Guild Wars 2

mzt.3270:

But a CC can happen at 75% if traited and still be far efficient than the pet and do far more damage. A Guardian can DPS hammer blow with mass damage 100% of the time. Why can’t a pet? If a pet is 40% of our damage I would jolly well expect it to hit 100%. I don’t see the logic of a 40% critter damage as being OP when scaled to what else is out there

You can’t expect pets to hit 100% because that would be working under the assumption that you’ll land your hits a 100%, which you don’t. No class does.

Not to mention balance and the the cornerstone of the pvp in this game is about dodging and mitigation (e.g. aegis/blind etc) and you’re asking for your source of DPS to go up without giving your opponents more chances to mitigate the said damage.

If you want 100% hit rate on pets, your weapons will have to become utterly worthless. To foster a healthy competitive environment, one should lower the instances of automation and chance, which pets have in spades currently. I’ve asked this repeatedly on this forum and hope a dev would actually address this:

If I can’t control whether my pet CCs someone, is it really skill if I managed to beat him because my wolf happens to land a pounce?

I would argue, pets in their current form actually introduce way too much randomness and ultimately skill debasement into the meta. And that’s the last thing this game needs if they want to make it into an esport.

No one wants to play a bot. No one wants to watch a bot either. No one likes playing against a bot, cuz it feels cheap. That’s not skillful, fun, or interesting.

Aridia.3042:

You can’t expect pets to hit 100% because that would be working under the assumption that you’ll land your hits a 100%, which you don’t. No class does.

Not to mention balance and the the cornerstone of the pvp in this game is about dodging and mitigation (e.g. aegis/blind etc) and you’re asking for your source of DPS to go up without giving your opponents more chances to mitigate the said damage.

If you want 100% hit rate on pets, your weapons will have to become utterly worthless. To foster a healthy competitive environment, one should lower the instances of automation and chance, which pets have in spades currently. I’ve asked this repeatedly on this forum and hope a dev would actually address this:

You’re right in that expecting them to land 100% of hits is a bad idea. But their necessity to stay stationary when attacking has them landing far fewer hits than a player as the opponent can pretty easily see the tell and move. Players don’t even need to dodge or evade to avoid the damage. They can simply walk away. If they removed that fact and allowed pets to hit while moving, then the pet DPS issue … well, it wouldn’t be an issue anymore.

+1

The worst aspect of the Ranger profession: Pets.

SynfulChaot

Then you yourself need to look up the definition of “define.” While the pet is one of the defining characteristics of GW2’s ranger, it certainly isn’t the only one. Nor the most important one, despite what ANet says. Ranger’s are a DoT attrition class designed to beat you if they can outlast you. They have decent party utility, high survivability(especially with evasion and regen), and share dps and further utility with a permanently attached AI(the pet). Every class has some sort of “pet” besides the Warrior, it’s a matter of semantics to say because the ranger’s pet is permanent makes it the defining characteristic of the class.

“It’d only get bad if they were removed as the class mechanic and replaced with something else, being instead relegated to the role of a minor aspect of the class. I would bet real money that if there became a petless ranger option that pets would become as used in late-game PvE as minions and turrets, which is practically not at all. And that would be a shame.”

This is probably your worst argument, I don’t know why you keep bringing it up. You’re basically admitting that rangers would probably be better off without the pet, yet still refusing to entertain that idea. Umm…ok.

I don’t think the devs are malicious and uncaring, I just think they both aren’t willing to admit that the pet is an unfixable issue, and yet also aren’t willing to give us an alternative because it would require too much work. You think it’s fixable, I don’t. No amount of examples or logic from my end can convince you otherwise, so I have to move on so I can keep my sanity.

The forums aren’t what I’m talking about when citing player opinions. I’m talking about what I see and hear in-game on a daily basis. I don’t know if it’s a TC thing and removing the pet would mess up the RP there or something, but everywhere else I’ve been, there are very few who feel as you do my friend.

