The general problem that I see personally is the lack of class identity and a majority of those people having hunter alts, but want to advocate for a play style On toons they don’t main. This is one of the effects that come from the big list of problems with retail.
3 Likes
I wish we could go back to old talent trees, classes having a variety of baseline skills (instead of the focus on spec only), and the melee + range/wand/relic equip slots back.
With the old systems, you easily could have had the ranged explosive shot SV hunter as well as the modern SV melee playstyles intact without having to add a separate specialization. IE: you could have optional melee focused (and melee/ranged, or even melee/pet hybrid) talents spread through the SV and BM trees. Deep SV could still have explosive shot, black arrow, etc.
Realistically thou, I don’t think we’re getting anything resembling ranged survival back on retail unless they manage to do something amazing with some optional set of MM talents.
1 Like
Talent trees that could be mixed around would actually open up more possiblities for all the specs.
We could have MSV, RSV, and even melee BM. Hunter could just be a base that is build up from talents.
Your spec would not be chosen untill the final talent.
One tree would be focused on strengthing pets, one for range damage, and last melee combat.
There maybe optimal builds, but you should pick the talents that create the play-style you want.
I would sort of agree with this.
I’m not so keen on the Vanilla/TBC trees.
I’m leaning more towards the Cata approach with the Specializations having unique core abilities, while still having the talent trees. Where once you hit max level and have spent a minimum of talent points in your chosen spec/tree, you could go and dip into whichever other ones you want to.
It wasn’t perfect no. But at least it gave us who wanted, a real sense that we could actually specialize in a specific fantasy/theme while still allowing for the increased freedom of actual talent trees.
The problem sadly with the talent-tree approach to the design, was that it wasn’t sustainable through out a large number of expansions. Already in WotLK we had over 70 talent points to spend at max level. Imagine if we would still have this system today.
This was at least the problem that the devs saw. And the reason for why they decided to abandon the talent-trees and go with talent rows. And with having no talent ranks.
I would say that this pretty much describes how our talent trees looked during WotLK(part from the Melee-focus).
Where for example if you picked Survival. The final talents deep in the tree were Black Arrow(original version) along with Explosive Shot.
I wouldn’t mind this approach either. Though as with what I mentioned before. The talent tree design combined with having multiple ranks per talents. Wasn’t going to hold up in the long run.
1 Like
I think melee talents being split between BM and SV (IE: melee being a hybrid build) would be necessary for it to work. The big ranged SV stuff (explosive shot, black arrow) would have to be relatively deep into the tree to make them more exclusive with later MM talents.
Plus, melee using a lot of points in BM makes a lot of sense when you consider the only iconic melee hunter is Rexxar.
Leave this stuff off the forums please. I live where Andrew Jackson and the Democratic Party forced tribes they fought along side to live (Oklahoma) and my family has lost a lot of it’s history because of it. I deal with better informed people everyday, I come here to escape that.
3 Likes
Good call.
I appreciate that 
Never said that you posted more, only that you stood out more and helped bring in more trolls. I should also note that I was talking about the MSV vs. RSV chatter. I also stand by that your posting style matches Kindwolf’s.
Erm, really? I don’t see it. Maybe I’m too much of a Grammar Stickler (the actual term is not allowed), but I legitimately struggle to understand Kindwolf due to his poor grammar, spelling, and punctuation.
After all, it’s not like I could “read aloud.” What I get in the written form is all I get.
While Yura’s… preciseness (for the lack of a better term) has certainly slipped a little bit since the late days of WoD (when we used to get into arguments regarding the future of Hunters), I rarely struggle to understand him.
If you mean from the “vaguely trolly” angle, though? I disagree, but I can respect that. 
1 Like
Short, quick and snide posts meant just to inflame the other side. It’s not the sentence structure, it’s the actual posts themselves. Any good posts made by either two, and both do have them, are drowned out by the snide, short, quick comments meant just to inflame the other side.
Neither are anything vaguely trolly.
Thinking as a more simplified version of the old talent trees, maybe some thing like the Artifact trees.
You start with one node that activates at level 10, you place your first point in causing it to branch off into three points and every time you add a point to a node it branches.
You can add points to different nodes changing direction you want to take your spec. You add a point to Animal Companion to branch it off into Spirit Bond, but next point you have you can activate Raptor Strike, which branches into Mongoose Bite.
Last node would have a signature ability of the original three main specs, and would cement you into what spec you are; However, at same time you could be a hybrid of either of the other two.
This still doesn’t mean it is precedented. We already went through this limiting of weapon options when it came to Hunter specs; it happened in 5.0 when we could no longer use both a melee and ranged weapon and all melee abilities were removed.
You’re working from the assumption that Legion SV would necessarily introduce melee aspects, and therefore they would a) be for Survival since Survival had the melee-buffing talents in the past and b) they would be requirements instead of backup options in order to better fit the current design. But the problem is Legion did not need to introduce melee aspects and frankly it should not have.
The obvious defense for it is that it was a “tuning issue” and not an inherent problem with the ability, so I would go further and argue that Lacerate was bad from a design standpoint too. It had no unique flavour or interesting design. It was literally just Rend with a different name. It even had the same icon. Even if it did decent damage it should still have been replaced.
We were enjoying the spec we were playing, though. Then it was abruptly torn down and repurposed for a totally different (mostly non-existent) audience. That’s a big problem regardless of whether or not the former players can just pick up to another spec which is inferior for them.
