You mean like how you ignored the fact WoW is still the 900 pound gorilla when it comes to mmo’s? Or do you mean a game that is near two decades old has lost players over time, hot take that one.
With 10.2 tier set coming up, you don’t have to obsess about Hunter being melee via SV. You can literally cancel Fury of the Eagle just to tap into the nade bonuses and treat it like an a-la-double-tappe power CD. It’s hilarious how easy you can work around SV being melee.
It can still be an OPTIONAL thing, if you want to channel it on a mob pack.
Perhaps a better question is asked, “Why are people so obsessed with Hunter being a grenadier?”
yes you can play SV suboptimal like you can play every spec suboptimal? what a ridiculous thing to say lol
damage is optional 
1 Like
Again, you think I don’t do my homework, but I do. yet another arrogant you-don’t-really-want-that J. Allen Brack grin
JAB’s probably thinking he has never been as condescending in his life, particularly CORRECT in his condescending, as I’ve been.
The most powerful ability SV has even know is still WFB. That means SCREW Strikes and Bites. SCREW Carves and Butcheries. SCREW Stings even. That not even FURY would have pet Richard.
I’d never thought I’d see it starting out, but Blizzard knows how to pick a winner.
To cancel Fury with the tier set bonus would actually be optimal, say, for single target. Because that’s two GCDs you can spend, like, I dunno? How about TWO NADES?
Don’t keep wrecking, Asthelon. Or do. Whatever you want. I can toss two nades and do more damage in 4 sec than anything else in the toolkit. And all up to 40 yards. Huzzah. That’s actually tempting to get me to buy DF, come to think of it. But we’ll still have another tier after this one so I dunno.
every time we have this discussion you forget that auto attacks reduce the cooldown of wildfire bomb. you know damaging enemies with fote reduces the cd of wildfire bomb as well?
you know wildfire bomb as a cooldown right? your entire argument is focusing on a 2 gcd moment of combat and nothing around that.
okay, what do you do after these 4 seconds? 
like I said, you’re more than welcome to play suboptimal if that’s what you have fun doing
I still remember all this stuff discussed from this summer. You pretty much have to take Lunge regardless if you use it or not, it’s cookie cutter. Use it, don’t use it, it’s just there. Now the nice thing is that you can now opt out of Ruthless Marauder. Two precious points.
Whatever you want as filler before more nades. Arcshots with a ranged weapon, or strikes/bites with a 2Her. Withstanding a handy macro that switches the weapons out.
Suboptimal is subjective. If that’s suboptimal to you, that’s suboptimal to you. If you want to limit almost 100% of your damage uptime within 5 yards, that’s on you buddy. But you can’t speak for every other SV and their damage profile. Good luck even finding them.
for someone who’s so obsessed with WFB you’re pretty dismissive of something that gives you more WFB.
Same with this.
Like I said, if you want to play suboptimal, nobody is stopping you.
Not dismissive. Permissive.
Unless you really want to use Fury in melee, that’s up to the SV to decide. The tier set bonuses didn’t make it melee-mandatory.
Dude, I’m not stopping you either from your own obstinance. The way they’ve done the talent tree now, you can’t skip any of the core melee stuff(and believe me, I’ve tried). The only thing you can skip are Bite, enhancements to Bite, Flanking Strike, Harpoon, and Spearhead, which are not essential to ranged play, and vice versa for the WFB improvements. You’re forced to take everything else.
I actually think it’s messed up that Blizz won’t let SVs SPECIALIZE MORE in either ranged nor melee, but everyone loves nades anyway.
If you want to argue and debate which side of the tree is stronger, “more optimal” as you say, then you can do that with another. Because it sounds like you want the right-hand side of the tree and I want the left-hand side. I’m sure both are competitive since the talent choices are well homogenized together.
I think you genuinely don’t understand how the specialization works at all if you don’t see how ruthless marauder or lunge gives you more wfb.
because it’s a melee spec lol
lol not at all but why are you even arguing? You clearly don’t play sv
If there’s only one reason why you’re losing, is because you don’t listen. You weren’t listening to what I said an hour ago.
And I know because I’ve done this in 9.2.5. I never had to go into melee if I didn’t feel like it. I never felt like I had to.
I never said it wasn’t a melee spec, did I? But what did I say? I said with the new tier set bonuses, you can work around the melee element. Work around. BYPASS. Maybe even COMPLETELY if you know what you’re doing, if you’re savvy. And potentially be more competitive.
I can forego Ruthless Marauder and buy something else if I don’t want to use it. I can buy Explosives Expert and get 2 sec off EACH nade. That’s a little better than hoping you’d get some crits on Fury.
Because this is the dirty little open secret this whole entire time: it’s BOTH melee and ranged. It’s an omnirange DPS. It’s whatever you want it to be, baby. The only thing that has made me happy about it is that RSV DID get a Jeffersons’ piece of the pie in 10.1, and more of it presently. So I’m not moving the goalposts or flip-flopping. The modern SV spec has come a LONG way since Leg, despite that modern MM did the classic RSV better than SV which is another subject of discussion.