Obsidian.1328:

Then you yourself need to look up the definition of “define.” While the pet is one of the defining characteristics of GW2’s ranger, it certainly isn’t the only one. Nor the most important one, despite what ANet says. Ranger’s are a DoT attrition class designed to beat you if they can outlast you. They have decent party utility, high survivability(especially with evasion and regen), and share dps and further utility with a permanently attached AI(the pet). Every class has some sort of “pet” besides the Warrior, it’s a matter of semantics to say because the ranger’s pet is permanent makes it the defining characteristic of the class.

I did. Let me pull that up for you:

de·fine, de·fined, de·fin·ing.
verb (used with object)
2.
to explain or identify the nature or essential qualities of; describe: to define judicial functions.

There is no other mechanic to the ranger that is that essential. You can run a good GW2 ranger without a bow. You really can’t run a good GW2 ranger without a pet. In fact, there really is no other real characteristic that defines all rangers aside from their pet. Some may be more defined by their traps, their spirits, their bows, or their bunkering. But all GW2 rangers are defined by their pets.

Remember, also, that we are the only class that has any real modicum of control over our pets. All the other ‘pets’, spirits included, are more aptly described as ‘minions’ as you have practically zero control over them.

And that DoT attrition playstyle may be true for PvP and roaming WvW, but that is not the ranger’s role in PvE.

Obsidian.1328:

“It’d only get bad if they were removed as the class mechanic and replaced with something else, being instead relegated to the role of a minor aspect of the class. I would bet real money that if there became a petless ranger option that pets would become as used in late-game PvE as minions and turrets, which is practically not at all. And that would be a shame.”

This is probably your worst argument, I don’t know why you keep bringing it up. You’re basically admitting that rangers would probably be better off without the pet, yet still refusing to entertain that idea. Umm…ok.

Yes. We would be stronger without the pet solely due to the design of the game. Also, I would like to note that the ranger as a whole seems to be designed for a different game. We’re supposedly supposed to be ‘unparalleled archers’, yet both other classes that can use a bow have greater power and utility with their bows. In addition, there really is no point to an ‘unparalleled archer’ in a game that promotes melee and punishes ranged with lower DPS. Especially as most enemies in the game have gap-closers and ranged-punishing attacks like reflect and other boss-specific ranged-only attacks like the new TA boss’s sprocket things.

I am solely against the removal of the pet as the primary mechanic as I feel it would be an injustice to the idea of the class. That being said, I am not against implementation of ‘support’ style pets that buff and are harder (or impossible) to kill or other alternative pet mechanics. I am just against outright removal of them as the primary mechanic.

Obsidian.1328:

I don’t think the devs are malicious and uncaring, I just think they both aren’t willing to admit that the pet is an unfixable issue, and yet also aren’t willing to give us an alternative because it would require too much work. You think it’s fixable, I don’t. No amount of examples or logic from my end can convince you otherwise, so I have to move on so I can keep my sanity.

I think they aren’t yet ready to admit it as they’ve not yet really tried to yet. Maybe it is fixable. Maybe it isn’t. That is unknown. But the point is that prior to now they’ve not tried at all. Now it seems that they’re actually trying. I’m all for giving them a chance to fix the pet now that it seems to be a priority for them.

Now if a few months pass and nothing more has changed, my tune will probably change as well.

Obsidian.1328:

The forums aren’t what I’m talking about when citing player opinions. I’m talking about what I see and hear in-game on a daily basis. I don’t know if it’s a TC thing and removing the pet would mess up the RP there or something, but everywhere else I’ve been, there are very few who feel as you do my friend.

Most of those people probably didn’t want a pet in the first place, despite it being described as a pet class. I’d not hesitate to say that a majority in this thread that want pet removal are those same type of people. Remove those people from your calculation and you might find a different message. A message that rangers just want it to be fixed, whether it be with or without the pet.

I support the retention of the pet if it’s at all feasible. You’re seemingly against the retention of the pet regardless. What we can both agree on, and something that most rangers probably can as well, is that the ranger’s pet needs to be fixed one way or the other.

Aridia.3042:

eliminate pet DPS all together and make them a source of utility.

+1 this!!!!!!!!!!!

pets should be a utility f skill, not apart of your dmg out put. Most of the time, pets can’t chase down and hit our target when we want them to, so they should be useful for other things like healing/ buff/ support or that extra dmg/cc.

As much as I love running around with pets, the AI simply isn’t good enough for huge PvE fights, players abusing the terrain in PvP or zerg fights in WvW.

Rangers are still fun to play but relying on the AI to work properly so much is never a good idea.

SynfulChaot

The pet’s not essential though, because it can’t survive in the game the way GW2 is designed. We’ve already been over this. And yes, you can run a good ranger without the pet…most do. The problem is a good ranger, with or without the pet, is still subpar to every other class.

Our control over our pet is modest at best and untenable at worst, you should know this. You should also know by now that given the game mechanics(heavily reliant on raw dps, dodging, and CC) the pet has no place there. That’s why condi ranger’s are better than power rangers in general PvE and sPvP…the dps is improved dramatically. End-game PvE and W3 is an entirely different story though, as has been pointed out.

I agree with your middle paragraph, that’s ANet’s fault for designing them this way for this game. Yet another reason they can’t fix it.

Who cares about the injustice to the class when said class is an injustice to the player? Really, your attachment to the pet at all costs seems to be clouding your judgement. Anything that is shown to be a flawed mechanic should be removed, it doesn’t matter what their intentions were.

The amount of faith you have in them fixing it is unreasonable. Do you really think they’ve simply not thought about it for over year with the massive amount of public outcry about it? They’d have to be pretty clueless for that.

I wanted a pet when I first started. But, had I known how bad it gimps me then I would have chosen a different class. The game is extremely un alt-friendly when it comes to gearing your 80 out in max stat gear, starting over is a bad option.

If you think there’s a way to fix them, please come up with some stellar ideas about it so we can discuss them. Otherwise, taking your word on faith alone doesn’t cut it.

Obsidian.1328:

The pet’s not essential though, because it can’t survive in the game the way GW2 is designed. We’ve already been over this. And yes, you can run a good ranger without the pet…most do. The problem is a good ranger, with or without the pet, is still subpar to every other class.

I have to strongly disagree with you here. A good ranger in melee with a pet can output very high damage. I believe that record CoF speed-clears have been with these rangers. And although the pet can’t currently survive everywhere, it can survive in most places outside of a few boss encounters.

Obsidian.1328:

Our control over our pet is modest at best and untenable at worst, you should know this. You should also know by now that given the game mechanics(heavily reliant on raw dps, dodging, and CC) the pet has no place there. That’s why condi ranger’s are better than power rangers in general PvE and sPvP…the dps is improved dramatically. End-game PvE is an entirely different story though, as has been pointed out.

Actually I’ve switched from running condi to power (in PvE, of course) as the other ‘condi’ classes can build and maintain better and longer conditions than a ranger, as well as doing it more effortlessly. And with proper pet swapping and management, I can maintain near full pet uptime, of which the pet remains attacking a majority of it.

Yes, control is abysmal. That badly needs updating. But it’s updating that’s needed, not necessarily removal.

Obsidian.1328:

I agree with your middle paragraph, that’s ANet’s fault for designing them this way for this game. Yet another reason they can’t fix it.

Who cares about the injustice to the class when said class is an injustice to the player? Really, your attachment to the pet at all costs seems to be clouding your judgement. Anything that is shown to be a flawed mechanic should be removed, it doesn’t matter what their intentions were.

The amount of faith you have in them fixing it is unreasonable. Do you really think they’ve simply not thought about for over year with the massive amount of public outcry about it? They’d have to be pretty clueless for that.

If the class is that much an injustice to the players then the players will stop playing it and ArenaNet will be forced to change it one way or the other. But evidence shows that it is still a highly played class.

And you have a major logic fail there. A flawed mechanic does not necessarily need to be removed. It needs to be fixed. That fix may require removal, and if so then that’s that. But a fix does not necessitate removal.

And again, like I’ve said waaaay too many times to count, the reason for nothing being done about it is that our pet issues are minor in the PvP meta and prior to recently they have not seemed to care at all about balance outside of PvP. Yes, people have complained. No they didn’t do anything, not because they couldn’t but because the main balance dev is also the head PvP dev, and he only seemed to care about his PvP and eSports. Now that the focus seems to be on PvE we should see some changes. If we don’t then I’ll be forced to agree with you.

Obsidian.1328:

I wanted a pet when I first started. But, had I known how bad it gimps me then I would have chosen a different class. The game is extremely un alt-friendly when it comes to gearing your 80 out in max stat gear, starting over is a bad option.

If you think there’s a way to fix them, please come up with some stellar ideas about it so we can discuss them. Otherwise, taking your word on faith alone doesn’t cut it.

I have level 80s of all classes but engy (level 60; getting there!). All are partially to fully geared. Out of all classes I still prefer the playstyle of the ranger above all others due to its far more dynamic combat. This is proven by having a large majority of my game hours on my ranger main.

And I agree that the game is now alt-unfriendly for gear acquisition. It used to be better, but with dungeon rewards now being account-bound instead of chara-bound and the time-gating of ascendeds, it has gotten pretty bad. I hope they do something to change that as they’re reducing people’s interest in running alts for any reason.

As for ideas on how to improve the pet? I’ve seen many ideas put out there and promoted left and right by many. Here’s just a few I’ve either read or come up with myself:

- More supporty pets. Perhaps even ones that give buffs and are immune, or nearly immune, to damage.
- Lowered death pet-swap cooldowns. 60s of downtime is just absurd. No other class can have so much of it’s power and utility shut down for a full minute.
- Addition of more pet modes than aggressive and passive like, say, one that has your pet only automatically attack targets that you attack, prioritizing the target you’re currently attacking.
- Addition of the pet dodging/evading attacks, whether it be automatic or manually triggered. If automatically triggered it could be so it only dodges specific attacks, mostly ‘wave’ attacks and AoEs. Or very hard-hitting boss attacks. You know, the things that generally kill your pets.
- Making the pet stay closer to you when idle. It’s idle leash range is too far away.
- Perhaps taking reduced damage when it’s retreating back to you on F3 (with a cooldown on the damage reduction of course).
- The ability for the pet to detect and get out of AoE circles.
- The ability for the pet to attack while it is moving.
- The ability to choose which of the pet’s attacks you get to manually trigger.
- The ability for Master’s Bond to retain stacks and keep them active between all pets until a pet fully dies.
- Revamp of the beastmaster major traits so that they don’t only affect particular pets but all pets.

This is, by no means a complete list. These are just a few small things that came to my mind within minutes. I’m sure I could provide you with at least 20 more.

SynfulChaot.3169:

I have to strongly disagree with you here. A good ranger in melee with a pet can output very high damage. I believe that record CoF speed-clears have been with these rangers. And although the pet can’t currently survive everywhere, it can survive in most places outside of a few boss encounters.

…if the pet consistently hits, which it doesn’t in W3, and if the pet doesn’t die fast, which it does in W3 and end-game encounters. Those two are the entire reason for this thread.

SynfulChaot.3169:

Actually I’ve switched from running condi to power (in PvE, of course) as the other ‘condi’ classes can build and maintain better and longer conditions than a ranger, as well as doing it more effortlessly. And with proper pet swapping and management, I can maintain near full pet uptime, of which the pet remains attacking a majority of it.

Yes, control is abysmal. That badly needs updating. But it’s updating that’s needed, not necessarily removal..

In regular PvE yes. But not in the other two I already mentioned. Between removal and updating I’ll get to…

SynfulChaot.3169:

If the class is that much an injustice to the players then the players will stop playing it and ArenaNet will be forced to change it one way or the other. But evidence shows that it is still a highly played class.