No spec has changed to the degree Survival has, or as suddenly. The only one that comes close is Demonology and that’s not really a defense because that spec faces a very similar set of issues.
One bad decision is not excused by other bad decisions.
SV Hunter is still very problematic.
Even from an objective point of view, disregarding screwing over the ranged SV players:
- It is extremely high-maintenace, so far being totally remade in Legion and BFA
- It has very low appeal and is mostly avoided by Hunters wherever it can be (basically everywhere outside of rated PvP)
- It necessarily depends on pet aspects and therefore infringes on BM’s spec identity
- Expression of ranged weapon fantasies is extremely limited now since MM is effectively the only spec that focuses on them
In summary, it was a high-risk low-reward venture that didn’t pay off and is continuing to cost us.
This one “only one difference” angle never works when that “one difference” is huge. Switching of roles is a big deal. It puts it in a different league above any other spec change.
This is a big stretch. Even from this perspective that isn’t accurate because there are other options for each of those things you mentioned: the current iteration of the spec. The other melee option in the Druid class is the current Feral, for example. Plus, all of those specs still have some identity/gameplay aspects that tie them to their prior iterations. Survival doesn’t. Well, it kind of does, now that it has Serpent Sting back, but that’s pretty contrived.
I really don’t think you could.
Historically trying to force two different roles into one spec has never worked out well.
3 Likes
P.S. Sincerely comparing in-game gripes to actual historical events is pretty cringeworthy, but to be fair so is calling colonialism a PC issue.
2 Likes
Was looking for a way to relate in-game issues to real world issues. Hard to place your self into a non physical world, but if you can find a common issue that others may have had it is easier relate.
The PC part was just me trolling knew it would get a response.
But well just not talk about it again and focus on the topic at hand from now on.
I wasn’t talking about stuffing two playstyles entirely within one tree (like old feral being cat + bear), but rather hunter melee existing as a hybrid of talents that could be split between SV and BM.
Think about the SL/SL lock spec in BC. Affliction was a DPS tree that featured talents to add and improve health drain effects. Demonology was a DPS tree that also increased player health and damage mitigation. SL/SL took all the defensive stuff from both to become basically a prot spec; below average damage output and high survivability.
I think melee hunter could have existed in a similar way, without having to axe another spec in the process.
Such posts are against the CoC so, flag them and hopefully they’ll get removed.
Technically, it could be an appealing design depending how it’s executed, design-wise.
It sounds a bit like the system we have today, just without the restriction of getting locked into a specialization.
Only 1 choice at level 10 btw?
Also, a potential risk with a system like this, is that all those branches may result in you being forced into following certain paths throughout the tree.
Having to pick specific talents you may not like earlier on, just to reach the ones you want later in the process.
If the branches connects with eachother at several places, so you can go with whatever route you prefer, then maybe.
Although I still don’t think that it will, in the end, give that much freedom of choice compared to now.
It didn’t no.
All it was, was the devs wanting to change the focus and theme of the spec.
Exactly this.
Again, I agree.
Though I would say that if you look at the game today, sure, the amount of MSV players we have, aren’t that many in comparison. But there are still quite a few of them.
Removing/deleting MSV from the class would upset them as much as it did us when they took away RSV.
How would you avoid problems such as these?
Give us a 4th spec option. Done.
True. But removing it now would cause all of that work to have been for nothing.
I would agree.
And due to this design, I can see why people are suggesting for it to be a sub-spec within BM.
I still have my doubts though for that to be a viable option at all. Due to the large number of baseline abilities, talents and passives that currently define each spec(BM and MSV).
Merging them would probably force them to remove much from each side.
Agreed.
And merging MM with the old ranged SV would not give a satisfying level of options that caters towards each fantasy/theme.
We would basically end up with two halves out of two different playstyles. Mashed together.
Indeed.
Those specs still exist. They might not be the same as before. But they are still here.
Ranged SV, does not exist, at all.
And adding in a few talent options in MM, would not give it back to us.
Not to a satisfying level no.
More likely, it risks destroying them both.
3 Likes
It activates at ten then you activate it and it opens into three branches, which you pick one to start with. Next time you get a point you can keep going down the same path or put a point into the next tree, which opens another branching path.
Every ten levels you get a point that way leveling feels like a reward again, and just waiting forever to unlock your next ability.
Ah okay.
I would say that if we want this to be a general design for all ‘specs’ or instead of those, then it might feel better to get a talent point more often than every 10 levels.
Perhaps every 2nd - 3rd level. Now ofc we have no confirmation on this regarding a level squish. But this would with 60 levels in total for the new expansion, amount to between 18-25 talent points. Depending on how often you get a new one.
If we go with 1 talent point per 10 levels, you wouldn’t be able to make a lot of choices.
And if people want it to be a giant talent tree that replaces the current specializations. We would actually have to still be able to get enough points to pick a decent amount of active + passive effects from that new tree.
Without that, talents wouldn’t feel like more than: you’re just picking a few extra abilities.
Sure, some want the oldschool approach with 1 base toolkit no matter what you spec into, and talents just give some small bonuses or perhaps a new ability.
I get why some want this. But we already have that in Classic.
Let there be a difference so that anyone who prefers specializations or to focus more on a theme/fantasy, they can do so.
Flagging has proven to be useless.
I guess it depends.
Though it has worked on some of Kindwolf’s posts in this thread that were troll-posts/inapropriate etc.
As they were removed.