I pray for a "no pets" elite spec because......

[draxynnic.3719]

Hrrmn. From memory, the main objections that get raised with respect to pets in PvP were that pet stats are independent of ranger stats (so rangers could make themselves as tanky as the game allowed while still having some killing capacity through the pet) and because the pet could continue harassing a target while the ranger is far away (to finish off a downed enemy while the ranger is doing something else, say, or allowing the ranger to run away if pressured while the pet remains in the fight).

 

These could probably be fixed by making the ranger stats matter more for the pet, and putting a shorter 'leash' on the pet (which would make sense if it's a melee-oriented spec as the hammer suggests). A shorter leash could itself serve both as a tradeoff and a means to reduce the amount of function bar skills needed to control the pet (if, say, the pet always tried to stay within 450 of the ranger, the attack/heel toggle might become redundant because it will no longer attack on its own unless the target is close to the ranger).

[Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582]

5 hours ago, draxynnic.3719 said:

Hrrmn. From memory, the main objections that get raised with respect to pets in PvP were that pet stats are independent of ranger stats (so rangers could make themselves as tanky as the game allowed while still having some killing capacity through the pet) and because the pet could continue harassing a target while the ranger is far away (to finish off a downed enemy while the ranger is doing something else, say, or allowing the ranger to run away if pressured while the pet remains in the fight).

 

These could probably be fixed by making the ranger stats matter more for the pet, and putting a shorter 'leash' on the pet (which would make sense if it's a melee-oriented spec as the hammer suggests). A shorter leash could itself serve both as a tradeoff and a means to reduce the amount of function bar skills needed to control the pet (if, say, the pet always tried to stay within 450 of the ranger, the attack/heel toggle might become redundant because it will no longer attack on its own unless the target is close to the ranger).

If the pet cannot operate independently of the Ranger, it is utterly pointless. The whole point of having command over a separate entity is so that you can get it to harass/finish/CC  something else at the same time as you doing a different thing in a different place. The entire point is to be in two places at the same time. If it is always right next to you, doing the same thing as you, it may as well be a cosmetic mini pet and just put all the damage on the Ranger.

[Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582]

On 10/15/2021 at 4:44 PM, Xenash.1245 said:

Well since we don't have a pet elite spec yet it'd be nice to see something based around our professions main mechanic.

The amount of work that would take is almost immeasurable. 

They'd have to totally rewrite the pet pathing and almost all pet code, all the pet skills and fix all the bugs that exist with pets and there are dozens of them.

Then they'd have to retune all the Ranger weapons, many skills and traits for competitive modes at least, since they are tuned around the pet not doing reliable damage and the pets being continually nerfed since launch.

Then you'd need to debuff the ranger itself, to give those stats to the pet and who wants that?

Then you need to have some method of making the pet get into battle much faster than it does now. Go test this out, make a Beastmastery build focused on the pet and run around the open world killing things. Imagine the pet is the main focus of damage and it can kill everything as fast as LB with full zerker. It still takes like 5s to even get to a target from 1500 range. So it would need shadow steps or something to make it even remotely fun to play, so that you are not waiting around half the time for the pet to run over to your target.

 

Don't get me wrong, I loved playing full pet mode in GW1, I used a staff for energy only and all pet attacks with buffs like Great Dwarf Weapon for it. It was fun at times, but waiting for the pet to change directions, targets and path to different mobs was painful and it is not much improved in this game. 

 

I just don't see a beast master spec being viable without breaking everything ANet has done with pets for the last decade. 

[Xenesis.6389]

On 10/11/2021 at 1:15 PM, Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

What if you merged into the pet rather than the pet merge into you?

 

What I see working is ending up with a specific 'pet' list and lose all the core, HoT, and PoF pets.

 

*cough* Norn racial elite skills *cough*

[NotTooFoolish.7412]

We are getting a hammer, I don't mind sending my pets on a little vacation. 
All I want for Christmas is enough hard CC to do something filthy with my former main char. 

[Xenash.1245]

20 hours ago, Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582 said:

The amount of work that would take is almost immeasurable. 

