Wednesday, March 25, 2015

Would You Support Another Physical Ranged Class Being Added?

I often see the idea of adding another class that could use hunter weapons, as in bows, crossbows and guns, being added to the game.  Hunters right now are the only class that can use these items, at least effectively, as warriors and rogues and still equip them but it really serves them no more use than a hunter equipping a polearm.

From the standpoint of a hunter that has still not seen a hunter weapon drop this expansion, yeap, not a single one, unless you count getting one in a dungeon and one from an invasion bag, but I don't.  I do not really like the idea of seeing another class that could possibly roll on my weapon.  I have a hard enough time finding one as it is and would not enjoy the idea of having yet another class possibly roll against me if one ever does magically drop.

However, from a game play standpoint, another physical ranged class does make sense even if I would rather keep my unique status as a hunter.  There is something that is enjoyable, at least for me, knowing that my class is unique in the game.  A tank is a tank, a healer is a healer, a melee is a melee and a caster is a caster.  Their abilities might have different names and they might be played in different ways, but in the game, they are all the same.

It would be interesting to see some mixes added to the game.  I might not welcome the idea of having another class that could roll on my weapon but another physical ranged class does have a little logic to it.  I've always thought it would be a great idea to add a caster based tank.  And for that matter, melee casters.  I know that paladins and shamans of the enhancement variety are technically casters but they act like melee, they play like melee and they have auto attack like melee.  I am talking caster melee, as in cast times, no auto attack, just need to be in melee range for their spells.

It would be an interesting twist and for me it is the only way I would be willing to accept losing my unique nature as a hunter.  If things were being mixed up a little.

Outside of hunters there is only one other unique class, in my opinion, in the game.  That is the monk.  Why do I call the monk unique?  Because when in healing spec it is the only class that is considered melee.  So when fighting a raid boss that has an an ability that targets a ranged character all other healers become viable targets but a monk healer does not.  It is melee.  That is pretty unique if you ask me.

I guess even if could see adding another physical ranged class as making some sense in the game I don't really wish to see it.  Weapon issues aside, I just think that classes should have a little something that keeps them feeling unique, different and hunters are the last class left that has that feeling.  I don't think I am ready to give that up just yet.  How about you?


  1. As an altoholic who DPSs with 11 different class/spec combinations and also tried almost all the rest, I must say that Blizzard does a very good job for delivering very special playing styles even within class. for example, you can never mix Arms/Fury/Gladiator warriors. They ARE different. So whenever you want to apply the same style to another spec or class, they balanced the abilities in the way that MAKES you play like a rogue, or like a mage, or like a shaman - in your spec's own unique way. If you want to be effective or even survive. You CAN'T allow any aggro on you if you're a rogue, so you're always ready to vanish or flee in case your tank makes a mistake. You can't act like a warrior and forget your poisons because you will fight 30 seconds with a simple mob instead of 5. And so on.

    As for gear, there are many items that actually fit very few classes. A dagger is a rogue weapon. A shield with intellect is assigned only to elemental shamans and healer paladins. And so on.

    1. I agree with the melee, for example, all playing differently, but what I meant is once you play a melee the fight is the same on all melee. A hunter is one of its own. Sure playing another range is like any, but hunters are different in that they can move and they auto attack from range. That is why I said they are unique and all others are the same. Because they are. Once I meleed a boss on my warrior doing it on rogue is nothing different.

    2. Don't MM hunters gain profit if they stand still?
      My Affliction Warlock is actually very flexible. She doesn't have auto attack, but DOTs and demons do their job even if she has to change position and interrupt her channeling - this could be compared to auto-attacks.

      As for melees, if we're talking about the situations evryone loves like: all focus on boss and don't give a ** what it does, then yes, only the buttons order matters. But things get interesting with added mobs or unique boss abilities. All melees (and ranges) have different AoE, different survivability and different useful abilities. So while you can hold a mob or even two with a DPS warrior or DK, your rogue runs like hell to the farthest corner hoping someone will re-aggro her foe. While a retri paladin can yawn and stand in the middle of the mobs pile spamming AoE which is also self-healing and care for nothing, your rogue will put some small DoT all over the pack and then focus on one main target. There are differences.

  2. Well from a WoW lore standpoint there is only one other "class" that uses ranged weapons: Shadow Hunter of which the current War Chief, Vol'Jin is. I don't foresee Blizzard making a class out of this because it would be a ranged guy that can cast spells. So like a Shadow Priest/Affliction Warlock mixed with a Survivalist Hunter makes for a bunch of Voodoo.

    Sounds interesting but so did the Witch Doctor in Diablo initially. There are players that complain that we shouldn't have a Destruction spec and Fire Mage because they are similar. Or an Affliction Warlock and Shadow Priest. Phooey. We need that flavor.

    But If they did do a class like that, how would you create 3 separate specs? And Vol'Jin does appear to do melee damage too (remember when the Alliance tried to take out Thrall in Orgrimmar and accidently pulled Vol'Jin too?).

    And let's not get into the whole class balancing act (PVE and PVP!!! NOOOOO!!!). People are already floating about Demon Hunter as a class too with all the speculation that the next expac will be about the Burning Legion.

