The Pet-less Ranger
The Ranger would be a lot weaker without the pet. Not by damage, but by utility imo.
You have to just learn to control your pet better. Can;t tell you how many times my pet has actually saved my life.
Irrelevant. I don’t like the pet, I don’t like managing the pet, I don’t like having to constantly keep track of the pet. I like everything else about the Ranger. I’d like there to be an option to stow the pet in favor a stat increase to the Ranger. Something along the lines of the White Lion from Warhammer but not as over powered.
But that is what makes a Ranger unique. What exactly do you like? Only thing else Ranger has are traps/spirits.
I disagree. The pet doesn’t make the Ranger unique. It makes it clunky. And it’s fine if you like the pet. I’m not trying to take it away from those who enjoy it. I’d just like to enjoy the class just as much. My personal hang up is the pet.
EDIT: The way the weapons work on the Ranger is great to me. I love the traps, the signets, the Spirits. Basically everything a ranger does I like. Just not pets.
But it does…every profession has a unique aspect to it. Necro has death shroud, Ele has attunement swapping, Engineer has the tool belt etc etc.
Taking away the pet would make the Ranger nothing unique (besides traps and spirits). Not like only the Ranger can use bows.
Then just let your pets die. What is the big deal. I don’t see them adding in a perm stow any time soon at least.
Pets offer a lot of abilities the ranger does not have. I don’t have a knockdown ability. But my wolves do that for me. I don’t have a fear, but my wolf can do that etc etc.
Even if you are buffed in stats, not using a pet would seriously limit yourself. Especially in PvP.
I laugh at the fact that a group of 4 people try to finish me off and it takes them a good 10+ seconds to do so thanks to my pet.
(edited by Joey.3928)
You’re either completely missing the point or trying to convince me that I should love pets like a Mormon going door to door. And it doesn’t matter if other classes can use bows. I love the Ranger weapons skills better than any other class. It’s what attracts me to it. If I had the option of foregoing the pet, if I chose to, I would never play another class. The suggestion is just an option for people like me.
Not telling you to love pets. Just showing you that ANet will probably not do it. If they do it, people will complain that the Ranger is weak when not using pets. That is how it seems to work in online competitive games.
Plus like I said, taking away the pet takes away a lot of utility. If it was me and my wolf vs you with no pet buffed up, you would definitely lose.
I don’t even know how it works. Do pets come out when you enter combat?
Yes, they come out when you enter combat.
Then I do not see the issue here. You can stow the pet when not fighting (so they dont grab aggro). When you are in combat, just let your pet die…it is like it isn’t even there. Plus it will distract mobs from attacking you initially.
Good thing you didn’t play GW1. When your pet died, all your skills went on cooldown.
How can you say you like the Signets when they are tied into the Pets?
How can you say you like the Signets when they are tied into the Pets?
Not to mention the traits that transfer daze/knockdown etc to pets.
30 points into Marksmanship makes Signets affect you.
http://www.guildhead.com/skill-calc#Mcoc0M9MoGghooGghox0xa0msqmabc
A build that is not petcentric and benefits from Signets. Pretend now that you have a 10% bonus to your stats while not using a pet. Yes, you lose utility but I would personally enjoy something like this.
I agree with the OP. Everybody here seems to miss the point that the ranger (character itself) does less damage to equate for the pet doing damage. That’s all fine and dandy in PvE where most mobs lock on to a target and stand still.
Then in sPvP or WvW where everybody is moving and your pet wont attack outside the gate while you are on the wall (or only sometimes) you are nerfed. The pet has a HORRIBLE time attacking anything moving, so you’re basically at about 70% of your potential as a ranger.
I would love to see an option to perm-stow your pet which would give you a 15/20% damage bonus (or maybe toughness bonus/vitality bonus, something you could select yourself). 15/20 is just a random, obviously the devs would know more about how much % increase to actually grant you.
If they just fix the pet & arrow AI, then I wouldn’t care as much.
RIP in peace Robert
Hopefully they add something in for all you people who don’t want their pet.