They'd have to totally rewrite the pet pathing and almost all pet code, all the pet skills and fix all the bugs that exist with pets and there are dozens of them.

Then they'd have to retune all the Ranger weapons, many skills and traits for competitive modes at least, since they are tuned around the pet not doing reliable damage and the pets being continually nerfed since launch.

Then you'd need to debuff the ranger itself, to give those stats to the pet and who wants that?

Then you need to have some method of making the pet get into battle much faster than it does now. Go test this out, make a Beastmastery build focused on the pet and run around the open world killing things. Imagine the pet is the main focus of damage and it can kill everything as fast as LB with full zerker. It still takes like 5s to even get to a target from 1500 range. So it would need shadow steps or something to make it even remotely fun to play, so that you are not waiting around half the time for the pet to run over to your target.

 

Don't get me wrong, I loved playing full pet mode in GW1, I used a staff for energy only and all pet attacks with buffs like Great Dwarf Weapon for it. It was fun at times, but waiting for the pet to change directions, targets and path to different mobs was painful and it is not much improved in this game. 

 

I just don't see a beast master spec being viable without breaking everything ANet has done with pets for the last decade. 

I get it and I just don't really care, I'd just like to see a pet elite spec good or bad instead of just joining the train of everyone always wanting the pet to just go away. Not even really saying I want it to be good or bad, it's just something I'd like to see personally.

Edited October 17, 2021 by Xenash.1245

[Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582]

50 minutes ago, Xenash.1245 said:

I get it and I just don't really care, I'd just like to see a pet elite spec good or bad instead of just joining the train of everyone always wanting the pet to just go away. Not even really saying I want it to be good or bad, it's just something I'd like to see personally.

I would too. But I highly doubt it is going to happen due to the nature of it being AI controlled. Both for lame gameplay in PvE and for crazy OP gameplay in competitive modes. If it is good enough for PvE, it is too good for PvP. If it is balanced for PvP, it is not good enough for PvE.

 

I just can't see how they can achieve both without doing insane amounts of work. 

The solution is to not have AI controlled pets. Make them a ground targetted summon that only appears for that skill use. In effect, they are a visual only. But I don't think that is really what you mean.

[Teratus.2859]

Already had a no pets with Soulbeast.. I just don't get the desire to not have Pets on Ranger, that's like not having Minions on a Necro or Illusions on a Mesmer... or Swords on a Warrior lol

Part of the reason most play Ranger is because they want a pet companion.
I'd argue what Ranger really needs more is a better pet system to fix the issues that many tend to dislike the pets for.
That would be far more preferable to just making new specs that remove the pet entirely.

Hell even better, let me take active control over my pet like I could in Gw1 and actively choose when and where to use all my pet's skills..
Go even further and let me customise my pets and teach them different skills for different situations so I no longer have to diminish my build to use a pet that I prefer for asthetic reasons or restrict my build to be better aligned with the benefits of a specific pet I want to use.

Options and freedom, that's all I want.

Edited October 17, 2021 by Teratus.2859

[draxynnic.3719]

On 10/16/2021 at 3:53 PM, Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582 said:

If the pet cannot operate independently of the Ranger, it is utterly pointless. The whole point of having command over a separate entity is so that you can get it to harass/finish/CC  something else at the same time as you doing a different thing in a different place. The entire point is to be in two places at the same time. If it is always right next to you, doing the same thing as you, it may as well be a cosmetic mini pet and just put all the damage on the Ranger.

I disagree. Possibilities for such a situation can involve setting up comboes that can happen faster because they involve two skills happening simultaneously (both in terms of combo fields/finishers, and in terms of skills that happen to chain well, such as one entity setting up a CC while the other spikes it... which is pretty much how bunny thumper operated). Consider, for instance, the possibility of having the pet leashed close enough to you that you don't need to use F1 and F3 to control it. Instead, those function keys are used to command the pet to use its non-autoattack skills instead. This would allow pet families like dogs, moas, and wyverns with CC skills to be more useful because the player can activate those skills voluntarily, while gap-closers can also be used actively by the player to get the pet onto a target, but people wouldn't be able to complain about being finished off by AI while the ranger runs and hides because it's the player activating the skills and the ranger still can't be too far away.