You’re not PIGEONHOLED in being in melee range only, is the point, and more than that, you can probably get away with not being in melee at all. There is a weapon switcheroo macro you have to use though.
If you feel like doing way less damage go for it
it’s a melee spec. like I said earlier, nobody is stopping you from playing suboptimal. you are missing out on damage and ironically even more wfb if you stay at range. nobody is stopping you from playing how you want
yes, you can play around melee if you want to do less damage and play suboptimally like I said. this isn’t “more competitive”. if you disagree you are welcome to create an APL to show how you are right or even log on and prove everyone else wrong
1 Like
I don’t know what you’re talking about, this “way less damage”. If you haven’t figured how to make it work because it’s too hard or you just don’t want to, that’s one thing.
I’m sure somebody has by now. But who knows who they are? And I have to laugh at Raidbots because I think I remember that when you have a ranged weapon equipped, it doesn’t know how to calculate arcs and steadies.
If I wasn’t already busy actually playing the REAL SURVIVAL SPEC we all fondly remember in Classic Wrath, I would have checked it out.
You meant to say it will cost you a raid/dungeon slot if you don’t play the quote-on-quote “optimal” way.
10.2 is not live just yet. We can’t do it right now; it’s not for another month and then however long it takes to get the tier set. Maybe before the end of the year at the earliest it can be retested?
I just find it hilarious that almost as if taking advantage of a technicality or a loophole: you can turn Fury on and cancel it, and conserve GCDs because you will have a fresh nade in pocket that needs to be burned off to not cap the charges. With the tier set bonuses you DON’T have to channel Fury, you don’t have to CRIT with it, and you don’t even have to DO ANY DAMAGE with it. And you’re not even asking why Blizz set it up that way.
We will be foregoing the 30-focus 1-sec cdr on nades from the old 4-pc bonus. I remember when I discussed how arcshots could compete against strikes/bites. But this time, this is converting an attack ability into a power CD, which is quite Gucci. A PCD you can use for melee or ranged, whatever you “specialize” in.
Not to mention it comes in handy for PvP, that UNLIKE THE WARRIOR’S SUPERIOR BLADESTORM, Fury doesn’t make you immune to roots, snares, and loss of control CC. That means that in the PvP persuasion, your Fury can be stopped anyway.
The TL;DR: We’re only talking about what the tier set offers for right now, and how it can be used meta-wise.
Youtube personalities are just same as forum posters as they both want attention. Even if it negative as ragebait can get even more views. You don’t even need to back up your claims as long as it hooked someone.
I was posting what was stated by Ion why even if Survival Hunters started to see range abilities returning it would still remain a melee spec. I then just restated it in my own words. My argument was not about if I agreed on this that I only want to acknowledge why range Survival would never be brought back. Even though I do not believe in what Ion reasons were.
Blizzard is a business and it is always about money first. WoD was the last time Blizzard showed subnumbers and they had lost huge numbers. They needed new blood and were willing to take risks if it gave a gain.
As you have even quoted Survival was designed to appeal to a niche group of poeple. New players and those who were on the line about returning. Blizzard was leaning on that melee would be enough of an appeal to get more poeple involved with the next expansion.
Even if they lost older players they had classic coming, and with classic Survival also returning would just recuperate those losts with older players shifting over.
Even all this rage about the switch to melee has only helped out Survival. With all this posting about how unappealing melee is has interested some into actually trying Survival just to see if it true, or they just play it to come back to make troll posts.
1 Like
But then they somehow did a 180° and made the raid encounters punishing to melee, that RANGED was forcibly integrated to help with the encounter mechanics.
I never understood why they even did that. If you want to promote melee(but then again, there’s that zero sum thing again), you have to make the endgames that matter melee-friendly. Which means…ranged need not apply.
And melee-friendly doesn’t necessarily have to mean ranged-unfriendly in PvE. It was a Faustian arrangement; you want to play melee, you deal with the increased dangers that come with it. That doesn’t jive with people all that well, that they begin to start feeling PUNISHED for going melee.
That way, Blizzard wouldn’t lose out on the ranged side of the community, which would have been substantial.
It’s wild to me that you try to claim to be an authority on everything despite no actual experience to back it up
1 Like
its a disorder
Ah, the domain of common knowledge. No experience necessary. That means all of my BNet friends who have raided would vouch for me and make the same claim.
Ranged…NEED…not apply. If things were truly melee-friendly, why do you NEED ranged? You can WANT it or OPT for it, but needing is different. That’s what Blizzard had to do to preserve the ranged community.
I shouldn’t have to tell you how many more subs you’d lose if ranged gets zero enfranchisement.
You different designers working on different parts of the game.
The class design had pressure to make changes that would grab attention. Melee Survival helped do that as it was heavily discussed.
Raid designers focus on making raid encounters fun and challenging, but not too difficult or easy.
It doesn’t always mean that each apartment have discussions about what each team is doing.