Guild Wars 2

This post is found on the Ranger forum as well… didnt know where it would fit best… If it’s spammy, simply toss one in the bin…

So The idea is this;

• For the Beastmaster; Remove the ability to weaponswap for the ranger. Give that ranger more pets to tame (and skills with it). Make those pets compensate for the lack of weaponswapping. BM traitline is avaliable for this ranger.

• For the true “Archer”; Keep the ability to swap weapons. This removes the pet compleatly. The lack of pets could be compensated with a slight overall boost (except for to the LB wich is good enough since the last patch). This ranger has no BM traitline. (maybe another traitline for “dual wielders” or something)

The desicion on what kind of ranger u want to run could be decided in character Creation (a permanent on-time-choice), or in any major Town. Swapping between the two modes on the field (in OOC mode) would give too much diversity to the ranger compared to other classes I think.

Thoughts?

rather than making a new class/sub class out of it they could simply add something like Demonic Sacrifice from WoW.
in WoW a warlock works alot like a ranger in GW2 (in the way that they are both classes that are supposed to have a permanent AI ally fighting along side them)
Demonic Sacrifice let the warlock sacrifice (lets say “stow” for GW2 sake) the pet and in return got a buff depending on what pet it was.

in GW2 that could work out rather well,
stow a bird? get increased movement speed,
stow a cat? get a bonus to damage,
stow a bear? get a defensive bonus etc.

That will be basically the creation of two classes from one. Nice idea, however imagine that every other class would instantly want something like that, too…
Also a new class mechanic for the Archer would be needed, therefore making much more balancing problems with this change

How many times have they said there will never be a petless option?

We all rolled rangers, which was the pet class of the game. We did not roll archers, marksmen or anything of the sort.

The pet is not going anywhere. Deal with it.

Yelloweyedemon.2860:

How many times have they said there will never be a petless option?

We all rolled rangers, which was the pet class of the game. We did not roll archers, marksmen or anything of the sort.

The pet is not going anywhere. Deal with it.

This. Anet made a decision to merge scraped ideas and called the result a ranger for the sake of the original games. You can disagree with their decision, but the pet ain’t going anywhere..

And people need to understand that taking a pet away from the ranger wouldn’t make it an archer. It would still be a ranger.

Rangers, warriors, and thieves, are archers. They use bows, therefore are archers. It seems unreasonable to make a profession that is limited to 2 weapons alone. Which is precisely what you have to do, because the second they start using anything other then a bow, they are no longer archers.

Yelloweyedemon.2860:

How many times have they said there will never be a petless option?

We all rolled rangers, which was the pet class of the game. We did not roll archers, marksmen or anything of the sort.

The pet is not going anywhere. Deal with it.

i made my ranger before they nerfed pets through the floor,
i’d rather they just go all the way and remove it rather than leaving ranger with a weak, stupid AI companion that is supposed to factor in to balancing ranger damage.

I idea you put forward was already in place before the game came out. The ranger class we see today is actually multiple ( 2 or 3, not 100% sure) classes merged into one

I wish Anet would just give thieves longbow as a single target dps weapon. Then all the archer wannabes will be happy and stop begging for a petless ranger class.

Sebastian Knight.4736:

I wish Anet would just give thieves longbow as a single target dps weapon. Then all the archer wannabes will be happy and stop begging for a petless ranger class.

The only reason we see so many Rangers asking to be petless is because the game has been out for 2 years and the pet aspect of the class is, has always been, and likely always will be an enormous liability instead of any real benefit to the class.

If ANet can’t be bothered to get the primary mechanic the entire class was designed around into a functional state after 2 years, perhaps it’s time for them to wave the white flag and change it to something that actually benefited the class in all aspects of the game.

Yelloweyedemon.2860:

How many times have they said there will never be a petless option?

We all rolled rangers, which was the pet class of the game. We did not roll archers, marksmen or anything of the sort.

The pet is not going anywhere. Deal with it.

I personally rolled one on the basis that they were described as “unparalled archers” and have mained ranged classes on games for what will soon be closing in on twelve years.

And through the countless stow options suggested in the past, I know I’m not the only one who wants to play as an archer.

Granted, longbow buffs made them a hell of a lot better, and I’m not asking for much more, but it’s the sad truth that there are many people playing or who have quit the game who wanted to play a dedicated archer character and can’t.

I’m not discrediting the nature-based character, and I’m very well-aware that stowing is never going to be an option despite the at-times mandatory need for it (like scenarios where bouncing projectiles are a huge problem which forces extra hits to be received and offers the ranger no means of dealing with this), but the option for the pet-less archer genuinely should exist, at this point preferably on another class.

Yelloweyedemon.2860:

How many times have they said there will never be a petless option?

