Saying the 3 ranged specs werent different enough is like saying sll spell casters are the same cause they use magic. You had mobile dot spec a pet spec and a sniper spec
3 Likes
it wasn’t really a mistake though. the way the game was evolving the melee range restriction was becoming a huge handicap. auto attacking bosses that required stacking was not enjoyable. i remember in cata i quit doing bgs because generating focus was so annoying with how mobile everyone was getting. perhaps if they kept the melee weapon for things like wing clip or something then ok, but removing the dead zone/melee zone was not a mistake at all.
2 Likes
I agree, and didnt mean to imply it was. I have said before that I think there should be an implied disadvantage to ranged weapons at melee, but I also think that one of the ways the hunter specs should be distinguished is the way that they solve that problem. That does not mean I dont think the deadzone was a problem, nor that most of the hunter kit should have been useless at melee range.
I just dont think removing the fantasy of a hunter being able to use both melee and ranged weapons was a good solution (even if it is a rare occurrence for the hunter to do so). Its something they still havent remedied well and SV is the only spec that tried.
I just don’t think many hunters really care or are invested too heavily in the return of melee to the class. In clashes hard with both PVE and PVP. Not meant to be a jab at SV, just not sure how they could even add it back without it feeling like a penalty to hunters at this point without making it a major feature to be built around. Which… I don’t think most hunters want honestly.
For PVE the stacking issue is pretty obvious. But for PVP the melee classes have all significantly evolved from MoP’s time. Gap closers are a dime a dozen now and PVP talents have helped made sure melee classes are more effective and or more sticky and hard to peel. Which makes hunters (and most casters by extension) need to be able to have defensives or be able to kite better. Melee goes against that I think, unless it’s strictly a defensive thing. I think you’d have to have like, a different version of mongoose bite to increase dodge chance or something and still be able to use your ranged weapon in melee for it to still allow a melee weapon without feeling like you’re taking out thousands of player’s knee caps lol.
Edit: So for instance, in the hypothetical situation they were to add melee back at all, I think it would work best if you could still use your bow / gun in melee, but maybe have one or two utility melee spells that use something like a generic axe or something.
I am still in the camp that it’s removal was overall a good thing for the health of the class, but I enjoy the thought experiment of thinking about how it could be added back without it feel absolutely dreadful to most players.
The data is fascinating though.
3 Likes
This isnt a problem, really. I think having melee be mainly defensive would (and did for a long time) satisfy that fantasy.
I definitely dont think going back to switching back and forth for auto-attacks is/was a good thing. Conversely, I dont think there is anything wrong with saying you can only use a certain cooldown at range.
In my hunter class fantasy, that I indulge for these conversations, I would have Marksman hunters deal with some kind of melee range disadvantage by negating it completely, sacrificing the ability to use melee weapon abilities, and having a couple cooldowns with a range requirement. They would be ranged weapon masters. Beastmasters would deal with a melee range disadvantage by leaning on pet damage and poisons. Survival hunters would deal with a melee range disadvantage by increased effectiveness (damage?) of baseline melee weapon defensive abilities and an offensive melee cooldown on a significant timer, that could be replaced with a ranged ability via a talent.
1 Like
Honestly, I’m fine with using melee as mainly defensive — I started in Vanilla, so I’m used to Hunters having some melee abilities mainly for defensive reasons.
The catch is balancing.
We have to face the fact that one of the main reasons Blizzard removed melee from Hunters back in MoP was for the sake of balancing.
Prior to MoP, Hunters had to compete with all the melee classes for melee weapons… AND compete with Warriors and Rogues for ranged weapons.
(There’s a reason “All loot is Hunter loot!” meme existed. In the early WoW years, Hunters literally got benefit of some kind from every stat. MM, for example, literally could talent Int into being equal to Agi… in BC/WotLK.)
So this is also something we must consider; if Blizzard brings back dual wielding (as in melee + ranged weapons), the balancing is gonna be a nightmare.
EDIT: I meant, Hunters had to put in a lot of work to get melee weapons because the stats weighed a lot, but the Hunters almost never used the melee weapons. They were practically dead weights; that’s why people called them “stat sticks” — literally all they were good for.
1 Like
I understand what problems existed and that the things we have now were solutions to said problems, I simply reject the idea that they were the best solutions and that we can’t now have a better solution.
The idea to remove melee was a compromise of intended design.
That’s fair! 
2 Likes
Really?
Read the replies again…
He/she says that the reason they have any interest in the class is because of MSV, and that they have little-to-no interest in the ranged aspects.
Is that in itself wrong? As I have already multiple times, NO, NOT AT ALL.