My pet attacks people fine in WvW and sPvP. Especially with longbow #3
Ranger in this game is a pet class. You may disagree, but in GW2, pets are what make a Ranger a Ranger.
Pet perma-stow has made the rounds several times, and as I have said elsewhere, if you choose to ignore having a a pet that SHOULD be your choice, just like a thief choosing to only have a single sword vs having an off hand. However, just like the thief losing 2 skills, Arena Net should not be responsible for undoing your “self nerf”.
If you enjoy the ranger but do not want the pet at all, use a hawk / crow on passive and ignore it. They take up VERY little screen space and will not be impacting your play that way.
However, it is ludicrous to expect a complete revamp of the class AWAY from what Arena Net intends when other classes offer a play style similar to what you are wanting. Try a thief or a warrior if you want a pet less ranger, but don’t expect Anet to completely change the dynamics of an entire class to fit your expectations when they have SO many other things that need to be addressed.
Main: Dariak Wulfsbayne (Norn Ranger)
Proud member of [OMFG]
Proud member of [OMFG]
I would love to see an option to perm-stow your pet which would give you a 15/20% damage bonus (or maybe toughness bonus/vitality bonus, something you could select yourself). 15/20 is just a random, obviously the devs would know more about how much % increase to actually grant you.
This wouldn’t be a bad option, provided you had to build it this way specifically via special Traits. I, personally, only play Ranger BECAUSE of the pets, but I can see the appeal of a specialist solo/traps/woodland assassin type character that’s built specifically around the lack of one. Remember that besides basic DAMAGE the pet also gives the Ranger significant benefits – in PvE they draw aggro away from us and our Medium armor, and in PvE/PvP/WvW, etc. even if you keep the pet on Passive and don’t use it to attack directly all that much, you can still use skills like the brown bear’s condition removal, the fern hound’s Regen, spiders’ poison AOE/COmbo FIeld, etc. for a variety of beneficial effects…
PS. Sorry Pet Class are kitten in all RPGs. AI is horrible and people loved Ranger in GW1 due to being master of the Wilderness not Master of a kittening zoo filled with kitten pets
Ranger in this game is a pet class. You may disagree, but in GW2, pets are what make a Ranger a Ranger.
Pet perma-stow has made the rounds several times, and as I have said elsewhere, if you choose to ignore having a a pet that SHOULD be your choice, just like a thief choosing to only have a single sword vs having an off hand. However, just like the thief losing 2 skills, Arena Net should not be responsible for undoing your “self nerf”.
If you enjoy the ranger but do not want the pet at all, use a hawk / crow on passive and ignore it. They take up VERY little screen space and will not be impacting your play that way.
However, it is ludicrous to expect a complete revamp of the class AWAY from what Arena Net intends when other classes offer a play style similar to what you are wanting. Try a thief or a warrior if you want a pet less ranger, but don’t expect Anet to completely change the dynamics of an entire class to fit your expectations when they have SO many other things that need to be addressed.
It doesn’t require a revamp of the class. It requires one trait somewhere that lets you gain a bonus while the pet is stowed as well as making stowing pets permanent (meaning they don’t come out in combat unless you call them out).
Ranger in this game is a pet class. You may disagree, but in GW2, pets are what make a Ranger a Ranger.
Pet perma-stow has made the rounds several times, and as I have said elsewhere, if you choose to ignore having a a pet that SHOULD be your choice, just like a thief choosing to only have a single sword vs having an off hand. However, just like the thief losing 2 skills, Arena Net should not be responsible for undoing your “self nerf”.
If you enjoy the ranger but do not want the pet at all, use a hawk / crow on passive and ignore it. They take up VERY little screen space and will not be impacting your play that way.
However, it is ludicrous to expect a complete revamp of the class AWAY from what Arena Net intends when other classes offer a play style similar to what you are wanting. Try a thief or a warrior if you want a pet less ranger, but don’t expect Anet to completely change the dynamics of an entire class to fit your expectations when they have SO many other things that need to be addressed.