We all rolled rangers, which was the pet class of the game. We did not roll archers, marksmen or anything of the sort.

The pet is not going anywhere. Deal with it.

Ironically, I rolled an “Archer” and my pet stays at my side on passive in battle because they are completely useless. Yes I will still do more damage to you by myself, rather than you and your pet can do to me.

No player should have a problem with a “choice” to keep their pet stowed with a boost or to actually use the pet. It’s none of my business how you want to play, nor is it any of your business on how I play mine. If I have the choice to keep my pet stowed to do increased damage, it’s nobody’s business.

Simply Anet, give us the choice to either play with the pet or not. Nobody should object to this, not a soul.

DeadlySynz.3471:

Yelloweyedemon.2860:

How many times have they said there will never be a petless option?

We all rolled rangers, which was the pet class of the game. We did not roll archers, marksmen or anything of the sort.

The pet is not going anywhere. Deal with it.

Ironically, I rolled an “Archer” and my pet stays at my side on passive in battle because they are completely useless. Yes I will still do more damage to you by myself, rather than you and your pet can do to me.

No player should have a problem with a “choice” to keep their pet stowed with a boost or to actually use the pet. It’s none of my business how you want to play, nor is it any of your business on how I play mine. If I have the choice to keep my pet stowed to do increased damage, it’s nobody’s business.

Simply Anet, give us the choice to either play with the pet or not. Nobody should object to this, not a soul.

If you think you can out DPS a pet +ranger by yourself, you aren’t a very experienced ranger.

In PvE maybe. Frankly I’d say there’s little increase to using one unless fighting stationary targets.

I know for a fact my pet makes literally zero difference in PvP formats because the attacks are so easily dodged and the movement patterns so slow.

DeceiverX.8361:

In PvE maybe. Frankly I’d say there’s little increase to using one unless fighting stationary targets.

I know for a fact my pet makes literally zero difference in PvP formats because the attacks are so easily dodged and the movement patterns so slow.

Then use pets that offer CC and use CC yourself. Rangers have the most access to cripples and immobilize, utilize it.

What we need is more control over pet skills. Like f2, but 1 or 2 more.

Someday.3650:

What we need is more control over pet skills. Like f2, but 1 or 2 more.

Or a trait tree for pets!

warriorjrd.8695:

DeceiverX.8361:

In PvE maybe. Frankly I’d say there’s little increase to using one unless fighting stationary targets.

I know for a fact my pet makes literally zero difference in PvP formats because the attacks are so easily dodged and the movement patterns so slow.

Then use pets that offer CC and use CC yourself. Rangers have the most access to cripples and immobilize, utilize it.

That’s only true if you play S/D.

Further, that’s also only true if you play S/D and build around soft CC and that your opponent does not evade, use re-position skills, have access to cleanses, etc.

And that’s further only true if you’re running more effects to keep them locked down, in which case it’s very arguable that you could just build for more raw damage throughput as an individual.

There’s very little way to justify saying that pets offer a large portion of damage unless you build explicitly into BM and really spec your character out for utilizing the pet as your primary source of damage, which is only applicable/effective in a few scenarios.

DeceiverX.8361:

warriorjrd.8695:

DeceiverX.8361:

In PvE maybe. Frankly I’d say there’s little increase to using one unless fighting stationary targets.

I know for a fact my pet makes literally zero difference in PvP formats because the attacks are so easily dodged and the movement patterns so slow.

Then use pets that offer CC and use CC yourself. Rangers have the most access to cripples and immobilize, utilize it.

That’s only true if you play S/D.

Further, that’s also only true if you play S/D and build around soft CC and that your opponent does not evade, use re-position skills, have access to cleanses, etc.

And that’s further only true if you’re running more effects to keep them locked down, in which case it’s very arguable that you could just build for more raw damage throughput as an individual.

There’s very little way to justify saying that pets offer a large portion of damage unless you build explicitly into BM and really spec your character out for utilizing the pet as your primary source of damage, which is only applicable/effective in a few scenarios.

All of our weapons except for two, have access to soft CC. All canines have a cripple and knockdown. All spiders have an immobilize, some have two. Snowy owl and polar bear have a chill. Point is, ranger has a very easy access to soft CC, we don’t only need S/D. I currently run a S/W + SB hybrid build that uses the new marks GM. I take a krytan hound and jungle spider along with entangle. Nearly everybody I fight cries about the immob, and you can very easily chain the immob if you time it right. With the GM trait it is a very nice combination, but even without it, the two pets are the primary source of my CC, and they work wonders.

There’s no legitimate reason to not have a petless option, period. The way it very clearly should have been designed is that pets are only a minimal DPS increase and are more for utility, and you can simply choose to run with or without one without – running without one is slightly less optimal, depending on build, but also means you don’t have to constantly manage it.