So when is the Pet elite type coming?

[AreeSoothsayer.1068]

We've got the healer.

We've got the Take strength from our pet and make it out own.

We've got the Dope your Pet with Power it can't control and needs you to do it for it.

 

So why not an actual Pet Elite.

 

Hell, it could be an enhancement that gives you the ability to Tame pets that normal hunters can't. A Master Tamer. Unlocking a new Page of pets just for it. Each Elite pet would be 1 of a kind and not a set of "Here's 5 pets. They're not the same because the each have 1 skill different and they're different colors." And do not get me on the new Phoenix... it is using all Wyvern animations. The flippin bush pet still seems to be the highest DPS pet available.

[RainbowTurtle.3542]

Untamed was supposedly our pet spec.

 

 

As for pet DPS, felines are strongest, followed by jacaranda on stationary targets and in confusion fights (where things attack so fast they burst confusion on themselves) ilboga is still king.

[kharmin.7683]

The PvP and WvW crowd would go ballistic with such a thing.  From what I recall, they're the reason for the pet nerfs in the first place.

[Beddo.1907]

Nothing fixes balance between pets like adding elite pets.

I see no way for a pet espec to work, with pets having so many issues. 

Honestly I hope we don't get new especs any time soon, cause all classes need serious balancing and kit refresh. Adding a 4th espec is just too much.

[Kodama.6453]

3 hours ago, kharmin.7683 said:

The PvP and WvW crowd would go ballistic with such a thing.  From what I recall, they're the reason for the pet nerfs in the first place.

Such a spec will simply not be allowed to be viable in PvP/WvW. Already seeing that on mechanist.

[Avatar.3568]

Ranger is a pet focused Spec, idk why you want an elite that is even more focused. 

Beeing AFK while te pet is doing everything was already Very Boring and unfair With mech, compared to any Other class

Edited January 11, 2023 by Avatar.3568
Mystic sentence

[PolarBear.3961]

Boring to you and fun for me :P. People have different tastes SHOCKING !

[Zaret.1450]

As pets are right now its not worth having a elite that works around pets more than untamed already does.

On that note, if we got new comands, instead of attack and come back and the more than... id say unreliable passive and active instances, id like if we got comands like " prottect that area" so we just mark a spot and the pet attacks anything in a 300 radius from that area, or "protect me" the same but with the pj, just use it and the pet will attack enemies within 300 radius from you but never leave that radius, comands like move there  would also be pretty good, and we could just choose comand as we choose skills now, so we can addapt to each game mode better.

As for elite specs, untamed is already a pet focused elite, i mean if only they made unleash buffs affect the pet too, you know unleashed you hit % harder, leashed you receive % less dmg, a downgraded version for the pet would be a good start, a couple more changes that i jave mentioned dunno how many times in other posts, and pets would be much much better, and you could apply the comand changes to mec too (maybe getting mec involved will make anet implement the changes XD)

[Telgum.6071]

I really didn't realize how bad pets are until I started to play Untamed. I rather have something more close to Soulbeast that makes your pet less necessary in exchange for strengthening yourself.

 

Either that or make the Ranger version of Mechanist. I don't see a third option that doesn't involve a pet rework.

 

 

Edited January 11, 2023 by Telgum.6071

[Swagger.1459]

20 hours ago, AreeSoothsayer.1068 said:

We've got the healer.

We've got the Take strength from our pet and make it out own.

We've got the Dope your Pet with Power it can't control and needs you to do it for it.

 

So why not an actual Pet Elite.

 

Hell, it could be an enhancement that gives you the ability to Tame pets that normal hunters can't. A Master Tamer. Unlocking a new Page of pets just for it. Each Elite pet would be 1 of a kind and not a set of "Here's 5 pets. They're not the same because the each have 1 skill different and they're different colors." And do not get me on the new Phoenix... it is using all Wyvern animations. The flippin bush pet still seems to be the highest DPS pet available.

Hi!
 

Not sure how long you’ve been playing, but I can say with confidence that the greater community of Rangers (since the beginning) have been trying to lessen the need for pets, get more options to get rid of the pet entirely (sb was a small step), and have begged for a host of other non-pet related improvements because pets hamper this class in many ways. This is due to all the issues pets have by their original design (that will never get fixed at this point or completely recoded), and they end up screwing over this profession more than they are helpful. 

 

Next elite should be completely Ranger focused, not subpar pet focused. 
 

Have a great one! 

[Kodama.6453]

7 hours ago, Swagger.1459 said:

Next elite should be completely Ranger focused, not subpar pet focused. 

Problem is that the entire trait and skill system of core ranger is built around the idea of having a pet around. So how are you creating a spec that is "completely ranger focused"? Are these effects centered on / affecting the ranger instead? Because that is literally what soulbeast already does.

[Dadnir.5038]

I'd have no issue with a pet spec if the pet had a permanent buff making it immun to anything that's not a hard CC at the cost of making it's AA do clone amount of damage (because, unfortunately we do have effects that need the pet to hit foes relatively often). And if the majority of the pet skills didn't have stupidly long CDs and horribly long cast times tied to rigid animations for subpar effects (that's especially true for the various F2 skills).

If the devs satisfy these 2 conditions, I'd welcome a pet spec. Otherwise, as sad as it may be, the best outcome is an e-spec mechanism that have nothing to do with the pet.

 

NB: I'm not against the devs restricting the number/family of pets that would work like that, as long as these pets, beyond the "clone amount of damage" AA, do have skills that provide decent utility/damage for a "fair" animation/cast time/CD cost.

[Zyreva.1078]

21 hours ago, PolarBear.3961 said:

Boring to you and fun for me :P. People have different tastes SHOCKING !

If you prefer doing nothing with stuff happening anyway i'd recommend watching videos instead of playing a game.

[PolarBear.3961]

As i said, different tastes SHOCKING !

[RainbowTurtle.3542]

16 hours ago, Swagger.1459 said:

Hi!
 

Not sure how long you’ve been playing, but I can say with confidence that the greater community of Rangers (since the beginning) have been trying to lessen the need for pets, get more options to get rid of the pet entirely (sb was a small step), and have begged for a host of other non-pet related improvements because pets hamper this class in many ways. This is due to all the issues pets have by their original design (that will never get fixed at this point or completely recoded), and they end up screwing over this profession more than they are helpful. 

 

Next elite should be completely Ranger focused, not subpar pet focused. 
 

Have a great one! 

We literally already have this in Soulbeast. An elite that makes pets go from barely an afterthought to actually useful and makes pet choice matter more than "gazelle or wyvern for cc. Tiger for anything else" would be wonderful. It doesn't need to be mech strong, but there's currently no reason to swap pets beyond the need for cc or swapping back to your damage pet.

Edited January 12, 2023 by RainbowTurtle.3542

[kharmin.7683]

On 1/11/2023 at 6:24 PM, Swagger.1459 said:

Hi!
 

Not sure how long you’ve been playing, but I can say with confidence that the greater community of Rangers (since the beginning) have been trying to lessen the need for pets, get more options to get rid of the pet entirely (sb was a small step), and have begged for a host of other non-pet related improvements because pets hamper this class in many ways. This is due to all the issues pets have by their original design (that will never get fixed at this point or completely recoded), and they end up screwing over this profession more than they are helpful. 

 

Next elite should be completely Ranger focused, not subpar pet focused. 
 

Have a great one! 

I can say with confidence that the greater community of Rangers that I know (since I've been playing 1 year after launch) has NOT been trying to lessen the need for pets.

Please do not presume to speak for some subjective majority.

[Swagger.1459]

2 hours ago, kharmin.7683 said:

I can say with confidence that the greater community of Rangers that I know (since I've been playing 1 year after launch) has NOT been trying to lessen the need for pets.

Please do not presume to speak for some subjective majority.

So sad kharmin… I had thought differently of you… 😞

 

 

[kharmin.7683]

5 hours ago, Swagger.1459 said:

So sad kharmin… I had thought differently of you… 😞

 

 

Point being, a group of players posting on a forum doesn't necessarily indicate a majority of the player base is in agreement.  It's a common fallacy around here.  My post was just making the same argument but in reverse to show how ridiculous such points are.

[AreeSoothsayer.1068]

On 1/11/2023 at 3:24 PM, Swagger.1459 said:

Hi!
 

Not sure how long you’ve been playing, but I can say with confidence that the greater community of Rangers (since the beginning) have been trying to lessen the need for pets, get more options to get rid of the pet entirely (sb was a small step), and have begged for a host of other non-pet related improvements because pets hamper this class in many ways. This is due to all the issues pets have by their original design (that will never get fixed at this point or completely recoded), and they end up screwing over this profession more than they are helpful. 

 

Next elite should be completely Ranger focused, not subpar pet focused. 
 

Have a great one! 

9-1-2016 (Edit: Whoops, that was Heart of Thorns. Lost my reciept to the original) was the day I got Gw2. I got it for the Charr and the Ranger pets. The pets have been disappointing for a while. Each time an Elite spec was coming out I would hope. Then untamed came out. I was so excited... then.. It was just more of the same on every pet. It's just remote skill triggering. Plus that ugly green overlay... blegh.

 

(Completely off topic, the original female charr voice actor had an incredible voice.)

Edited January 13, 2023 by AreeSoothsayer.1068

[Zaret.1450]

How do people usually play with pets? because im pretty sure most dps usually only play beastmastery at most, while nature magic is a much more healer/boon line, meaning, we usually play pets at less than half potential id say, i mean how many use a beastmastery, nature magic, untamed? and even then you are sacrificing your own traits for the pet, mecanist does too, but mec is baseline stronger than pets so it compensates.

If we just got boons on pets outside of nature magic, be it a signet, a trait on beastmastery, or any other way, and if unleash boon had an effect on pet, the dmg increase or dmg reduction if unleashed or not, with just that pets would be tanky enought to survive on a wvw zerg fight, or at least theid survive better and regen revives them faster i think, and it would also help with its dmg a lot.

once pet stats are decent, then you just need to change a bit its comands, only attack, come back and passive and agressive modes means its very cluncky, id say the best would be a comand so the pet stays around you, not further than 300 range or so, and attacks anyone that gets in that range, another command to target a spot and make pet go there would be great too.

Of course i imagine comand creation would be... long and probably a lot of work, i dunno about game programming but i can make wild guess, but on the other side this kind of changes would be great for not only ranger, but mec, and make possible for other classes to get mecanic changes that they might need

[Swagger.1459]

5 hours ago, kharmin.7683 said:

Point being, a group of players posting on a forum doesn't necessarily indicate a majority of the player base is in agreement.  It's a common fallacy around here.  My post was just making the same argument but in reverse to show how ridiculous such points are.

Yes, point being that 67 pages of feedback, in an official thread started by a developer, is meaningless and only considered a mere "group of players posting on the forums"...

Guild Wars 2 Forum - CDI (gw2archive.eu)

Meanwhile, almost 0 of the core issues with pets themselves, and their negative design issues that impact the ranger profession, were never really addressed over the lifetime of the game. Sad when you have an alpha interview with a gaming news outlet and acknowledge the issues with pets, but never really address those issue over a decade. Same problems at alpha, same problems when the devs asked for feedback, same problems now...

 

But yes, kharmin, pretending that over the life of the game massive amounts of players haven't expressed desires and ideas to "trying to lessen the need for pets, get more options to get rid of the pet entirely (sb was a small step), and have begged for a host of other non-pet related improvements because pets hamper this class in many ways." is silly. Pets can't even hit WALKING targets with consistency (tested), don't get full value of boons, still die easily, hamper ranger coefficients to account for the flawed pet, and 90% of pets being useless... but ya know, of course that's all just "falllacy"... or perhaps you didn't really follow along all these years.  

Edited January 13, 2023 by Swagger.1459

[Swagger.1459]

oh, and @kharmin.7683

 

these are developer quotes from 2014, maybe actually read them? After you read them, you tell me what has been really addressed and why we should make a "pet focused" elite? 

 

• “Removing the pet was something that was discussed in initial design of the class, but it is such an integral part of the Ranger’s design and philosophy. There might be some ways that we can redesign the pet and it’s AI, but those are big projects. For the time being, we are happy to take any suggestions regarding the pet.”

•  

• “There are definitely things that need to be done to fix Ranger pets in general, and it’s something we are well aware of.”

•  

• “Before things get out of hand, I want to address the aspect idea so we can move on. First of all, it’s a great idea, but there are many current issues with the profession that need to be addressed first. Our priorities to make the pet a more viable option will likely remain higher than giving an option to “permastow” the pet. We recognize there are a number of issues with the pet AI and general functionality, so that is something that will come first. Rangers are first and foremost a pet class, but they are also great skirmishers and some of the best sustained long range damage. I don’t want you to think we’re going to ignore the idea or the feedback around the pet, but it could very well be the case that fixing some of the major nagging issues with the pet would make it a more desirable aspect of the Ranger.”

•  

• “That is exactly my point. We want to make sure we’ve done everything we can to make the pet desirable before we consider any options for those that don’t want to play with the pet as much.”

•  

• “We want to fix issues with the pet AI and general usability before we consider doing something to this extent.”

•  

• “We acknowledged that Pet AI does need help, but we did not say we would not be doing this. You will see some changes in the coming feature patch that should help with the pet’s usability.”

•  

• “We didn’t make this thread specifically to get feedback on the pets. It just happens to be one of (if not the biggest) the top issues with Ranger right now.”

•  

• “That is perfectly valid feedback. Like I said though, we do have some changes coming that should help with this. Particularly with the one you noted (F2).” (This is regarding F2 responsiveness)."

•  

• “The Ranger is designed to have a pet. If the pet was taken away or didn’t do damage, then it wouldn’t be a Ranger anymore. Does that make sense? The only reason Rangers lose damage is because the AI is not currently what it ought to be. What I’ve been seeing a lot of is that you guys don’t necessarily dislike pets. What you dislike is how they act and how they are controlled. It seems to me that these are feelings that have been built up over time, and have culminated into “pets have to go” because you guys haven’t seen the improvements that should be made to pets to make them desirable. I certainly don’t blame you for getting to this point, but I do want to know the core of the problem before we start talking about rebalancing an entire class.”

•  

• “Perhaps, but what people were suggesting was a rebalance of the class to make up for the current state of pet AI. In essence, that would mean tweaking the numbers of all Ranger traits and skills to account for the lack of pet.”

•  

• "Hey everyone, I’ve tried to summarize most of the feedback we’ve been getting. (shortened to highlight pet stuff)Beastmastery & Pets:

  1. Pets need stat scaling.
• 1. Stats could scale based on the Ranger’s stats and the pet’s family, with a weight on specific stats based on the individual pet
• 2. Beastmastery should improve the pet stat scaling.
  3. Pets should take less damage from AoE and one-shot mechanics.
• 1. Pets should take 30% damage from AoEs, be immune to one shot mechanics and take 25% damage from cleaves when not the selected target.
  2. Pets can’t keep up in combat.
• 1. Melee range should be increased to 600 to accommodate the “run>stop>begin attack>cancel attack>run>stop” type mechanics you see throughout the game.
• 2. Increase pet movement speed by 10-15%. Replace Agility Training with Vigorous training
• 3. Pets have a hard time sticking to their target because they can’t attack and move at the same time. Increasing their speed could help increase their damage by just allowing them to keep up with their target.
• 4. Allow pets to attack while moving."

[kharmin.7683]

53 minutes ago, Swagger.1459 said:

 

But yes, kharmin, pretending that over the life of the game massive amounts of players haven't expressed desires and ideas to

Source?  Let's see what you consider to be a "massive amounts of players".  

[Swagger.1459]

19 minutes ago, kharmin.7683 said:

Source?  Let's see what you consider to be a "massive amounts of players".  

I will provide the sources once you sufficiently answer the questions asked.  

[AreeSoothsayer.1068]

4 hours ago, Swagger.1459 said:

oh, and @kharmin.7683

 

these are developer quotes from 2014, maybe actually read them? After you read them, you tell me what has been really addressed and why we should make a "pet focused" elite? 

 

• “Removing the pet was something that was discussed in initial design of the class, but it is such an integral part of the Ranger’s design and philosophy. There might be some ways that we can redesign the pet and it’s AI, but those are big projects. For the time being, we are happy to take any suggestions regarding the pet.”

•  

• “There are definitely things that need to be done to fix Ranger pets in general, and it’s something we are well aware of.”

•  

• “Before things get out of hand, I want to address the aspect idea so we can move on. First of all, it’s a great idea, but there are many current issues with the profession that need to be addressed first. Our priorities to make the pet a more viable option will likely remain higher than giving an option to “permastow” the pet. We recognize there are a number of issues with the pet AI and general functionality, so that is something that will come first. Rangers are first and foremost a pet class, but they are also great skirmishers and some of the best sustained long range damage. I don’t want you to think we’re going to ignore the idea or the feedback around the pet, but it could very well be the case that fixing some of the major nagging issues with the pet would make it a more desirable aspect of the Ranger.”

•  

• “That is exactly my point. We want to make sure we’ve done everything we can to make the pet desirable before we consider any options for those that don’t want to play with the pet as much.”

•  

• “We want to fix issues with the pet AI and general usability before we consider doing something to this extent.”

•  

• “We acknowledged that Pet AI does need help, but we did not say we would not be doing this. You will see some changes in the coming feature patch that should help with the pet’s usability.”

•  

• “We didn’t make this thread specifically to get feedback on the pets. It just happens to be one of (if not the biggest) the top issues with Ranger right now.”

•  

• “That is perfectly valid feedback. Like I said though, we do have some changes coming that should help with this. Particularly with the one you noted (F2).” (This is regarding F2 responsiveness)."

•  

• “The Ranger is designed to have a pet. If the pet was taken away or didn’t do damage, then it wouldn’t be a Ranger anymore. Does that make sense? The only reason Rangers lose damage is because the AI is not currently what it ought to be. What I’ve been seeing a lot of is that you guys don’t necessarily dislike pets. What you dislike is how they act and how they are controlled. It seems to me that these are feelings that have been built up over time, and have culminated into “pets have to go” because you guys haven’t seen the improvements that should be made to pets to make them desirable. I certainly don’t blame you for getting to this point, but I do want to know the core of the problem before we start talking about rebalancing an entire class.”

•  

• “Perhaps, but what people were suggesting was a rebalance of the class to make up for the current state of pet AI. In essence, that would mean tweaking the numbers of all Ranger traits and skills to account for the lack of pet.”

•  

• "Hey everyone, I’ve tried to summarize most of the feedback we’ve been getting. (shortened to highlight pet stuff)Beastmastery & Pets:

  1. Pets need stat scaling.
• 1. Stats could scale based on the Ranger’s stats and the pet’s family, with a weight on specific stats based on the individual pet
• 2. Beastmastery should improve the pet stat scaling.
  3. Pets should take less damage from AoE and one-shot mechanics.
• 1. Pets should take 30% damage from AoEs, be immune to one shot mechanics and take 25% damage from cleaves when not the selected target.
  2. Pets can’t keep up in combat.
• 1. Melee range should be increased to 600 to accommodate the “run>stop>begin attack>cancel attack>run>stop” type mechanics you see throughout the game.
• 2. Increase pet movement speed by 10-15%. Replace Agility Training with Vigorous training
• 3. Pets have a hard time sticking to their target because they can’t attack and move at the same time. Increasing their speed could help increase their damage by just allowing them to keep up with their target.
• 4. Allow pets to attack while moving."

2014..

 

😭