 

(Hahah, seems @Teratus.2859was thinking along similar lines there...)

[anduriell.6280]

25 minutes ago, draxynnic.3719 said:

Possibilities for such a situation can involve setting up comboes that can happen faster because they involve two skills happening simultaneously (both in terms of combo fields/finishers, and in terms of skills that happen to chain well, such as one entity setting up a CC while the other spikes it... which is pretty much how bunny thumper operated). Consider, for instance, the possibility of having the pet leashed close enough to you that you don't need to use F1 and F3 to control it. Instead, those function keys are used to command the pet to use its non-autoattack skills instead. This would allow pet families like dogs, moas, and wyverns with CC skills to be more useful because the player can activate those skills voluntarily, while gap-closers can also be used actively by the player to get the pet onto a target, but people wouldn't be able to complain about being finished off by AI while the ranger runs and hides because it's the player activating the skills and the ranger still can't be too far away.

That would put the ranger into another dissavantage, having to "setup the combo" when other professions just need to click one button. It would not make any sense unless the "combo" provides similar effects as elite skill or otherwise overpowered. It would be an extremely cluckly mechanic nobody would use. 

 

The only reason why bunnythumper was sucessfull was because pet and ranger worked as different entities with different stats, while the ranger focused in CC and tankiness the pet would do in damage. 

 

 

 

 

 

[Teratus.2859]

27 minutes ago, draxynnic.3719 said:

I disagree. Possibilities for such a situation can involve setting up comboes that can happen faster because they involve two skills happening simultaneously (both in terms of combo fields/finishers, and in terms of skills that happen to chain well, such as one entity setting up a CC while the other spikes it... which is pretty much how bunny thumper operated). Consider, for instance, the possibility of having the pet leashed close enough to you that you don't need to use F1 and F3 to control it. Instead, those function keys are used to command the pet to use its non-autoattack skills instead. This would allow pet families like dogs, moas, and wyverns with CC skills to be more useful because the player can activate those skills voluntarily, while gap-closers can also be used actively by the player to get the pet onto a target, but people wouldn't be able to complain about being finished off by AI while the ranger runs and hides because it's the player activating the skills and the ranger still can't be too far away.

 

(Hahah, seems @Teratus.2859was thinking along similar lines there...)

Aye, I've had almost the same idea as what you've said there in the past too with the pet being at your side.

We need some kind of upgrade to the Pet system imo, maybe not a total overhaul or maybe they should go that far.. some like the system we have now and others are just very used to it and would dislike the change.

For me personally I'd like more control over what my pet does, and i'd also like more interaction with the pet which would make it feel more like a companion rather than some stray animal I found in the wild and keep sending into death battles xD

Let me train it, let me bond with it, let me customize it and give it more commands etc.
That would be a lot of fun to me ^^
 

[anduriell.6280]

25 minutes ago, Teratus.2859 said:

Aye, I've had almost the same idea as what you've said there in the past too with the pet being at your side.

We need some kind of upgrade to the Pet system imo, maybe not a total overhaul or maybe they should go that far.. some like the system we have now and others are just very used to it and would dislike the change.

For me personally I'd like more control over what my pet does, and i'd also like more interaction with the pet which would make it feel more like a companion rather than some stray animal I found in the wild and keep sending into death battles xD

Let me train it, let me bond with it, let me customize it and give it more commands etc.
That would be a lot of fun to me ^^
 

You are spot on Teratus, but i think is Core the part of the ranger who should be more "beastmastery" . It is the core who is totally deppendent on the pet mechanic, suddenly providing a Core 2.0 as next elite specialization would do more harm than good as Core ranger would become a waste and totally discarded. 

Right now at least has some off-meta uses in different gamemodes. 

[Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582]

1 hour ago, draxynnic.3719 said:

I disagree. Possibilities for such a situation can involve setting up comboes that can happen faster because they involve two skills happening simultaneously (both in terms of combo fields/finishers, and in terms of skills that happen to chain well, such as one entity setting up a CC while the other spikes it... which is pretty much how bunny thumper operated). Consider, for instance, the possibility of having the pet leashed close enough to you that you don't need to use F1 and F3 to control it. Instead, those function keys are used to command the pet to use its non-autoattack skills instead. This would allow pet families like dogs, moas, and wyverns with CC skills to be more useful because the player can activate those skills voluntarily, while gap-closers can also be used actively by the player to get the pet onto a target, but people wouldn't be able to complain about being finished off by AI while the ranger runs and hides because it's the player activating the skills and the ranger still can't be too far away.

 

(Hahah, seems @Teratus.2859was thinking along similar lines there...)

And what actual purpose does the pet serve in that case?

Like, if you want to have a spec combo off its own field or do any of those things, just build that into the weapon skills. There is zero need for an AI controlled pet if those are the constraints placed upon it.

 

It is there for visual effect, role playing feels only.

 

The only benefit to having a pet in GW2 is to be in two places at the same time. That is just so massively useful. Anything else is just redundant programming. Perhaps some of the pet/player boon interactions like "We Heal As One!" + Fortifying Bond + Fresh Reinforcement and the rest of the boon traits. You can bounce boons off each other all day. But that's a bit one trick pony, even though it does work. (Like this http://gw2skills.net/editor/?POwEEiNsMDWEDkFyQxk7a9lOiwA-zlyIsEo1QQtB-w)

 

You can already control the pet 3 skill, it uses it immediately off swap.

 

Getting control over a couple of extra skills is just not going to cut it. The spec needs at least 10 extra. 

 

What you are describing is a core Ranger with a mild QoL improvement for pet skill control at the expense of the greatest benefit there is in having control over a separate entity. 

[Teratus.2859]

6 hours ago, anduriell.6280 said:

You are spot on Teratus, but i think is Core the part of the ranger who should be more "beastmastery" . It is the core who is totally deppendent on the pet mechanic, suddenly providing a Core 2.0 as next elite specialization would do more harm than good as Core ranger would become a waste and totally discarded. 

Right now at least has some off-meta uses in different gamemodes. 

Yeah it would have to be the core Ranger that gets the pet overhaul not something introduced with an Elite Spec.

In the past i've often thought that one way they could improve the pet system is to add a category list rather than the bloated one we currently have.
Rather than choosing between 7 different Cats we'd just equip the Feline option and then pick which of the 7 skins and Feline skills we'd use on that pet.
So you could have a Mighty Roar Tiger or a teleporting Jaguar if you wanted.

But doing something like this would require other changes, the Archetypes would have to be considered and all that.
The simplest option I guess would be to have the F2 skill define the Archetype.
If you put Mighty Roar on a Tiger or a Lynx or a Snow Leopard it wouldn't matter, the pet would always be classed as a Supportive Archtype and provide the +100 Vitality and 25% healing buff to allies when merged on a Soulbeast.

It's the other 3 pet skills that would have to be hard thought out to avoid a balance nightmare.
On that I think leaving the autos alone is probably the best thing to do, or at most giving us a very minor choice.
In Felines case: Slash.
First Slash skill would deal the most direct damage and provide no other effects.
Second Slash skill would deal low direct damage and would instead apply some bleeding damage.
Third Slash skill would deal low direct damage (bit more than the second one) and would apply Vun.
You would pick one of these as your Felines auto.

The other 2 skills, Bite and Maul could become optional and 2 new skills per pet type could be added giving you a choice out of a total of 4 utility skills per pet and 3 autos per pet.
Feline's utility skills would be Bite, Maul, Pounce and Swipe.

Bite remains the same, high damage attack although i'd like to see it do more damage to downed foes for obvious reasons, that's how big cats kill prey :D.
Maul remains the same, although I think this should do bonus damage or additional bleeding damage to stunned and immobilized foes.
Pounce would be the pets low damage gap closer.
Swipe would be the Felines crippling but low damage skill.
Cooldowns would also be balanced appropriately to since we'd now be controlling when these skills are used.
So Bite would have a long CD where as Pounce would have a short one since it does low damage and adds more pressure.

