Wikia

WoWWiki

Talk:Survival

101,313pages on
this wiki

Back to page

Gross Edit

This article is gross. I think I am going to sit down and rewrite it and try to make it more--encyclopedic. // ProjektTHOR (talk) 14:20, September 14, 2009 (UTC)

Done! Hopefully everyone enjoys the re-write I did. Seemed to focus more on what talents make a good survival hunter and less of certain trees superiority over another // ProjektTHOR (talk) 15:29, September 14, 2009 (UTC)

Out of Date flag Edit

Can someone please specify as to why the Out of Date flag is being maintained on this article? If you can supply reasons, I will attempt to provide current information. I can't do that if people simply re-apply the flag without saying anything. Petrus4 (talk) 22:26, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Corrected. I'm hoping this page stands as a resource for hunters wanting to learn about the tree, instead of just looking an talent tooltips. Kingoomieiii (talk) 15:15, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Chronicide Edit

This article is a complete mess. It is written with a very biased veiwpoint and is not at all encyclopedic. Anyone want to clean it up? :P Chronocide (talk) 06:26, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Chronocide, no, it isn't a complete mess at all. I've had numerous people express their appreciation of it. I'm guessing your opinion is largely isolated to you yourself. I also removed the "Out of date," flag, because it actually isn't. Surv is still very defensively oriented in WoTLK, and with 51 point builds still has the lowest overall damage output of any of the three trees.

As yet another point, using the claim that something is "unencyclopedic," is an emotive, entirely subjective abstraction. It's a way of simply saying that you personally don't agree with or don't approve of what is written, while attempting to use the policy of the site as justification for doing so. Petrus4 (talk) 19:37, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

As I suspected; on Googling the definition of the word "encyclopedic," it is vague and subjective to the point of being entirely worthless. Petrus4 (talk) 22:29, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Removing Weakness Edit

It was stated: Considerably lower inherent ranged damage than the other two trees, although a Hunter with a sufficiently intimate knowledge of the tree can compensate for this by blending ranged and melee tactics.

I removed this because it is simply not true. Surv hunters are naturally the middle child when it comes to RAP. BM < Surv < MM. Unfortunately in practice Surv hunters tend to hunt agi over attack power to best make use of the lighting reflexes making their RAP lower and critical hit % higher. However, in identical gear Surv hunters have more RAP and more ranged dps than BM. It also somehow implies that blending ranged and melee tactics is a good idea. This is not the case and encouraging new survival hunters to do so will lead to mocking and frustration. Odarus 25 October 2007

Update Edit

I'm going to be pulling this article into shape. Really hoping to bring it up to speed for Wrath. Kingoomieiii (talk) 14:51, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Update posted.Kingoomieiii (talk) 15:15, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki