My take is that two things are particularly crucial to note:
-
Players judge the game by their individual experiences. (This can also include hunting with others and seeing how their friends perform, for example.)
-
Staff at least appears to judge the game by the aggregate player experience and/or peak player experience.
So, in a sense, you're not necessarily asking the right questions. When you ask...
Are bards unable to hunt in certain areas due to the changes, or are they just a little slower?
...the answer is yes. Some bards are unable to hunt in certain areas. Others are just a little slower.
What does it depend on? Gear, build, exp, race, preferred playstyle, all kinds of things. Even reaction time and typing speed factor in given how quickly some of the Ascension creatures move. It also depends on someone's definition of "unable to hunt."
All of this might sound like I'm obfuscating to make it seem like my bard is worse off than she is, but actually my bard is my third best if not second best character in the Hinterwilds. (Definitely behind my ranger and maybe behind Leafi, but ahead of the rest and it's not close. I will say my paladin used to be better than my bard there before the 140 nerf.)
What I'm getting at is that people are upset over a subjective, individual, lived bard experience created by a mechanical change that was implemented in response to the overall bard experience or the ceiling thereof.
Translating that down from abstraction, 1030 being OP for a 2x spells bard is meaningless to a 1x spells bard, yet nonetheless the latter took a hit too. As Erek has put it, tuning against extremes hurts the average joe.
Now, arguably 1030 is still OP at 1x--but, again, this is beside the point that things are driven by perception. If staff says that bards are doing just fine in Divergence areas and several players say their bards are unplayable there, both can be telling the truth from their perspective and definitions.