Druid pet nerf is NOT ok! Here's why and what to do instead

[Lazze.9870]

@derd.6413 said:

@Lazze.9870 said:

@derd.6413 said:

@Musha.4025 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:This doesn't really make sense ... choosing Druid as a support role IS diversity in builds and opening build options because Soulbeast and Core Ranger are poor support. If you want to play DPS druid, you can ... it just won't be optimal. The meta think is infectious ... be aware that the game does not cater to that kind of thinking.Choosing Druid as DPS is build diversity. Choosing Druid as support is going with the flow. Regardless, no class or elite spec should lock a player into ANY role. That was the core concept upon which GW2 was developed.

no, the classes shouldn't lock you in a role but elite specs aren't classes, they're traitlines

Picking a Honor as a Guardian doesn't force you into a healer role nor does it restrict your offensive stats. Picking Water Magic as an Elementalist doesn't force you into a healer role nor does it restrict your offensive stats. You need to understand where people are coming from. Druid used to be perfectly viable as a complement to a more offensive ranger build. Anet keeps shoehorning it into being nothing except a healer with buffs.

Like I said in a few comments above, I would be fine with that if they didn't implement it in such a lazy way. Simply taking away pet stats is a lazy trade off. Their changes are making the Druid dull and second tier at best in anything that isn't raids.

perhaps but don't really see what else anet could've done as trade-off to druid tho

There are lots of ideas. Even in this thread. I literally directed you to my comment above.

[enkeny.6937]

@"Obtena.7952" said:This doesn't really make sense ... choosing Druid as a support role IS diversity in builds and opening build options because Soulbeast and Core Ranger are poor support. If you want to play DPS druid, you can ... it just won't be optimal. The meta think is infectious ... be aware that the game does not cater to that kind of thinking.

Most of the support abilities are core ranger (spirits, spotter, boons, fields) , druid can do greater healing. I have played support ranger from the beginning and most case we called the one, who died next to me "idiot"... ("at least try to not stay in lava, please...")what druid give you as extra: might, a bit more condition cleanse, more heal, +2 blast.

[Chokolata.1870]

The nerf to pet attributes is irrelevant for PvE. The glyph of empowerment removal was noticeable however.

As for PvP or WvW, removing pet stats is a big deal because of much less health and damage reduction on them. Perhaps a better way to go about it would have been to remove pet swap for example.... but even then...

Astral form is cumbersome to use as you have to jump through many hoops to use it: generate astral force, time limited, CD limited.

It also has no damage skills.

[Wondrouswall.7169]

Thinking more about it, -20% stat reduction wasn't a great trade-off. As mentioned by others before - it was lazy. If Anet really wants to give a trade-off for taking the Druid traitline, then there's only one thing that must be done to make it a true trade-off.

 

A Core Ranger unique F5 function, BAY-BAY!!

 

[Euthymias.7984]

@"Wondrouswall.7169" said:Thinking more about it, -20% stat reduction wasn't a great trade-off. As mentioned by others before - it was lazy. If Anet really wants to give a trade-off for taking the Druid traitline, then there's only one thing that must be done to make it a true trade-off.

 

A Core Ranger unique F5 function, BAY-BAY!!

 

I agree. Giving the base ranger something both unique and effective to be lost upon taking druid/soulbeast would be much better preferred than just stripping the current specs for the sake of this "tradeoff" business.

With all the talk of tradeoffs and such, I guess I'll just copy what I said in the other thread here about a possibility for (core) Rangers:

In a way, I'd like to see something like a command to turn (or buff) the pets into different Archetypes like their GW1 counterpart (Dire/Elder/Hearty) with a new command that gives them a noticeable stat increase while being Core."Elder" is the default state of a Ranger's pet as they are now. Dire could increase their overall damage and attack rate/movement speed while giving them a slight defense reduction. Hearty could make them more durable (especially against non-focused attacks they happen to get hit by) at the cost of less damage to address the complaints about how fast they die to just random cleave/AoE. Naturally, Soulbeast/Druid would be defaulted to "Elder" (or just make Druid stuck with Hearty instead of cutting everything down by 20%.....) and not have any ability to change from that archetype like Core could.