    It's ironic that you mention the ranged weapon thing when hunters used to be notorious for rolling on everything that dropped as "hunter loot".

    1. If they add 4th specs I would not be adverse to shadow hunter being the 4th hunter spec. A cross between a melee hunter and a healing hunter. Even if I do think having a tank spec for hunter makes more sense.

      There are lots of hunters in lore that are different from what we see. We have hunter priests, hunter warriors, hunter shadow priests, heck, we have so many they could make 10 new specs for hunters combining them with all classes. lol

      Maybe make one of the classes get a forth spec with a ranged weapon. I could see a ranged rogue working.

  3. Dark Rangers would be great. You could put them in chainmail. If you're using the Aragorn archetype then you could have them be either ranged, melee combat or healers (since Blizz doesn't like to have specs that can't flex). I'm not sure what lore characters would be available on the Alliance side - on the Horde side this would be an obvious Sylvanas tie-in.

    1. I don't think we will see another pure class either. Dark rangers however, like I mentioned with the shadow hunter above in a response, would fit more into another hunter spec idea better.

      I am sure anything they make connecting a class to sylvanas will go over well, she is insanely popular.

  4. Well I'd rather see more variance in existing classes, than more new classes. Looking at rogues and hunters, both classes have very similar specs which is kinda pointless. Most hybrids have much, much more choice packed in one class. Mages and warlocks face the same problem. Whether they change existing specs or just add a fourth talent tree I don't mind. I'm merely discussing a sketch of an idea of mine.

    I'd like to see a ranged spec for rogues, or warriors, or maybe even monks. I mean, why not? Rogues which follow the assassin archetype could just as well kill from range. I could see some balance problems here but I'm sure many rogue would wish for a ranged spec whenever they encounter some stupid melee unfriendly mechanic. Warriors already have another role to fill but the typical stormwind-guard-archer type would fit that class as well.

    On the other hand, I'd like to see a tanking and/or a melee spec for hunters. Of course, beastmaster would be ideal for tanking. It could be done as a "tanking light" variant like the gladiator stance is a dps spec for prot warriors. I don't necessarily want to be able to tank bosses but I'd like to be able to sign up for heroic dungeons as a tanking class. Heck I already tank in 5mans whenever the actual tank is being a dick. So please let me queue as a tank so I can bypass the 30min queue and help other DPSers enter the instance faster.
    Blizz also missed an opportunity when they designed SV to be ranged (remember lacerate?). The original concept of SV was a catastrophy but it could have been easily turned into a proper melee spec. Alternatively, BM could also be melee, because when your pet is big and red and mighty, you'd usually want to be close to it so it can protect you.

    Mages and warlocks could get some versatility as well. I could kinda see mages as healers (the red dragon in-chief is a healer type after all) or warlocks as ranged tanks. Or even, demonology warlocks as actual tanks. If druids can turn into bears and tank, why shouldn't warlocks be able to turn into demons and tank too?

    I also dig the Idea of melee casters and melee healers. MW-monks work that way, kinda, and I'd like to see the same functionality with pallys. Warlocks as well as mages both could enter a melee-caster role.

    1. So you would sooner support a 4th spec for all classes before adding another class? I think I am with you on that one.

      All four pure classes can use some love. I still believe pure DPS classes should always top the meters as they have no option other than DPS. Being it seems most disagree with that a compromise is in order. A 4th spec can handle that. Give all pure classes another option. I think mages should get a healing spec and rogues, locks and hunters should all get tanking specs.

      There are things that they can do and quite honestly I think blizzard would be better off adding specs instead of classes for the next time they want to add something new.

    2. I'd like to see a 4th spec for all the pures, yeah that'd be great. Putting the pures ahead of everybody else can't and shouldn't be done realistically, since it would promote class stacking so much. Hunters are already a very useful class and do very high dps so a 20m raid can stack 3 of us without issue. Same goes for mage. Rogues and WLs are lagging behind in terms of support but their DPS is just as competitive.

      Not all classes need a 4th spec, take shamans and pallys for instance, they have 3 roles packed in 1 class. I think the pure DPSers would be first to need it. I think you're spot on with your suggestions, besides rogues. What would rogue tanks be? It would be odd, since normally rogues want as little attention as possible. Maybe they'd just need a ranged spec instead. The rogue class is kinda stuck in it's sneaky thief role so it's hard to come up with a fitting role. Maybe bard as a healer? /s

      Now that I've been thinking about it a bit I would add or change following specs for pure DPSers if I was queen of blizzard:
      - Hunters: BM with tank or dps option (like gladi stance), MM as ranged dps, SV as ranged dps, trapper as melee dps
      - Mages: Fire as ranged dps, frost or arcane as melee dps (the other range dps), and a 4th healing spec
      - WLs: demo as melee dps and a 4th spec as ranged tank
      - Rogues: keep everything as it is and add a 4th spec for ranged. Also, I kinda like my bard idea :D

  5. do remember at one time, warriors and rogues could use range weapons. It sucked as they would hog all the kills and did not have a dead zone as hunters did.

    I believe it would suck royal. Everything has been fined tuned that adding this to existing classes again would tear up that tuning.