Dramatized
Legend
Are you implying people in this bracket are good? I certainly am no god myself but if you compare this bracket with any other bracket, it's utter shit, skillwise (my observations).
Huntard Discussion: Survival vs. Beastmastery- PUGing
- Thread starter Neon
- Start date
- Status
Are you implying people in this bracket are good? I certainly am no god myself but if you compare this bracket with any other bracket, it's utter shit, skillwise (my observations).
Phrontistery
i was making waves u was surfing in 'em
Playstyle... Both are completely viable, I personally prefer SV but BM is obviously appealing with the extra stun.
It really all boils down to playstyle.
I can't help but cringe looking at the walls of text above hehe, though I must say nice job on each side of the argument,
It really all boils down to playstyle.
I can't help but cringe looking at the walls of text above hehe, though I must say nice job on each side of the argument,
Earlwing
Sheriff Earl
I didn't say, hint, imply, or otherwise give any indication that the average f2p is 'good'. But even someone who keyturns and has no binds understands that you have to get the flag back. It's not a difficult concept, and every BG has people who do *gasp* play at least somewhat objectively, even if they are noobs.
Last edited by a moderator:
Dramatized
Legend
My subjective observations speaks against this; usually atleast 50% of your team is limited to understand nothing other than "hi" on English, which for a start is really really disturbing. Then you'll have to keep in mind it's TRIAL accounts - TRIALS - many of the f2p are playing this game for their first time, they don't have a clue what "EFC", "mid", "ramp", etc, is.
Then we also have the "unstand-Enlish-and-can-play-the-game-quite-good-but-I-rather-stay-mid"-guys, which every bracket has.
Then you'll have about 2-3 people, approx, on EFC.
Earlwing
Sheriff Earl
The first part of your post is a blatant exaggeration, on both points. I said that every game has it's share of mid farmers. Now, here's the thing. Assuming that your formula holds true, your opposition will also have minimal people playing objectively. Now, that means that you, the TI user, the powerhouse pug-carrying all-star that everyone seems to be, should be able to carry your small offense against the enemy's small defense. I'm fed up with all this hypocrisy where in theory, the enemy plays objectively every game, but your own team never does. Get real.
Dramatized
Legend
It certainly am not exaggerating. I live in Sweden, so I play during EU-peak times, maybe South Americans also plays during that time? I don't know, but what I do know is that atleast 50% of the BG population doesn't understand the English language.
You seem to be accusing me of saying things, which I haven't said. Yes. The opposition will have the same South American-setup and the same amount of mid-farmer-setup. Does this fact make it easier to burst down the insanely OP healer EFC? No, it doesn't. All this result in is the 20-min long WSGs we're constantly experiencing, where not enough O is gathered in either of the teams - *NOTE* I DID NOT SAY ALLIANCE TEAM ONLY *NOTE*
It also amazes me that you seem to have missed that I wrote "I certainly am no god myself". But what is true is that it indeed would be easier to "carry" a PuG as BM than as Surv, considering the low amount of people on offense.
allahkazam
Legend
My point of view was that of a healer. A little more damage doesn't bother me. Most of the time with riptide on i'm overhealing anyway just to keep up my buff. A hunter could drain an entire focus bar on me and it wouldn't kill me. Hell even two hunters doing that probably wouldn't. Adding CC makes things tougher. Most hunters in this bracket will scatter the first cast they see, thinking it means anything. I don't know that I've really come across a good hunter yet in any BG. As a healer I'm always more afraid of losing control of my character than I am of burst. Maybe saying failure was too strong a word. But survival hunters don't scare me. They give me the same feeling I get when I see a ret paladin or a feral druid in a BG. I'm not as worried about them because it would take something extraordinary for me to notice. BM I need to be more aware.