It doesn’t require a revamp of the class. It requires one trait somewhere that lets you gain a bonus while the pet is stowed as well as making stowing pets permanent (meaning they don’t come out in combat unless you call them out).
Personally, I heavily disagree with perma stow. However, what I disagree with more is the fact that you want compensation for ditching your pet. You should not be rewarded for ditching your class mechanic. And, as it’s been said before, don’t like pets? Don’t play a ranger. Everything about the ranger is their pet. Plus their pets give them awesome utility. I hate cutter-solutions like this. Instead of cutting pets, just wait until they approve them! (Speed post, so I think there might be some holes here)
Ranger in this game is a pet class. You may disagree, but in GW2, pets are what make a Ranger a Ranger.
Pet perma-stow has made the rounds several times, and as I have said elsewhere, if you choose to ignore having a a pet that SHOULD be your choice, just like a thief choosing to only have a single sword vs having an off hand. However, just like the thief losing 2 skills, Arena Net should not be responsible for undoing your “self nerf”.
If you enjoy the ranger but do not want the pet at all, use a hawk / crow on passive and ignore it. They take up VERY little screen space and will not be impacting your play that way.
However, it is ludicrous to expect a complete revamp of the class AWAY from what Arena Net intends when other classes offer a play style similar to what you are wanting. Try a thief or a warrior if you want a pet less ranger, but don’t expect Anet to completely change the dynamics of an entire class to fit your expectations when they have SO many other things that need to be addressed.
It doesn’t require a revamp of the class. It requires one trait somewhere that lets you gain a bonus while the pet is stowed as well as making stowing pets permanent (meaning they don’t come out in combat unless you call them out).
No trait. This needs to be a passive buff for all rangers as it affects the whole class regardless of how you trait it or what weapon you use.
The problem as mentioned before is that pets are completely situational. A simple ledge or uneven plain or a wall could render them useless and cut a ranger’s DPS.
Pets should give a passive aura buff and increases the ranger’s DPS, like Aura of the Hunt or something if the pet is on passive mode and not attacking so the potential missing DPS is folded into the ranger. The reason is that it’s a pet class, and it’ll actually give a reason for people to target pets which is an indirect boost to the class, and it encourages active management of pets and at the same time gives the ranger their missing damage back when pets usage is not feasible.
The moment the pet starts attacking or dies, you lose the damage aura buff.
1. Yes. Rangers should be able to stow their pets permanently if they choose. The feature is already there, we just need it to work 100% of the time instead of having the pet unstow because I jumped 5 feet off a small rock.
2. No. Petless Rangers should not receive a buff for having their pet stowed.
3. No. Passive pets shouldn’t provide special passive buffs to their Ranger. That’s what F2 and spirits already do.
You should not play ranger. Every other class can use range weapons. I am a ranger that uses melee weapons, difference is I have a pet
the only problem i have with the pet is that it takes like 5 secs of spamming the f2 skill for it to actually work. even when the pet is on a stationary target. if they fix this then i am happy
3. No. Passive pets shouldn’t provide special passive buffs to their Ranger. That’s what F2 and spirits already do.
Err…no. We’re talking about two different issues.
Pet damage is a separate beast from F2 skills. In theory, pet damage is part of the class’ damage. F2s are just a subset of their overall attack repertoire. But since pets don’t attack or can’t attack sometimes, that’s why a passive buff is warranted.
You can’t suggest F2 itself is enough to offset the potential missing damage when the pet is not able to attack.
What exactly is that you enjoy about the Ranger? If you just enjoy the ranged weapon play style, you can play an Engineer. No pets and it’s focused on ranged combat. You could also play a shortbow or pistol Thief or a longbow or rifle Warrior. There are viable builds for both classes using ranged weapons.