And you have a major logic fail there. A flawed mechanic does not necessarily need to be removed. It needs to be fixed. That fix may require removal, and if so then that’s that. But a fix does not necessitate removal.

And again, like I’ve said waaaay too many times to count, the reason for nothing being done about it is that our pet issues are minor in the PvP meta and prior to recently they have not seemed to care at all about balance outside of PvP. Yes, people have complained. No they didn’t do anything, not because they couldn’t but because the main balance dev is also the head PvP dev, and he only seemed to care about his PvP and eSports. Now that the focus seems to be on PvE we should see some changes. If we don’t then I’ll be forced to agree with you.

It’s still highly played because it’s a casual game, and doesn’t require you to engage hard content to enjoy it.

A fix necessitates removal when it has been clearly shown to be untenable. Again, there’s little reason to think so given the mechanics of the game.

-“seemed…seemed…seemed…should…”_ ..that’s a lot of maybe’s for having such a strong position. I’d rather like to have something I can count on instead of blind hope.

Obsidian.1328:

SynfulChaot.3169:

I have to strongly disagree with you here. A good ranger in melee with a pet can output very high damage. I believe that record CoF speed-clears have been with these rangers. And although the pet can’t currently survive everywhere, it can survive in most places outside of a few boss encounters.

…if the pet consistently hits, which it doesn’t in W3, and if the pet doesn’t die fast, which it does in W3 and end-game encounters. Those two are the entire reason for this thread.

Pets do have more issues in zerg WvW. They get the worst of both worlds between PvE and PvP. There, at least, power may not be what you want to run. I honestly don’t know. I retired my ranger from zerg WvW duties nearly a year ago. In fact I retired entirely from WvW nearly a year ago.

But in most end-game group encounters in PvE, the pet can survive quite well if you’re skilled at micromanagement.

Obsidian.1328:

It’s still highly played because it’s a casual game, and doesn’t require you to engage hard content to enjoy it.

A fix necessitates removal when it has been clearly shown to be untenable. Again, there’s little reason to think so given the mechanics of the game.

-“seemed…seemed…seemed…should…”_ ..that’s a lot of maybe’s for having such a strong position. I’d rather like to have something I can count on instead of blind hope.

You have a lot of supposition in thinking that a majority of the rangers are casuals. Without hard numbers, which I know you cannot provide, we cannot know the balance of rangers between pure casual players and the more ‘hardcore’ or ‘elitist’ players.

Yes, a fix may necessitate removal when proven untenable. But it has not yet been proven untenable. Only the current implementation of pets has.

Yes. I did throw in those words alot. I say them because it’s based off of how I feel about the game, my critical observations of the game, and my discussions with game devs at PAX. Because it’s not cold-hard fact. Because little of either of our opinions are facts and I wish to properly present my opinions without being accused of presenting them as facts.

SynfulChaot.3169:

- More supporty pets. Perhaps even ones that give buffs and are immune, or nearly immune, to damage.
- Lowered death pet-swap cooldowns. 60s of downtime is just absurd. No other class can have so much of it’s power and utility shut down for a full minute.
- Addition of more pet modes than aggressive and passive like, say, one that has your pet only automatically attack targets that you attack, prioritizing the target you’re currently attacking.
- Addition of the pet dodging/evading attacks, whether it be automatic or manually triggered. If automatically triggered it could be so it only dodges specific attacks, mostly ‘wave’ attacks and AoEs. Or very hard-hitting boss attacks. You know, the things that generally kill your pets.
- Making the pet stay closer to you when idle. It’s idle leash range is too far away.
- Perhaps taking reduced damage when it’s retreating back to you on F3 (with a cooldown on the damage reduction of course).
- The ability for the pet to detect and get out of AoE circles.
- The ability for the pet to attack while it is moving.
- The ability to choose which of the pet’s attacks you get to manually trigger.
- The ability for Master’s Bond to retain stacks and keep them active between all pets until a pet fully dies.
- Revamp of the beastmaster major traits so that they don’t only affect particular pets but all pets..