Earlwing
Sheriff Earl
[MENTION=6815]Dramatized[/MENTION]
Calling everyone else shit, even when followed by your disclaimer, is still a roundabout way of calling yourself better than the average person in the bracket. I'm not saying you aren't, I'm simply pointing out the hypocrisy of the statement. You don't need to equate yourself to a god to be good in the f2p bracket. Also, the last sentence of my post was directed as a more general statement, and not towards what you said.
allahkazam
You're talking like SV hunters have zero CC, which is obviously not the case. And please, try to convince people why BM is better with examples of how noobs would scatter you at full health/with no focus/etc.... It's very convincing. If you're assuming the hunter is bad in the first place, neither spec should scare you. A hunter of either spec would be lucky to kill a resto shaman who is on a similar skill level to their own. 1v1 BM would have an advantage against a healer, but like I have said SO MANY TIMES, SV would bring more effectiveness in a group scenario.
Let me repeat it, so that people can see my original point more clearly.
1v1 BM would have an advantage against a healer, but like I have said SO MANY TIMES, SV would bring more effectiveness in a group scenario.
If you think WSG is a 1v1 game, go BM. If you have any comprehension of teamwork, go SV. In the end, it doesn't matter. Hunters of any spec are still OP as fuck. So long, and goodnight.
Calling everyone else shit, even when followed by your disclaimer, is still a roundabout way of calling yourself better than the average person in the bracket. I'm not saying you aren't, I'm simply pointing out the hypocrisy of the statement. You don't need to equate yourself to a god to be good in the f2p bracket. Also, the last sentence of my post was directed as a more general statement, and not towards what you said.
allahkazam
You're talking like SV hunters have zero CC, which is obviously not the case. And please, try to convince people why BM is better with examples of how noobs would scatter you at full health/with no focus/etc.... It's very convincing. If you're assuming the hunter is bad in the first place, neither spec should scare you. A hunter of either spec would be lucky to kill a resto shaman who is on a similar skill level to their own. 1v1 BM would have an advantage against a healer, but like I have said SO MANY TIMES, SV would bring more effectiveness in a group scenario.
Let me repeat it, so that people can see my original point more clearly.
1v1 BM would have an advantage against a healer, but like I have said SO MANY TIMES, SV would bring more effectiveness in a group scenario.
If you think WSG is a 1v1 game, go BM. If you have any comprehension of teamwork, go SV. In the end, it doesn't matter. Hunters of any spec are still OP as fuck. So long, and goodnight.
Dramatized
Legend
So, instead of responing to my post, which pretty much executed everything you wrote, you're just gonna make up lies?
What part of "in these shit PuGs, you're most likely to be almost alone against EFC" didn't you get? For mid control, maybe SV is better, but I thought we were discussing objective gameplay????
Earlwing
Sheriff Earl
Tell me what I'm lying about, please. If you're alone vs EFC, your team is particularly bad. Very rarely am I the only person on EFC. I play the objectives, and always urge everyone I'm playing with to do the same. You guys must have particularly shitty luck, not pay attention to your teammates, or just make up total lies, because when I pug, I don't have nearly as much trouble coordinating flag returns as you are claiming. You guys really must have a terrible time playing this game. In which case, you should stop. I don't see the point in doing something that seems to be so unappealing to you.
I eternally love you all. Fwiendly neighbohood Palalalaldin.
Last edited by a moderator:
Dramatized
Legend
You are making up accusations of me saying every f2p is shit, all I said was that f2p is shit compared to other brackets. And I explained the reasons behind this Earlier (c wat i did). I don't seem to be the only one who gets into shitty PuGs where not a single person aims for the EFC, many people in this thread has witnessed about the same thing.
Please refrain from using personal attacks. I understand you need something to compenaste your lack of knowledge and evidance, but please. And obv. people did watch it, I have gotten lots of positive feedback. If you have any personal vandetta against me, please take it to PMs.
I am reporting your post in hopes of making this thread more enjoyable to read.
Last edited by a moderator:
Earlwing
Sheriff Earl
People QQ and exaggerate about the quality of PuGs. They aren't as bad as everyone claims they are. If the games are so bad, people wouldn't play them. I'm simply stating my personal experience in pvp. If you experience otherwise, tough luck. I can safely say that I have more success, and more fun playing SV. And that's what the thread is about, right? Or maybe it was about how everyone here is the only person who plays objectively.... I don't remember anymore!
