I don’t think you did. I’ve played since Vanilla and the history you seem to be trying to present is warped at best.
7 Likes
Really then why is it the least played dps spec since it went to melee.
Most of us went either MM,BM or changed class. Ion has even said it is a niche spec and that people play hunter to be range . Others that were around at the time you say you were have said melee was put in as a hunter weakness and to help get them out of melee and back into range to do their real damage .
At it’s height during Mists , Survival as range was one of the most played specs .
Now as melee it is a after thought . Why do you think Blizz really hasn’t done anything to fix it since they turned it to melee. It’s because not enough play it to make it worth their time.
6 Likes
Are you seriously again trying to appeal to melee Survival’s popularity? You know, the famously unpopular pariah spec? How can you even begin to pretend that it helps Hunters attract a larger audience?
7 Likes
TBF here on this point. They did do a pretty hefty rework of survival going from Legion into BFA.
1 Like
You mean where they added some range aspects and it wasn’t really that great at either because of it .
I don’t even mind the ranged aspects. It’s the fact that in the rework it takes even more from BM than it already did in Legion. Which is both funny and sad given that it’s completely hypocritical to the stated reasons for the rework of old SV somehow being too similar to MM but now they’ve made the same problem with BM and SV while alienating a ton of players.
3 Likes
Ah yes, the whole 12 people playing MSV really highlights how MSV has contributed to the class being so much more full and well rounded 
Why are MSV hunter so delusional about how much of a complete failure MSV has been since it’s inception in Legion? It’s so strange.
4 Likes
Projection. They like it, so everyone else must like it, even if they only secretly like it.
How do you know this?
Because people dont raid or do mythic+ with it? Because thats the only groups of people you can track.
As an FYI, there is no RSV and no MSV…there is only survival.
Even when there was a talent tree with both ranged and melee talents, there was no RSV /MSV…there was only survival.
Dont tempt me.
SV in general probably has the most devout fans of any spec. Like… MSV and RSV dont seem to realize that they are both wild eyed SV zealots.
Can also look at arena representation. But what other measures do you want other than anecdotal? Ion himself even mentioned it would be a niche spec, and by the measures available to us it is.
Question, if it’s popular as something beyond M+ / Arenas / Raiding, is there not still a potential problem? If people are only using the spec to quest or level up, and it’s not in any meaningful content, wouldn’t that still indicate something is off? We know it’s not just based on performance either as even when the spec is doing well, it’s still barely played by all available metrics.
2 Likes
Akin to militant vegans, that’s what you lot are like.
2 Likes
Arbitrary.
And representation isnt really relevant. Something can be a good idea and not see much representation. They could take away every single complaint people have about msv besides being top damage or having a mandatory raid utility (because that would make people who dont like it feel forced to play it) and it could still see low representation. In fact, making it a 4th spec by bringing back the best ranged hunter spec (RSV) would not do msv any favors in representation, bit that still woupdnt really mean its bad. There are better represented specs that would garner much less complaint if they were scrapped.
I’m not saying it means a whole lot. But I think the position Toad is taking is just factually untrue with the information we do have.
Edit: Just to put into context, Toad brought up the spec being popular. I feel like if we can’t even agree on something super basic like that, how are we supposed to have a remotely meaningful discussion where we can take one another seriously?
3 Likes
Case-in-point…
This.
Why would you completely revamp an entire spec because 1 or 2 abilities aren’t working properly? Either try to fix those or replace/re-design them with new theme-accurate ones.
Or are you saying that the entire spec is completely broken and nothing works at all? When has this ever been the case before? Why assume that “okay, they added a 4th spec to the class and this naturally means that 1 spec will be completely busted, so therefor they might as well not do it in the first place” ?
At this point, you’re basically arguing hypotheticals that we have no reason to believe will be a thing if they decide to add said 4th spec.
And I’m basing this on the fact that RSV and it’s theme was in the game in the past, and if they bring that back and then further build upon it to add more, there’s no reason to assume that it will fall flat.
Uhm…okay?
So we’re back to the argument of how the specs need to be distinguished by:
Ranged vs. no ranged, or, pet vs no pet.
And they were?
Yes!
Whether they can or cannot balance things in this game is debatable. Though this argument has no basis as, it has never stopped them from changing or introducing new things(classes) in the past.
And he/she’s the one who has repeatedly blamed others for “not having an open mind”…
No it doesn’t. I assume that you here meant “a wider audience”. Because most players who choose to play a hunter do so because of reasons other than the focus on melee-combat.
Whether in theory it(the class) will now have an option for those who prefer melee-combat, it’s the definition of a flawed logic as the overwhelming majority of those players are not interested(as evident) in rolling the hunter class anyway.
There’s a big difference between “attracting a wider audience” and “attracting a larger audience”. Especially considering how specs are designed nowadays compared to in the past.
For the record…
Out of all hunters who have begun playing the e.g-content, with recent activity, only 3.7% are playing as Survival. That equals 0.43% of all classes/specs total representation.
And no, this is not a flame towards MSV itself. It’s merely to point out the flaw in the logic presented by Toadwart.
1 Like
I dont know what NEEDed to be done. I am actually just acknowledging the other side of the argument- That melee SV wasnt necessary.
I do think some more thematic distinction was necessary, but it didnt need to be melee. I like melee abilities in my hunter. I enjoy the themes and the potential of MSV. I also enjoyed RSV. I enjoyed it more in wrath when I got to have a spear on my back and little axes spinning around me when I got into melee in AV back when it was fun. But SV didnt need to go full melee (to the extent that it is). Can I acknowledge the other side without you guys copy pasting and arguing against it?
That only show some raiders and some mythic+ players. It does not show every player in the game.
If a spec is performing low, chances are people are not going to use it in competitive content. That doesnt mean that they are not using it in the non-competitive areas of the game.
Not all raiders raid log and not all players raid or mythic+
You didn’t play from the start. Survival was always ranged, it simply had more tools to get out of melee.
Lacerate was the top talent for SV in beta as a bleed thst never made it to live.
If you are going to claim you played something you need to make sure people that actually did it are not around.
1 Like
The melee abilities existed BECAUSE of the minimum range needed for ranged abilities. There was no “melee hunter” it was part of the tool kit to get out of melee range. That’s what deflection, wing clip and aspect of the monkey were for.
Hunters could not stand up to anyone in melee, they could use their tool kit to get out of melee. Hunters were built to kite originally. That aspect is gone now as now melee has too many ways to close a gap compared to Hunters ability to open one.
THAT DOES NOT MEAN survival was intended to be melee 16+ years ago.
Melee survival is one of the biggest pooch screws they have ever done along with arenas.
6 Likes