- immune pets would be OP and not acceptable.
- true, but doesn’t address the real issue at all.
- true, but doesn’t address the real issue at all.
- true, dodging alone isn’t nearly enough to make them viable. It’s a one trick pony, and maintaining 2 separate dodge-bars only adds to the micromanagement.
- making the pet stay on your kitten would mean a lot of RP’ers complaining that they can’t “see” their pet because it’s in your legs. Also, it means your pet will get hit whenever you do. Darned if you do, darned if you don’t.
- A reduced damage return is interesting, but unfair in W3. Why should your pet get to soak more damage when a player is actively targeting it?
- auto-maneuvering out of AoE circles would be OP in W3.
- attacking while moving…that is an extremely hard thing to balance for an AI when against a human player. The attack range would probably have to shrink to make up for it, thusly nerfing your own damage yet again.
- more micromanaging…wonderful
- this one I agree with, but still doesn’t address the real issue.
- good idea, but still doesn’t affect the real issue.

SynfulChaot.3169:

Pets do have more issues in zerg WvW. They get the worst of both worlds between PvE and PvP. There, at least, power may not be what you want to run. I honestly don’t know. I retired my ranger from zerg WvW duties nearly a year ago. In fact I retired entirely from WvW nearly a year ago.

…

Then you shouldn’t be posting here if W3 is not a part of your solution. End of story.

SynfulChaot.3169:

But in most end-game group encounters in PvE, the pet can survive quite well if you’re skilled at micromanagement.

Then ANet needs to inform players that Rangers require a high degree of micromanagement before getting to the area’s where it is required. Nothing before Orr, the dungeons, W3, or PvP requires micromanagement.

Obsidian.1328:

SynfulChaot.3169:

But in most end-game group encounters in PvE, the pet can survive quite well if you’re skilled at micromanagement.

Then ANet needs to inform players that Rangers require a high degree of micromanagement before getting to the area’s where it is required. Nothing before Orr, the dungeons, W3, or PvP requires micromanagement.

Very true, though I hold more that rangers should be updated to require less micromanagement. Though expecting a pet class not not require a decent amount of micro is a bit … naive …

SynfulChaot.3169:

You have a lot of supposition in thinking that a majority of the rangers are casuals. Without hard numbers, which I know you cannot provide, we cannot know the balance of rangers between pure casual players and the more ‘hardcore’ or ‘elitist’ players.

Yes, a fix may necessitate removal when proven untenable. But it has not yet been proven untenable. Only the current implementation of pets has.

Yes. I did throw in those words alot. I say them because it’s based off of how I feel about the game, my critical observations of the game, and my discussions with game devs at PAX. Because it’s not cold-hard fact. Because little of either of our opinions are facts and I wish to properly present my opinions without being accused of presenting them as facts.

I never said Ranger players are casuals, I said the game itself is a casual game. I doubt you could get 10% of the playerbase call this game hardcore.

SynfulChaot.3169:

Obsidian.1328:

SynfulChaot.3169:

But in most end-game group encounters in PvE, the pet can survive quite well if you’re skilled at micromanagement.

Then ANet needs to inform players that Rangers require a high degree of micromanagement before getting to the area’s where it is required. Nothing before Orr, the dungeons, W3, or PvP requires micromanagement.

