I was wondering why hunters have such a bad reputation. If you'd do a poll asking World of Warcraft players what classes they are most likely to invite into their group, given the choice, hunters would figure at or near the bottom of the list. Which I don't think is totally justified.
One problem with hunters is pet pathing and control. The famous situation where the hunter jumps down a ledge, and the pet decides to take the long way around, aggroing about 20 mobs on the way that wipe the group, is more of a caricature than reality. A good hunter can take control of his pet and jump with it, or he stows it away for the jump. And of course a good hunter has his pet on defensive mode in a group, and watches that the pet doesn't run off after some mob.
The more fundamental problem with hunters is the same problem I have with my paladin, class balance of hybrid classes. A MMORPG has basic functions, like tanking, damage dealing, and healing. Some classes are specialized in one of these functions, and by necessity these classes are the best in that particular function. Other classes have several functions at once, a hunter can tank with his pet, heal his pet, and deal damage with his ranged attacks. But if any of these functions would be better than a specialist class, nobody would play the specialist any more. For class balance, if you can do several things, you must be less good in them. But in a group situation, three specialists are better than three hybrids.
Groups basically form by finding a warrior, a priest or healing-specced druid, a dedicated damage dealer like a mage or rogue (depending on whether you need AoE or not), and then just has two "random" spots in which you can invite any class, hunters and paladins included. But the way classes are distributed on a typical server, there are far too many people around that can only fill the random spots, and a perennial shortage of healers. Even warriors, although one of the most popular classes, are very sought-after, because there is no other class that could really replace them as tanks.
Hybrid classes are popular, because while they are less optimal in group situations, they are often better in solo and PvP situations. For example I have a defensive specced warrior, which is great in groups, okay in soloing, and just plain useless in PvP. His major function in groups in taunting, which doesn't do anything in solo or PvP situations. If you want to do a mix of many different activities, a hunter would be a better choice.
Which brings me to the final point of the hunter's reputation problem. The one where I have to express myself very carefully, if I don't want to find lots of arrows in my back and angry cats at my heels. :) By the nature of their class, hunter is a good choice for casual players not highly interested in groups and end-game content, while only a small percentage of "leet" hardcore players do choose it. So any given hunter you meet, even at level 60, has a relatively high probability to have done little grouping, and be not very experienced in group situations. And of course it is people who don't have much group experience who end up making the mistake that wipes the group. I've seen a hunter walk backwards in Molten Core, to get to a better shooting distance, and aggroing a giant standing behind him. It is easy to see how such situations can lead to a "all hunters are idiots" prejudice, which like all prejudices is not fair. I've played with very good hunters which knew how to play in a group very well, and had their pet under perfect control. You certainly want to have *some* hunters in your raid group, even if you probably don't want them to be the most numerous class in the raid.
No comments:
Post a Comment