But what’s wrong is when that same person speaks against the ranged aspects of the class, and about bringing them back, based on nothing but said individuals own bias and dislike towards these aspects, rather than looking at it from the point of other players. When he/she comes up with arbitrary excuses for why we for example should not get RSV back.
And you think that the removal of the remnants of melee-elements from the hunter class was, at the time, a big contributor to said decline in subs?
There is/should be more to the class than only ranged weapons, yes. I very much agree with this.
The exact same thing can be said for why RSV should return.
Once they did the melee hunter thing they can’t undo it. As upset as those that loved the old RSV, think of those that love MSV. At this point they should just make a 4th spec. With a 4th spec we could possibly open the door to let there be talent choices in melee SV that let you tank! (I’m sure it could be possible to make group finder see and understand you’re a tank of spec x and talent y is picked). Would want it that way so that those that enjoy melee hunter and don’t want to be tanks don’t get their spec taken away.
That’s exactly why most of us argue for a 4th spec. There’s also the issue of precedent. The current precedent being, blizz can and will delete a long established spec if they think it’s a good idea in favor of something else that may or may not make sense. That’s not exactly a great precedent to have.
1 Like
This idea needs to be dropped already. I see it in general and reddit all the time. The same people that got SV deleted in the first place are trying to do it again to the melee spec because “it should be tank its in the name!!”. Pretty soon we’ll have enough old SV specs that we can make an entire new class.
5 Likes
Facts, also do not forget that hunters still have a BOW for their class Icon, so it further proves you’re point.
3 Likes
I don’t think Blizzard thought they were “deleting” a spec. They totally did, but I don’t think they thought they were. They revamped Spriest and it was a hit.
Ion’s language on the topic seems to suggest that they realize they pushed too far with SV’s revamp, shy of admitting it was a mistake. I think he makes it pretty clear they know NOT to do that again, and they are going to be scaling it back, without losing melee completely from the SV spec. They are probably already working on the rebuild for the next expansion… and it’s probably not a 4th spec RSV.
Changing SV to melee is definitely my least favorite class-related decision they’ve ever made in the game, keeping in mind that SV hunters were very popular when they were ranged. There are so many problems with it…such as it being impossible to PUG as SV because people were expecting a ranged class. It’s been years now, and obviously the experiment didn’t work out. SV is a wasted, very unpopular spec. For crying out loud, it’s not even a “good” melee choice…give me a break.
The overwhelming majority of hunters intentionally rolled such a RANGED class, and all you’ve really done is take our class down to two choices - the one that has to stand still sometimes and the one that gets to move around.
On top of this, too much of my content rewards are useless pieces of inert trash I might as well frisbee into the sun like Superman. More polearms! Yay! It’s SO COOL that our different specs use totally different weapons now, as I LOVE getting pointless items! I also really like that a ton of my xpac related upgrade items are now for something I have a 100% chance of never using. I might as well be getting drops for a different class.
I really don’t care if Blizz felt that the three specs were too close to one another in playstyle. This obviously wasn’t effecting the popularity of the class and really feels like fixing a problem that wasn’t actually broken. Only…you didn’t “fix” it. Hunters should be a pure ranged class. Give me back my third spec please.
6 Likes
if you want to see what a survival hunter once was, go play one in classic. Melee hunters have always been weird, blizz could at least give the survival spec the option to use a bow/gun. Make it a talent that changes all abilities to ranged. then use that data of who picked it to see if it needs a permanent change back to ranged.
1 Like
Unholy DK has been around for 14 years. Play that instead of ruining a hunter spec.
5 Likes
There’s another precedent that says it’s totally unrealistic to expect a 4th spec for a pure DPS class.
If we get ranged SV back it will be because melee survival gets deleted. Anyone who thinks otherwise is kidding themselves.
And personally they can’t delete melee survival fast enough. Total abortion of a spec that literally everyone thinks is a joke.
1 Like
They probably didn’t initially, I’m inclined to agree with that assessment. However, it doesn’t change the reality that is what essentially happened or how most players feel about it. It was a poorly handled decision that should have resulted in a 4th spec from the start if they wanted melee added as a spec. I do agree with you they probably initially thought it would be a good change or at least one that wasn’t so despised or leading other players to feeling ostracized.
I totally understand a 4th spec is unlikely. That does not change my opinion that it would be the best solution moving forward. Not only would it keep those who enjoy the rework to keep what they want while returning what was lost, but it also acts as an acknowledgement that how they implemented the current spec was a total unmitigated disaster. A failure of game design and development.
Make no mistake, I suspect they will remove melee eventually. But I’d rather advocate for what I believe to the best method moving forward despite what I think they’ll do. If no one advocates or ask for it, it’ll certainly never happen.
3 Likes