I feel irked reading this thread with the strong hatred towards pets lol poor pets <3 Don’t play rangers if you don’t want pets. simple as that. Sure pets have some issues, I stow my pet when I’m trying to avoid combat and stealth my way around, pets are clunky, slow sometimes, stupid but it DOES help no matter what. When you’re using it to the fullest, the both of you are so synergistic. It’s not hard to manage a pet and also you can pick smarter pets, I’ve heard good things about devourers knowing when to use skills and evade and stuff. It is ranged. My wolves are great, they time their knock downs to use on mobs that are trying to use a skill to interrupt. They’re also super durable and have tanked like six mobs on it at once. With barely any healing. It’s freaking awesome. Love it. I swap pets when they may die so its only several seconds of cool down before i can swap again. I heal when I need healing as well only. It’s not hard to manage pets. My wolves also deal alot of damage and lately I’ve been running around with two melee weapon sets and having a blast because of all the DPS, and AoE that I myself can do, + the damage my pet does. Plus having traits that allows me to survive well… It’s like this big storm and your pet is synergistic to it fighting together. Why not have another thing to take some damage, use skills and deal damage as well? What’s the big deal and what’s there to lose? You still do your own thing. It’s only when you need to avoid combat or facing a particularly tougher one hit kill boss that you need to micro manage your pet and whatnot.
It also doesn’t make sense for us to demand buffs to the ranger because you don’t want a pet. the pet is part of the class. It’s what you signed up for when you chose the class. Be another class if you don’t want pets, simple as that. Warriors are a lot of melee fun, etc etc. Our skills are versatile but not especially powerful or great compared to other classes that are specialized.
Just use the pet, or use a different class. The pet doesn’t break our game and certainly it’s not like it’s no help
I understand what he is wanting. I have a feeling he played eigther a White Lion or a Squig Herder in Warhammer and both classes let you go petless and gain a 25% damage boost.
I dont see them doing that in GW2 and the pet makes the ranger seperate from the rest the range classes like engineer.
I too didnt want a pet as first but once i started realzing what they could do they work into my stagety. for open field i use a Snow Leapord, the command is a 5second chill (66%snare) and the pet also does alot bleed damage and even makes teh target vulnerable for me.
For standoffs i like a spider, he does ranged attacks with me, he does ranged aoe poison and also imobolizes with web shots.
But yah in alot cases i wish i could trade the pet in for more sniper damage.
I do wish that I wouldn’t start auto-attacking when I F2 my pet…
3. No. Passive pets shouldn’t provide special passive buffs to their Ranger. That’s what F2 and spirits already do.
Err…no. We’re talking about two different issues.
Pet damage is a separate beast from F2 skills. In theory, pet damage is part of the class’ damage. F2s are just a subset of their overall attack repertoire. But since pets don’t attack or can’t attack sometimes, that’s why a passive buff is warranted.
You can’t suggest F2 itself is enough to offset the potential missing damage when the pet is not able to attack.
I guess I don’t have problems with my pet being able to attack 99.9% of the time. I don’t see that as a problem. If the pet dies, that’s part of the mechanics of playing a ranger. If the enemy is on a ledge, except for PvP, kite it where you can get your pet to it.
The only real situation where my pet doesn’t attack is sometimes when I’m destroying an inanimate object. Well, the inanimate object isn’t fighting back, so it’s no real loss.
Buffing petless rangers is a fundamental change that I personally oppose. We’re a pet class. If you have issues where the pet doesn’t attack that’s not caused by poor gameplay, then offer suggestions to fix that issue. Don’t use it as a lame excuse for why pets are bad and we need a way to roll without them.
(edited by Skolvikings.5132)
Pets and their usefulness was not really the point of my original post. Pets do need a buff to survivability and I hope they get it. The suggestion to make pet-less builds viable was in response to my dislike for the pet in general. I don’t feel like I should be punished for disliking one aspect of the class while enjoying everything else. All I want is the choice.
Reading what has been posted I wanted to come back with just a couple of points for rational discussion. Before I say anything though, I want to make something VERY clear. I am not saying pets right now are perfect, they are not. They need work. F2 responsiveness is better but not where it needs to be. It has some AI / pathing issues that need tweaked. I love my pets but at the same time I do not have my head in the sand about the issues they have =D
Now, having said that I want to revisit the trait / passive buff / stowed buff thing that I think that many of us that are against this idea are opposing.
