| Position | Spec and Class | Population Size |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Demonology Warlock | 244,961 |
| 2 | Assassination Rogue | 357,448 |
| 3 | Affliction Warlock | 271,861 |
| 4 | Unholy Death Knight | 288,650 |
| 5 | Combat Rogue | 49,284 |
| 6 | Enhancement Shaman | 124,530 |
| 7 | Frost Death Knight | 182,171 |
| 8 | Destruction Warlock | 21,327 |
| 9 | Survival Hunter | 229,658 |
| 10 | Arcane Mage | 413,967 |
| 11 | Balance Druid | 259,434 |
| 12 | Marksmanship Hunter | 80,172 |
| 13 | Fire Mage | 38,322 |
| 14 | Elemental Shaman | 120,129 |
| 15 | Shadow Priest | 191,462 |
| 16 | Feral Druid | 136,614 |
| 17 | Retribution Paladin | 235,244 |
| 18 | Beast Mastery Hunter | 7,632 |
| 19 | Fury Warrior | 73,537 |
| 20 | Subtlety Rogue | 241 |
| 21 | Arms Warrior | 145,680 |
| 22 | Frost Mage | 16,111 |
| 23 | Gladiator Warrior | 33,205 |
1 Like
who…
asked ?
2 Likes
Ranged survival best survival
6 Likes
No facts, no source and no actual data… Is this just your personal opinion/guess?
Not the same list that OP posted but we might assume that it could be his source, for some of the info at least. But what do you guys want to say? What is the point of the post?
Week one post release, with very vague data and arbitrary scoring system. So many flaws its kind of point less. You have to give Context for this to stand a chance of relevance. People love to use raid logs as some basis for Any evaluation of a class or the game. Cant be done. Raiding is way too specific. And data from raids can only be used to say anything about… Raids. And the fact its from the people that raidlog (big risk of scewed data) and it being Week 1 etc just makes it kind of point less.
Sorry for rant but again, what is the point that OP is trying to make? The only guess we could make out of this is which classes is possibly better tuned for Week 1 (no/low gear) raiding than other classes. Its irrelevant for class comparisons over all and its most likely useless for Any overarching evaluation of class dps rankings in raids for this patch/expansion.
Tldr long rant of me not liking when people just post data that is flawed with zero Context just to… Do nothing?
idk the point, i just saw the same list from a wowhead post earlier
2 Likes
Yeah i guessed as much. My reply was mainly aimed at the OP.
It’s relevant due to the frequent gaslighting from dishonest posters over the years arguing that ranged SV was always bad and underplayed (as an attempt to deflect from the failures of melee SV).
1 Like
That’s early game. After Naxx things shift allot
We argued with you because you non stop claim that SV hunter was the most popular spec, and yet it’s like always, like every spec trough history of the game. It’s played when it outperforms other specs . It’s good in early stages, after naxx MM takes over and it will stay B-C tier till end of WoTLk. Was it better than melee? Well ofc ranged it’s always better than melee easier to play, even in SV case. As a true SV hunter can I played the spec when it was ranged I play SV now, and even if they would change it to slingshot, dual wielding whatever they want style I’ll play it. I’m not like you that plays only spec when it performs well.
Ok Bepplelelelels pet
3 Likes
The difference is in its ranged days SV remains a popular spec without having to be the very best by a mile. While it’s currently the best of the Hunter specs in WotLK classic, the difference between it and MM isn’t huge. Later in the expansion MM was ahead in DPS but SV still had a healthy amount of players; we will see how that plays out again this time. But as it stands ranged SV is a very popular and widely enjoyed spec. I’ve had plenty of people deny that even for WotLK’s early days.
But I’ve long since given up on WoW classic dispelling myths about WoW’s earlier days. There are still people going around parroting that Thori’dal was bad for Hunters due to not using ammo because they can’t be bothered to even look at the tooltip or notice how in BC classic every Hunter was going nuts over Thori’dal and those who got it saw huge DPS gains. There are still plenty of people including a prominent TSL poster who’s active in the DF beta feedback thread insisting Survival was a melee spec back in 2006 despite us actually being able to see how it played in Classic 2019-2021. Hell, a (very infamous) community poster who mains a Hunter even insists Survival was a melee spec in Burning Crusade when it had several talents including the crucial Expose Weakness being ranged exclusive.
People have unwavering faith in their own terrible recollections. That’s the harsh fact. So I have no doubt we will see delusional, dishonest people on the forums continuing to claim ranged Survival was as much of a dysfunctional dumpster fire as melee Survival despite it concurrently thriving on WotLK classic and beyond. They can pretend all they want but it won’t change the obvious and well-known fact that melee Survival was a disastrous decision even now 6 years in. And no, that’s not just me and a few others on this subforum saying it. It’s openly discussed outside of melee SV hugbox echo chambers. It’s no secret.
8 Likes
Jesus is this the purpose of your life, just to keep rabbiting on about ranged survival.
There it is, in wrath in all its glory; enjoy.
1 Like
This just confirms what ive always thought, people who miss ranged sv should play classic. 
2 Likes
That’s what I’m doing. There isn’t much I’m looking forward too in DF, and many of the “hey, can we get X back?” things already exist in Wrath.
2 Likes
Wtf is gladiator warrior? Just a prot war with arms talents?
I was wondering the same. I had flashbacks to gladiator stance in wod.