 

[InsaneQR.7412]

@Wondrouswall.7169 said:Thinking more about it, -20% stat reduction wasn't a great trade-off. As mentioned by others before - it was lazy. If Anet really wants to give a trade-off for taking the Druid traitline, then there's only one thing that must be done to make it a true trade-off.

 

A Core Ranger unique F5 function, BAY-BAY!!

 

Woohoo woundrousswall is back!Yeah F5 or core pet buff would be a great.

[Lazze.9870]

Especially considering they made trade offs to the revenant specs by giving the core class an F2.

Very aware of how revenant already felt incomplete without using an elite spec, but still, it's not like the ranger haven't had problems with its only mechanic. Problems that still persist.

[Sobx.1758]

@Lazze.9870 said:

@derd.6413 said:

@Musha.4025 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:This doesn't really make sense ... choosing Druid as a support role IS diversity in builds and opening build options because Soulbeast and Core Ranger are poor support. If you want to play DPS druid, you can ... it just won't be optimal. The meta think is infectious ... be aware that the game does not cater to that kind of thinking.Choosing Druid as DPS is build diversity. Choosing Druid as support is going with the flow. Regardless, no class or elite spec should lock a player into ANY role. That was the core concept upon which GW2 was developed.

no, the classes shouldn't lock you in a role but elite specs aren't classes, they're traitlines

Picking Honor as a Guardian doesn't force you into a healer role nor does it restrict your offensive stats. Picking Water Magic as an Elementalist doesn't force you into a healer role nor does it restrict your offensive stats. You need to understand where people are coming from. Druid used to be perfectly viable as a complement to a more offensive ranger build. Anet keeps shoehorning it into being nothing except a healer with buffs.

Like I said in a few comments above, I would be fine with that if they didn't implement it in such a lazy way. Simply taking away pet stats is a lazy trade off. Their changes are making the Druid dull and second tier at best in anything that isn't raids.

Elite spec isn't the same thing as core specs, if it was, it wouldn't get a differentiating name.

[Obtena.7952]

@enkeny.6937 said:

@"Obtena.7952" said:This doesn't really make sense ... choosing Druid as a support role IS diversity in builds and opening build options because Soulbeast and Core Ranger are poor support. If you want to play DPS druid, you can ... it just won't be optimal. The meta think is infectious ... be aware that the game does not cater to that kind of thinking.

Most of the support abilities are core ranger (spirits, spotter, boons, fields) , druid can do greater healing. I have played support ranger from the beginning and most case we called the one, who died next to me "idiot"... ("at least try to not stay in lava, please...")what druid give you as extra: might, a bit more condition cleanse, more heal, +2 blast.

Doesn't really change what I said ... are you going to play a core ranger over a druid for support? I doubt it ... therefore, choosing druid as a support role IS diversity in builds and opening build options because Soulbeast and Core Ranger are poor support.

[enkeny.6937]

@Obtena.7952 said:

@enkeny.6937 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:This doesn't really make sense ... choosing Druid as a support role IS diversity in builds and opening build options because Soulbeast and Core Ranger are poor support. If you want to play DPS druid, you can ... it just won't be optimal. The meta think is infectious ... be aware that the game does not cater to that kind of thinking.

Most of the support abilities are core ranger (spirits, spotter, boons, fields) , druid can do greater healing. I have played support ranger from the beginning and most case we called the one, who died next to me "idiot"... ("at least try to not stay in lava, please...")what druid give you as extra: might, a bit more condition cleanse, more heal, +2 blast.

Doesn't really change what I said ... are you going to play a core ranger over a druid for support? I doubt it ... therefore, choosing druid as a support role IS diversity in builds and opening build options because Soulbeast and Core Ranger are poor support.