Very true, though I hold more that rangers should be updated to require less micromanagement. Though expecting a pet class not not require a decent amount of micro is a bit … naive …

The GW1 pet required very little micromanaging. Oh wait, that’s because the pet didn’t nerf the Ranger’s damage when it died…

Obsidian.1328:

- immune pets would be OP and not acceptable.
- true, but doesn’t address the real issue at all.
- true, but doesn’t address the real issue at all.
- true, dodging alone isn’t nearly enough to make them viable. It’s a one trick pony, and maintaining 2 separate dodge-bars only adds to the micromanagement.
- making the pet stay on your kitten would mean a lot of RP’ers complaining that they can’t “see” their pet because it’s in your legs. Also, it means your pet will get hit whenever you do. Darned if you do, darned if you don’t.
- A reduced damage return is interesting, but unfair in W3. Why should your pet get to soak more damage when a player is actively targeting it?
- auto-maneuvering out of AoE circles would be OP in W3.
- attacking while moving…that is an extremely hard thing to balance for an AI when against a human player. The attack range would probably have to shrink to make up for it, thusly nerfing your own damage yet again.
- more micromanaging…wonderful
- this one I agree with, but still doesn’t address the real issue.
- good idea, but still doesn’t affect the real issue.

- What’s the difference between an immune pet that gives a buff and no pet at all, hmm?
- Yes dodging alone isn’t enough. But it is more to help. And as to needing more micro? I think that an ‘automatic’ system would be superior.
- I RP. I want that pet closer to me, kitten it! As for it getting hit when you do? When it’s passive then it generally gets hit when you do anyways, in addition to getting hit by things you’re able to walk away from while your pet just stands there like a kitten .
- That would only be short term when retreating and with an internal cooldown to prevent abuse.
- Auto-maneuvering out of red rings would also cause the pet to do less damage as it would be moving out of the circle instead of attacking. And it’s no more OP than a player able to see and avoid AoE circles. If a player can avoid AoE by moving, then a pet should as well. Perhaps have AoE avoidance on a toggle?
- Why should pets not be able to attack while moving? We’re not rooted on all attacks. Why should our pets be?

Now I know that none of these alone will fix the issue with the ranger. But a combination of fixes should. There is no one true fix that will make this all better. But fixing the smaller issues here and there should fix the larger issue as a whole.

Obsidian.1328:

SynfulChaot.3169:

Pets do have more issues in zerg WvW. They get the worst of both worlds between PvE and PvP. There, at least, power may not be what you want to run. I honestly don’t know. I retired my ranger from zerg WvW duties nearly a year ago. In fact I retired entirely from WvW nearly a year ago.

…

Then you shouldn’t be posting here if W3 is not a part of your solution. End of story.

There are many solutions that would help in WvW. I’m sorry, but one doesn’t need to be a master of all game modes to understand and discuss the issues. Just because I don’t play the current zerg WvW meta doesn’t mean I am incapable of discussing the class.

Obsidian.1328:

The GW1 pet required very little micromanaging. Oh wait, that’s because the pet didn’t nerf the Ranger’s damage when it died…

True. The GW1 implementation was superior to the GW2 implementation for many reasons, some of which I listed here. They could learn something from themselves.

Synful Chaot

GW1 mechanics are very different than than GW2, the same principles wouldn’t necessarily work. Even so, there’s a reason you didn’t see many rangers with pets in the elite areas of GW1. Just saying…

You don’t need to be a master of all games modes, but a simple understanding of W3 is required for a solution to the pet. As it stands, I don’t see any viable way the pet can produce results like other classes can there. It’s just the way that game-mode plays out.

Aridia.3042:

mzt.3270:

But a CC can happen at 75% if traited and still be far efficient than the pet and do far more damage. A Guardian can DPS hammer blow with mass damage 100% of the time. Why can’t a pet? If a pet is 40% of our damage I would jolly well expect it to hit 100%. I don’t see the logic of a 40% critter damage as being OP when scaled to what else is out there

You can’t expect pets to hit 100% because that would be working under the assumption that you’ll land your hits a 100%, which you don’t. No class does.

Not to mention balance and the the cornerstone of the pvp in this game is about dodging and mitigation (e.g. aegis/blind etc) and you’re asking for your source of DPS to go up without giving your opponents more chances to mitigate the said damage.

If you want 100% hit rate on pets, your weapons will have to become utterly worthless. To foster a healthy competitive environment, one should lower the instances of automation and chance, which pets have in spades currently. I’ve asked this repeatedly on this forum and hope a dev would actually address this:

If I can’t control whether my pet CCs someone, is it really skill if I managed to beat him because my wolf happens to land a pounce?

