinion but the current “balance” paradigm needs to change anyway.
Homogenisation is a cancer that needs a cure, all it promotes is which ever class is the best at one thing is the best at everything.
Either you give the tools to everyone and homogenisation is ultimate and the game is more boring, or you let specs specialise at different things and who cares if Spriest is always top in 1-2 targets, because any boss with adds and in M+ they become garbage.
Great burst and AoE? Awesome, you will top add fights and be really good in M+ but sorry, you are unlikely to top a 1-2 target boss encounter.
Flavour guys, bring back flavour.
And lets not get caught up on “yeah but meta will mean these classes become unplayable” because how is it looking right now, not that great I’d argue.
Class stacking will always happen, as will meta comps for M+.
1 Like
Yes and this includes melee SV. You guys like to make a mental exception for that particular change yet it’s the poster child for everything wrong with Legion’s class design philosophy.
No, the real issue is making it melee in the first place. Bandaiding does not make it a good decision.
You’re now suggesting that it would be good to have the Hunter, a class based around the ranged weapon and a pet, to have a spec with neither of those things. Even worse than asking for a Rogue without Stealth. You’re in no place to criticise Legion class design when you’re championing the absolute worst of it.
This is not a defense.
Hunters are heavily built around a ranged weapon. That represents not only a lot of uniqueness but also a specific capability that SV asks you to abandon.
Switching between different types of melee weapons is not a difference in capability.
Yeah. You would. We’ve learned in this conversation that you make a big talk about bad class design but you sure do show up to defend it wherever possible.
Then why defend it at length?
BM already does this. It can even fight in melee range.
We do not need “ranged BM” and “melee BM” in the same class.
LOL
Now admitting that MoP was good. At least we made progress?
SV was popular in WoD too, you know. It was popular until they gutted it in 6.2 which was just a month before Legion and melee SV were announced. Given it would have taken a lot longer to brainstorm the change, they certainly decided that SV would be made melee when it was already a popular and successful spec in live WoW.
The facts don’t work for you here.
The point was clear. SV is a constant and ongoing controversy. Don’t pretend it died out years ago.
1 Like
BM doesn’t swing a sword quite like my Surv hunter does. However if I did choose to play ranged, it’s cool to know I’m able to pick either as the same class. (;
I haven’t mate, that is your bias coming through.
Survival is part of the joke that is Legion design, probably the biggest.
The part about melee is more that it opens up a question beyond survival of compensation of melee vs ranged.
That’s not defending it, “jarring” is not a positive word. I’d say it was low on the priorities of reasons to change the spec, ie there are other justifications that are more valid.
And again, I never asked for a Rogue class without stealth. I suggested that Blizzard already reworked a spec to which stealth is now largely irrelevant in it’s theme/gameplay.