And pls dont report while cower is on cooldown. Infraction op.
And pls dont report while cower is on cooldown. Infraction op.
SallyG
Legend
What a redonkulous thing to say, superman-ing the EFC is where it's at.
Dramatized
Legend
CC matters more on few ppl than in grps (your own words) -> few people goes for EFC and few ppl protects EFC as many ppl stay in mid (my observations) -> BM should be superior
I have no idea how you find this illogical.
allahkazam
Legend
i think the disconnect is that damage comes in and I just heal it off without caring where it's coming from whereas CC comes in and I know exactly where it's coming from. I'll take the word of someone who at least plays their hunter (the one in my sig I don't). I still say it's worth checking out BM and seeing which spec suits your playstyle more though.
Mialo
The Architect.
Calm down folks. I would hate to have to close this discussion. Keep it up.
On a side-note (not like everything hasn't been said yet tho):
BM and Survival are both completely different things. Whats the difference? Explosive Shot burst against a 3 sec (maybe DR'd) stun. Essentially this is it. What do you struggle with? Not being able to kill something? Lacking that minimal extra burst? 1v1 BM is without a doubt better. But when will you really be playing 1v1? If have any common sense, and so do your teammates, you will never be really alone. The need for another stun might be crucial sometimes better, but always? I don't know. I used to play BM at first, swapping to Survival around 5.0. I went BM back after 5.2 and now I feel BM is hands-down better. Certainly for PuG'ing. That extra stun is just gamebreaking. Survival is probably better against non-healers. But against a healer-heavy comp, every time again I'm glad I'm BM that game.
On a side-note (not like everything hasn't been said yet tho):
BM and Survival are both completely different things. Whats the difference? Explosive Shot burst against a 3 sec (maybe DR'd) stun. Essentially this is it. What do you struggle with? Not being able to kill something? Lacking that minimal extra burst? 1v1 BM is without a doubt better. But when will you really be playing 1v1? If have any common sense, and so do your teammates, you will never be really alone. The need for another stun might be crucial sometimes better, but always? I don't know. I used to play BM at first, swapping to Survival around 5.0. I went BM back after 5.2 and now I feel BM is hands-down better. Certainly for PuG'ing. That extra stun is just gamebreaking. Survival is probably better against non-healers. But against a healer-heavy comp, every time again I'm glad I'm BM that game.
Earlwing
Sheriff Earl
If you have a paladin/warrior with you, survival is better. BM will DR the superior stuns from warbringer and HoJ. Seeing as those are both extremely common right now, I think SV fits better. I have no idea how you find this illogical. I've already tried to let it go, but you keep pressing the issue. Neither of us are going to back down, so drop it. I'm done discussing this with you.
bigdip
Go Outside Fools
Earl, I agree with you in some places. Pugs are not always dumb. I find that in Pugs there are more objective players than mid derpers. Those games that there are mid derpers people tend to blow out of proportion because they had a bad time in that particular game. Most pugs are not completely retarded. That being said, I have enjoyed my BM hunt. I have had great success taking out healers or even just pressuring them enough that the other pugs can take out the efc. See, pugs may go after efc, but they struggle to attack the healer that is healing the efc. This is where BMs intimidation comes in. Since no one is paying attention to this healer, its a 1v1 situation. And since this healer is trying to both keep efc up and his/herself, the three stuns really are a game breaker. And I have no trouble pumping out enough damage to keep them on there toes as well. I spec BM for these situations, because I tend to see them the most, and I feel the most useful to the pug this way. I'm sure though that there have been times when SV would have been better.
But it is indeed situational whether BM is better than SV or visa versa. That was the whole point of the hunter guide was to just try to show the capabilities of each spec, not to say which one is overall better. This thread has definitely made me want to try out SV though so I can see for myself.
One more thing. You can't say that bat is better than wasp. Wasp stun has a 45 second cooldown vs. 1 minute cooldown of bat, you may be forgetting that. Each has its benefits, but neither is better than the other, just depends on your play style and what you wish to accomplish.
- Status