I am going to play soulbeast over druid. Soulbeast have good support, not heal based, but sharing the aspects give a big boost. If you are not in raid, you don't need much heal, so making bigger damage with damage reduction / control (like protection, stability) is better.

And don't forget, now we have a very big synergy problem with druid and beastmastery... have any other class get a specialization synergy problem like this?

[enkeny.6937]

Option for trade-off: 1 pet.like berserker lost 2 bar (the 1st and 2nd :) ), we can use only 1 pet and change the switch pet to "renew pet" - revive, heal, remove conditions/boons, clear cooldowns and making trigger any traits triggered by switch pet./or when enter celestial form, our pet get renewed/

[Warscythes.9307]

Don't really have too much to say as I don't know about ranger that well. But reaper shroud decrease about 66.67% faster. Core shroud is actually pretty competitive in terms of wvw roaming because of the range and better sustain. So yes there is a trade off where you trade defense for offense. Granted the ratio is a bit skewed but is there.

Now I think about, isn't locking you into a role by picking an elite line the intended purpose? You specialize in one thing and give up others? Most elite specs only do one thing and one thing only.

There are 18 elites especs. Of which Renegade, FB, Herald, Scourge, Chrono, tempest, Scrapper is what I would consider to fulfill multi-roles at a somewhat reasonable level. This isn't really a new thing no?

[Lazze.9870]

@Sobx.1758 said:

@Lazze.9870 said:

@derd.6413 said:

@Musha.4025 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:This doesn't really make sense ... choosing Druid as a support role IS diversity in builds and opening build options because Soulbeast and Core Ranger are poor support. If you want to play DPS druid, you can ... it just won't be optimal. The meta think is infectious ... be aware that the game does not cater to that kind of thinking.Choosing Druid as DPS is build diversity. Choosing Druid as support is going with the flow. Regardless, no class or elite spec should lock a player into ANY role. That was the core concept upon which GW2 was developed.

no, the classes shouldn't lock you in a role but elite specs aren't classes, they're traitlines

Picking Honor as a Guardian doesn't force you into a healer role nor does it restrict your offensive stats. Picking Water Magic as an Elementalist doesn't force you into a healer role nor does it restrict your offensive stats. You need to understand where people are coming from. Druid used to be perfectly viable as a complement to a more offensive ranger build. Anet keeps shoehorning it into being nothing except a healer with buffs.

Like I said in a few comments above, I would be fine with that if they didn't implement it in such a lazy way. Simply taking away pet stats is a lazy trade off. Their changes are making the Druid dull and second tier at best in anything that isn't raids.

Elite spec isn't the same thing as core specs, if it was, it wouldn't get a differentiating name.

You're pointing out semantics and skipping the problem entirely.

Read the thread.

[Lazze.9870]

@Warscythes.9307 said:Now I think about, isn't locking you into a role by picking an elite line the intended purpose? You specialize in one thing and give up others? Most elite specs only do one thing and one thing only.

There are 18 elites especs. Of which Renegade, FB, Herald, Scourge, Chrono, tempest, Scrapper is what I would consider to fulfill multi-roles at a somewhat reasonable level. This isn't really a new thing no?

It is a new thing that they keep shoehorning the druid into doing a single role in ONE FRACTION OF ONE GAMEMODE.

Druid isn't a particularly good support spec for pvp or wvw in comparison to others, and it has even fallen out of the fractal meta. Instead of shuffling things around and do some rework to make it on par as a support, while implementing a proper trade off as a part of it, they gut the pets in the laziest way possible.

[Warscythes.9307]

@Lazze.9870 said:

@Warscythes.9307 said:Now I think about, isn't locking you into a role by picking an elite line the intended purpose? You specialize in one thing and give up others? Most elite specs only do one thing and one thing only.

There are 18 elites especs. Of which Renegade, FB, Herald, Scourge, Chrono, tempest, Scrapper is what I would consider to fulfill multi-roles at a somewhat reasonable level. This isn't really a new thing no?

It is a new thing that they keep shoehorning the druid into doing a single role in ONE FRACTION OF ONE GAMEMODE.