This is one idea i've had in mind for a long time anyway, there are probably much better ways to improve the pet system.

Edited October 17, 2021 by Teratus.2859

[wolfyrik.2017]

On 10/10/2021 at 4:37 AM, magic fly.2041 said:

Both of the ranger especs try to push the pet away.

 

We need one that either keeps the pet at regular full power or buffs it somehow, since anything that currently buffs the pet is better off on a merged soulbeast making it extremely hard to justify any real investment into pets outside of soulbeasts who barely even have a pet.

 I disagree with this assesment. Soulbeast, if anything, exemplifies the pet. If you're playing it beastmode exclusively, you're doing it wrong. Many of the alternative traitlines play with the merging/un-merging process. Only Beastmastery provides boosts to the merged state but even that line promotes mixing up the play. The pet is far more effective with Soulbeast than core ranger, not least because you can stow it in events/bossfights when the pet becomes a liability, then release it with additional boons and effects when the danger has passed.
Sure you lose pet-swap in battle, but that's a small price to pay when your pet becomes a stat-boosted, boon-buffed fighting machine. In stead of controlling 2 mediocre pets and one mediocre ranger, you're controlling one much better pet and one much better ranger.
My only complaint against Soulbeast is that Soulbeast is what core ranger should be.

[Arheundel.6451]

13 minutes ago, wolfyrik.2017 said:

 I disagree with this assesment. Soulbeast, if anything, exemplifies the pet. If you're playing it beastmode exclusively, you're doing it wrong. Many of the alternative traitlines play with the merging/un-merging process. Only Beastmastery provides boosts to the merged state but even that line promotes mixing up the play. The pet is far more effective with Soulbeast than core ranger, not least because you can stow it in events/bossfights when the pet becomes a liability, then release it with additional boons and effects when the danger has passed.
Sure you lose pet-swap in battle, but that's a small price to pay when your pet becomes a stat-boosted, boon-buffed fighting machine. In stead of controlling 2 mediocre pets and one mediocre ranger, you're controlling one much better pet and one much better ranger.
My only complaint against Soulbeast is that Soulbeast is what core ranger should be.

Soulbeast is basically what GW1 ranger was but with a twist, GW2 core ranger is actually a downgrade from the previous iteraction of the class, having a mechanic that literally drags you down most times than not

[frareanselm.1925]

Well, the ressurrective power of the pet when downed is ridiculously ovrepowered.

The Ai of the pet is also bad.

If this has not been fixed since 2012 I prefer anet gets rid of the pet, for the sake of balance.

[Gotejjeken.1267]

1 hour ago, frareanselm.1925 said:

Well, the ressurrective power of the pet when downed is ridiculously ovrepowered.

The Ai of the pet is also bad.

If this has not been fixed since 2012 I prefer anet gets rid of the pet, for the sake of balance.

 

Forget the resurrection potential, have you SEEN that pet's can CC while the ranger is downed?! We even had someone rage and make a whole bug complaint about it that got ignored! Super OP stuff right here.

 

As for the topic, they should have revised and pared down core ranger pet options before they made druid, and then should have allowed a pet merge functionality on all specs before creating soulbeast.  In a way, ranger would have benefitted from not getting any additional elite specs per say, but from expanding the original idea in new ways.  

 

Since they have not done this and instead continued creating disjointed messes, I cannot wait  until the end of this week to find out what new horror awaits.  

[anduriell.6280]

I wouldn't mind to do again the scavenger hunt for pets if that means Anet reworks the pet system so they provide a new set of pets which actually makes sense and perform properly in pvp and wvw. 

 

Edited October 19, 2021 by anduriell.6280

[draxynnic.3719]

Oh, hey. Looks like the new elite is based around... keeping and enhancing the pet. 

 

We'll see how it actually works in the GuildChat (and whether that works in the beta).