Guild Wars 2

Knote.2904:

They should just let you choose which of the pet skills you have in the “active” slot, so if you the active skill you have you want on auto you can, and then use a different one actively instead of passively.

It’s not as simple. Keep in mind that this would increase balancing load exponentially. If a pet has a knockdown or other strong CC (i.e. canines) you have to cross-check for every ranger instance of CC so that they aren’t suddenly able to pull off an overpowered stunlock. If a pet has a strong vanilla DOT or burst damage skill, you have to check if it doesn’t lead to the ranger being able to instagib you.

Personally I think it’s imperative to bring the combat abilities of pets up to the standard of humanoid characters, and increase their reaction speed to the F-commands. My main is thief and I find the two “pet” skills we have infinitely more useful than any ranger pet, because the summoned thieves don’t have the same movement restrictions or slow attack speeds, and they react much faster.

RyuDragnier.9476:

Except Search and Rescue was nerfed to uselessness by the devs, and Guard is very situational. It wouldn’t change a kitten thing right now.

“Search and Rescue” is only bad because you can justify it taking up a utility slot. Both of these skills are situational, which is exactly why they would fit as permanent pet skills. It would also make room for two new shout skills. Skills that could be supportive, and give way for new kinds of support or bunker builds.

Kasama.8941:

RyuDragnier.9476:

Except Search and Rescue was nerfed to uselessness by the devs, and Guard is very situational. It wouldn’t change a kitten thing right now.

“Search and Rescue” is only bad because you can justify it taking up a utility slot. Both of these skills are situational, which is exactly why they would fit as permanent pet skills. It would also make room for two new shout skills. Skills that could be supportive, and give way for new kinds of support or bunker builds.

No, I can’t justify it taking up a utility slot. I CAN’T EVEN JUSTIFY ITS EXISTENCE AT THIS POINT. It got “booned” by Anet pretty badly.

I remember back when I could do a dungeon, have my trap ranger setup, and actually have some use for my pet. Ally downed or died? I’d send the pet their way while trying to keep the aggro away from it before the ally was revived. If the ally was revived, awesome, my pet did a good job. If it died, oh well, it was brought up enough to where I could possibly rez them the rest of the way myself. But now…no, it can’t bring up dead players. Meaning now it’s worthless for my build completely in group play.

Just make Ranger more engaging and rewarding to play.

I know, I know, I’m a balancing master.

Couple of things:

1. Consideration to condense MM traits.
2. More love to bows, especially power.
3. Pet pathing – especially when circle kiting; ie: pet running at tangents.

2 additional things from me on this.

First, this is not an either/or proposition, it is not the case that casual players or those who could not handle 2 additional powers would be forced to do so. It can very easily be done in a way where it would be optional, as are so many other such functions in the game currently. This is a non issue.

Second, the idea that Rangers with direct control over their pet’s 2nd and 3rd abilities would require rebalancing. This is absurd. All other professions have direct control over all of their mandatory abilities, and are able to execute CC lockdowns, chain stunblock and the like…this is very much a false premise. It is already possible for a skilled ranger to dictate which of his pets execute what powers in controlled circumstances – distance of pet from target and recast timer status – the problem is this is successful in a very small fraction of attempts, due to the mechanics involved (random variability, invisible cooldowns & timers) Direct control would bring things up to a balanced state, not over it.

Again, whether people choose to believe it or not, the stated reason from the dev in question was very clearly that of players not being able to handle the complexity of having this control – this is fact, anyone can hear it for themselves. It was not, I repeat NOT a question of balance, nor it not being able to be done – it was considered and discussed by ANet and rejected on the basis of difficulty to the player, nothing more.

Whether you agree with this premise of it being too difficult or not is immaterial, as it could be optional, as many other such things are already. The muddling of this issue is very simply not valid.

First of all, balance concerns should never come before functionality and debugging , which ranger is in dire need of.

Second, the ranger is already kitten because he/she has a pet . Less damage , less utility in utility skills , etc…

I have no problem making ranger the hard class . The game is simple enough , and newbies can always play warriors ..which they do anyway .

I don’t think pets should be controllable. If you don’t like AI companions, go play another class.

Its only 2 abilities that need added as the auto attack shouldn’t be included, that means F1-4 no more than engies have… also they could have a toggle for auto cast for newbs…..

Jamais vu.5284:

Knote.2904:

They should just let you choose which of the pet skills you have in the “active” slot, so if you the active skill you have you want on auto you can, and then use a different one actively instead of passively.

It’s not as simple. Keep in mind that this would increase balancing load exponentially. If a pet has a knockdown or other strong CC (i.e. canines) you have to cross-check for every ranger instance of CC so that they aren’t suddenly able to pull off an overpowered stunlock. If a pet has a strong vanilla DOT or burst damage skill, you have to check if it doesn’t lead to the ranger being able to instagib you.

Personally I think it’s imperative to bring the combat abilities of pets up to the standard of humanoid characters, and increase their reaction speed to the F-commands. My main is thief and I find the two “pet” skills we have infinitely more useful than any ranger pet, because the summoned thieves don’t have the same movement restrictions or slow attack speeds, and they react much faster.

actual its not the case. the skills are already there and used. the only difference is they are used by ai and not the pp.

controlling what skill of the pet is used would at deep into the game without higher the complexity what is imho good. also it would higher the possible progression in skill of playing ranger.

Anthrage.2519:

Second, the idea that Rangers with direct control over their pet’s 2nd and 3rd abilities would require rebalancing. This is absurd. All other professions have direct control over all of their mandatory abilities, and are able to execute CC lockdowns, chain stunblock and the like…

Yeah. Not two at a time.

hooma.9642:

actual its not the case. the skills are already there and used. the only difference is they are used by ai and not the pp.

I explained in that quote why it makes such a difference that it can be directly controlled by the player, rather than the AI.

Please let rangers have this. They are already the lowest skill cap class in the game. LEts give them some skill! <3