Druid isn't a particularly good support spec for pvp or wvw in comparison to others, and it has even fallen out of the fractal meta. Instead of shuffling things around and do some rework to make it on par as a support, while implementing a proper trade off as a part of it, they gut the pets in the laziest way possible.

Most specs really aren't that great in more than one game mode though. No I don't really count open world PvE as a metric as balance because you can run literally anything. Fractals sure but is meh at worst, I don't think anybody will say no to druids unless you are speedclearing which I wager most aren't.

Functionality most elite specs are really good in 1 game mode and kind of meh in others. It was the stated intention for elite specs that is suppose to specialize, that's why is called specialization no? If is currently weak in its supposed role then buff it and maybe bring some off spec up to speed. But I don't think it was ever their intention for elite spec to be really good multiple roles other than some outliers such as Chrono.

[Eleazar.9478]

@LughLongArm.5460 said:Perhaps A.net got a grand vision of returning to the roots of the combat mechanic as they were in vanilla. So they are in the process of reducing all specs in power emphasizing risk-reward concepts of damage vs defense. I inspect all the changes in a vacuum, assuming everything lese is more or less the same but maybe I'm wrong. Perhaps 7 sec channeled skill is a possibility in the future of GW2 combat. If only we had some transparency from the devs....

I think your giving them too much credit. They seem to be very inconsistent with their changes.

1) Remember how they nerfed auras to reduce visual noise well, pof intrudcued crazy amount of visual noise with scourge

2) remember the tether change how it casts reveal on tethered targets? Unity still doesn't do that

3)This update they said elite specs should have trade offs, warrior gets his toughness back plus stab on a grandmaster trait

4) remember how they said they didn't like all the damage mitigation, well all that came back in the form of unique buffs that they said they didn't like

5)remember how they nerfed quickness rezing but then proceeded to add insta rezes even on traits.

6) remember way back when they nerfed reflects well look at all the reflects now.

7) remember how we lost throwing traps, and following spirits in order to split our class identity from necros. Well look at the scrapper rework.

8) dagger still sucks lol.

[enkeny.6937]

Before HoT, you were kick from groups just because you typed slow "I will change character just wait a minute, please!" or just by playing ranger... Ranger was weak at the point, when the devs asked about the weakest classes, if someone didn't mentioned ranger, that means he/she didn't have ranger. After HoT, ranger (druid) become usable, not good in any situation, but it gave some extra. Almost all of it is now gone. (we have soulbeast, so no need the druid...,thanks?)In the first year, ranger was left out from a balance patch. we didn't liked it. We hope if we will left out again. When it was announced druid will not be part of a patch, we were happy. I hope, if this will change someday...Getting a huge nerf is one thing (we used to it), saying it is because we don't get enough is irritating and saying "bit weaker" for reducing 5 stat with ~300-700 is not acceptable.Balance usually about nerfing something that is overpowered and buff things that is too weak to be usable. Was the druid pets this op? I don't think so.

[Deadvillager.1956]

I dont really understand why you would take the druid spec for damage. If you are too "lazy" to swap your specs all the time depending on whatever content you are currently playing, I can totally understand. Why you would pick druid with the intend to ignore its core mechanic and do damage with a wet noodle weapon instead is beyond me though. Not saying that the 20% stat squish on pets was needed but thematically speaking, Anet could also have reduced your offensive stats or total damage output instead. You got away pretty good with the pet nerf.

[LughLongArm.5460]

@Eleazar.9478 said:

@LughLongArm.5460 said:Perhaps A.net got a grand vision of returning to the roots of the combat mechanic as they were in vanilla. So they are in the process of reducing all specs in power emphasizing risk-reward concepts of damage vs defense. I inspect all the changes in a vacuum, assuming everything lese is more or less the same but maybe I'm wrong. Perhaps 7 sec channeled skill is a possibility in the future of GW2 combat. If only we had some transparency from the devs....

I think your giving them too much credit. They seem to be very inconsistent with their changes.