I would argue, pets in their current form actually introduce way too much randomness and ultimately skill debasement into the meta. And that’s the last thing this game needs if they want to make it into an esport.

No one wants to play a bot. No one wants to watch a bot either. No one likes playing against a bot, cuz it feels cheap. That’s not skillful, fun, or interesting.

I just wanted to quote this for double emphasis and to agree with it. +1

Obsidian.1328:

GW1 mechanics are very different than than GW2, the same principles wouldn’t necessarily work. Even so, there’s a reason you didn’t see many rangers with pets in the elite areas of GW1. Just saying…

The mechanics may be different but there is no reason for such sub-par shouts with how useful some of the GW1 pet oriented shouts were. No, you didn’t see many in the elite areas. That’s because the meta in GW1 for rangers was splinter barrage, burning arrow, or SoS/SoGM.

Obsidian.1328:

You don’t need to be a master of all games modes, but a simple understanding of W3 is required for a solution to the pet. As it stands, I don’t see any viable way the pet can produce results like other classes can there. It’s just the way that game-mode plays out.

I have a simple understanding of WvW. I know where the downsides of the pet are in all game modes. just because I don’t actively play there now doesn’t mean I am unaware of what transpires.

SynfulChaot.3169:

No, you didn’t see many [pets] in the elite areas. That’s because the meta in GW1 for rangers was splinter barrage, burning arrow, or SoS/SoGM.

Pet’s weren’t run in dungeons not because of the meta, but rather they weren’t a viable option. Minions and spirits were both very useful because a) their numbers meant huge amounts of both damage soaking and applying, and b) those numbers could generally be repopulated quickly.

The pet, even a tanky one, couldn’t last that long in dungeons simply because the mobs hit hard as heck, and the pet lacked the skillset, anticipation, and mechanics to survive like a well-geared hero or player could.

It makes sense. Why force a mechanic on someone when that mechanic is known to be a fail in that situation?

Pet should be an invulnerable/innocuous companion who neither deals nor takes damage.

Instead every pet offers various utilities existing on the class mechanic bar.

Boom. Ranger fixed.

Kilandros.2098:

Pet should be an invulnerable/innocuous companion who neither deals nor takes damage.

Instead every pet offers various utilities existing on the class mechanic bar.

Boom. Ranger fixed.

That would be interesting and worthwhile, I think, but it would be a little odd to have a shark just maxing and relaxing beside you while a krait tries to stab your face in.

Also, this is a minor issue compared to everything else fundamentally wrong with the mechanic, but it bothers me to no end: why are the pets permanently juveniles? I’d like my polar bear to grow up and lose his stripes.

Imagi.4561:

Kilandros.2098:

Pet should be an invulnerable/innocuous companion who neither deals nor takes damage.

Instead every pet offers various utilities existing on the class mechanic bar.

Boom. Ranger fixed.

That would be interesting and worthwhile, I think, but it would be a little odd to have a shark just maxing and relaxing beside you while a krait tries to stab your face in.

Also, this is a minor issue compared to everything else fundamentally wrong with the mechanic, but it bothers me to no end: why are the pets permanently juveniles? I’d like my polar bear to grow up and lose his stripes.

Or to have any control over their stats.

+1 or they need some work.

Serieusly Anet 2 years back this pertition was started and still you didnt do what you ranger players ask for……

+1 and replace it with preparations, you know, the amazing skills we had in GW1?

unfortunately, petitions are against forum rules, so this will likely be deleted,

+1 For awarnes of the issue

+1 again and again and again
For free view in jumping puzzle, for not breaking boss mechanics, achievements etc. For real stealth mode and fast combat leaving!

really? /charrrrrrrr

Don’t like the pet mechanics? Well then how about you pick one of the other 8 remaining classes?

THE PET IS NEVER EVER GOING TO GO AWAY. DEAL WITH IT !!!