1) Remember how they nerfed auras to reduce visual noise well, pof intrudcued crazy amount of visual noise with scourge

2) remember the tether change how it casts reveal on tethered targets? Unity still doesn't do that

3)This update they said elite specs should have trade offs, warrior gets his toughness back plus stab on a grandmaster trait

4) remember how they said they didn't like all the damage mitigation, well all that came back in the form of unique buffs that they said they didn't like

5)remember how they nerfed quickness rezing but then proceeded to add insta rezes even on traits.

6) remember way back when they nerfed reflects well look at all the reflects now.

7) remember how we lost throwing traps, and following spirits in order to split our class identity from necros. Well look at the scrapper rework.

8) dagger still sucks lol.

All true :(

[LughLongArm.5460]

@"Deadvillager.1956" said:I dont really understand why you would take the druid spec for damage. If you are too "lazy" to swap your specs all the time depending on whatever content you are currently playing, I can totally understand. Why you would pick druid with the intend to ignore its core mechanic and do damage with a wet noodle weapon instead is beyond me though. Not saying that the 20% stat squish on pets was needed but thematically speaking, Anet could also have reduced your offensive stats or total damage output instead. You got away pretty good with the pet nerf.

1)No one is taking druid to be the number one DPS on a raid party. Players want to do enough DPS to at least be compatible and dangerous in PvP.2)Players like the concept of druid from a fantasy stand of view and want feel capable and have options with their favored spec(build diversity).3)Since when support specs ca't do massive damage if they are build for it, look at firebrand and scourge, both doing arguably better job at team support with better defenses and much better damage.

[enkeny.6937]

I tried to write down the trade off for classes. I will ask around in my guild too, but maybe you can help me too:what is the trade-off for Chronomancer and scrapper?

what i found as a weak trade-off: tempest, reaper, soulbeast, dead-eye, holosmith, dragon-huntermaybe weak: mirage, daredevil, renegade

(by weak I mean it is not a relevant loss. )

[Deadvillager.1956]

@LughLongArm.5460 said:

@"Deadvillager.1956" said:I dont really understand why you would take the druid spec for damage. If you are too "lazy" to swap your specs all the time depending on whatever content you are currently playing, I can totally understand. Why you would pick druid with the intend to ignore its core mechanic and do damage with a wet noodle weapon instead is beyond me though. Not saying that the 20% stat squish on pets was needed but thematically speaking, Anet could also have reduced your offensive stats or total damage output instead. You got away pretty good with the pet nerf.

1)No one is taking druid to be the number one DPS on a raid party. Players want to do enough DPS to at least be compatible and dangerous in PvP.2)Players like the concept of druid from a fantasy stand of view and want feel capable and have options with their favored spec(build diversity).3)Since when support specs ca't do massive damage if they are build for it, look at firebrand and scourge, both doing arguably better job at team support with better defenses and much better damage.

1) You are far more compatible and dangerous with a soulbeast or core ranger. Druid is probably the most defensive support you could pick and is all about sustain and disruptive CC. If you find yourself dueling a spellbreaker on point your teammates are either bad, dead or underway. There have to be limitations to what one build is capable of doing.2) Build diversity is a huge point but it still doesnt mean everyone should be able to do everything. The only real problem I found in this thread was that pets dont tank for you anymore because of their lack of toughness. This is probably unintended and should be fixed, as that truly defeats the pets purpose.3) I agree with firebrand, it has an insane boon output even when traited offensively. IMO that means that it needs more drawbacks though. As a necro main, I know the feel of too strong base kits and too weak traits. Although I would argue that especially scourge does not support groups as much as you say it does. You can trait strong rezz and passive life reg + barriers but you dont have any other boons to share than some might and a drop of regen. A single ranger warhorn 5 has more boons than that. The scourges strength lie in messing up the defense of the enemy.

[enkeny.6937]

@Deadvillager.1956 said:3) I agree with firebrand, it has an insane boon output even when traited offensively. IMO that means that it needs more drawbacks though. As a necro main, I know the feel of too strong base kits and too weak traits. Although I would argue that especially scourge does not support groups as much as you say it does. You can trait strong rezz and passive life reg + barriers but you dont have any other boons to share than some might and a drop of regen. A single ranger warhorn 5 has more boons than that. The scourges strength lie in messing up the defense of the enemy.

warhorn is a core ranger weapon, boost by nature magic, that is also core ranger. Nothing boost warhorn in druid and has nothing that trigger for it. It's like saying scourges are great because epidemic (just an example, I don't know how epidemic do now :) )Because the core class has something, make the elite specialization worse... seems logic

[Deadvillager.1956]

@enkeny.6937 said:

@Deadvillager.1956 said:3) I agree with firebrand, it has an insane boon output even when traited offensively. IMO that means that it needs more drawbacks though. As a necro main, I know the feel of too strong base kits and too weak traits. Although I would argue that especially scourge does not support groups as much as you say it does. You can trait strong rezz and passive life reg + barriers but you dont have any other boons to share than some might and a drop of regen. A single ranger warhorn 5 has more boons than that. The scourges strength lie in messing up the defense of the enemy.

warhorn is a core ranger weapon, boost by nature magic, that is also core ranger. Nothing boost warhorn in druid and has nothing that trigger for it. It's like saying scourges are great because epidemic (just an example, I don't know how epidemic do now :) )Because the core class has something, make the

elite

specialization worse... seems logic

Okay let me rephrase then: Scourge has about as much or even less boon support than a traited core ranger spell. It is just not intended to do those things and has other strengths like temporary health and boon corrupt (admittedly similar to core necro).

[LughLongArm.5460]

@Deadvillager.1956 said:

@LughLongArm.5460 said:

@Deadvillager.1956 said:I dont really understand why you would take the druid spec for damage. If you are too "lazy" to swap your specs all the time depending on whatever content you are currently playing, I can totally understand. Why you would pick druid with the intend to ignore its core mechanic and do damage with a wet noodle weapon instead is beyond me though. Not saying that the 20% stat squish on pets was needed but thematically speaking, Anet could also have reduced your offensive stats or total damage output instead. You got away pretty good with the pet nerf.

1)No one is taking druid to be the number one DPS on a raid party. Players want to do enough DPS to at least be compatible and dangerous in PvP.2)Players like the concept of druid from a fantasy stand of view and want feel capable and have options with their favored spec(build diversity).3)Since when support specs ca't do massive damage if they are build for it, look at firebrand and scourge, both doing arguably better job at team support with better defenses and much better damage.

1) You are far more compatible and dangerous with a soulbeast or core ranger. Druid is probably the most defensive support you could pick and is all about sustain and disruptive CC. If you find yourself dueling a spellbreaker on point your teammates are either bad, dead or underway. There have to be limitations to what one build is capable of doing.2) Build diversity is a huge point but it still doesnt mean everyone should be able to do everything. The only real problem I found in this thread was that pets dont tank for you anymore because of their lack of toughness. This is probably unintended and should be fixed, as that truly defeats the pets purpose.3) I agree with firebrand, it has an insane boon output even when traited offensively. IMO that means that it needs more drawbacks though. As a necro main, I know the feel of too strong base kits and too weak traits. Although I would argue that especially scourge does not support groups as much as you say it does. You can trait strong rezz and passive life reg + barriers but you dont have any other boons to share than some might and a drop of regen. A single ranger warhorn 5 has more boons than that. The scourges strength lie in messing up the defense of the enemy.

Druid is not defensive at all, it probably the least tanky spec out of the support specs. Druid survivability relays on kiting/evades/stealth. Druid has very limited access to stability and very vulnerable to CC. Druid cannot hold a point vs most roamers like holo/mirage/SBDruid cannot tank, even for short duration +1 situations.You can just watch high level pvp tourneys, druid is nowhere to be found for like 1 year +. Firebarnds and scourges you can find in plenty.