Are there times that I wind up in a situation where I do not want my pet underfoot? Absolutely yes. Should there be a mechanic rework allowing me to put my pet away so that I am not having to deal with it then AND not have it pop out if I stumble over a rock? Yep. Not trying to take that away, it is needed. Should I get the damage that my pet would have generated “added into” mine? Nope. I made the decision to not have it.
Passive bonuses for when the pet is not attacking. This I will give just a LITTLE leeway for, but more than that I will give a little free ranger advice (and a bit of a confession). In WvW is really the ONLY place where this should have an impact, because in PvE if I am on a ledge and my pet can not move to what I am fighting I am going to get the invulnerable anti-exploit check. I would not mind to see a “Master’s Bond” type of buff with this in which my pet could generate added bonus damage or something if I am defending a keep or on a ledge in a choke point. HOWEVER we already have a version of this that you can use right now. It’s called pet diversity =D
To explain, I really ONLY run 4 pets, ever. My wolf (Shadow) and lynx (Green Eyes) are my land pets, while in water I use my armor fish (Chauncy) and shark (Wakefin). That’s pretty well it. In WvW though, if I am on the walls of a keep I switch to a red moa and one of the devourer or spider family. I use the moa for the frenzy screech and the spiders for ranged attacks. I would RATHER use my standard animal companions, but if they can’t attack I can choose to switch em up and still benefit from my class mechanic. Maybe people have not really thought of this, maybe they have not found a pet they like, but while I am not CRAZY about a devourer and have ZERO “attachment” to it, using it is better than having a lazy cat laying at my feet =D
I am sorry that some people feel that they can like all other aspects of a “pet class” except for the pet and want to completely remove what makes that class “stand out” and that is simply a choice. It’s like I have said, you CAN do so, but if YOU are choosing to ignore an aspect of the class, it is no one’s fault but your own.
You can roll an elementalist and only run one attunement. That is absolutely your option. You are not going to get the damage / control of the other 3 “folded into” your fire build, nor are you going to get access to a weapon swap to compensate. You can run an engineer without either turrets, gadgets, or a kit. Your pistol damage is not going to be raised to compensate. You can ignore the Virtues on a Guardian, but you are not going to be able to say “If I choose to disable ALL my virtues I should get burning on every single attack to make up for it”… life just does not work that way.
Ranger is a pet class. Pets are our “thing”. Trying to remove our “thing” is not going to happen in a manner that will warrant an improvement in another area. A mesmer can never summon a clone/phantasm/etc, but that is not going to benefit them, and fact is if I did not enjoy that play style why in the world would I not play a necro or an ele?
Main: Dariak Wulfsbayne (Norn Ranger)
Proud member of [OMFG]
Proud member of [OMFG]
completely agree ^ we signed up for the pets as part of our class and experience. just a few fixes and we should be good. especially how far a pet stands next to you… > < lol
Reading what has been posted I wanted to come back with just a couple of points for rational discussion. Before I say anything though, I want to make something VERY clear. I am not saying pets right now are perfect, they are not. They need work. F2 responsiveness is better but not where it needs to be. It has some AI / pathing issues that need tweaked. I love my pets but at the same time I do not have my head in the sand about the issues they have =D
Now, having said that I want to revisit the trait / passive buff / stowed buff thing that I think that many of us that are against this idea are opposing.
Are there times that I wind up in a situation where I do not want my pet underfoot? Absolutely yes. Should there be a mechanic rework allowing me to put my pet away so that I am not having to deal with it then AND not have it pop out if I stumble over a rock? Yep. Not trying to take that away, it is needed. Should I get the damage that my pet would have generated “added into” mine? Nope. I made the decision to not have it.
Passive bonuses for when the pet is not attacking. This I will give just a LITTLE leeway for, but more than that I will give a little free ranger advice (and a bit of a confession). In WvW is really the ONLY place where this should have an impact, because in PvE if I am on a ledge and my pet can not move to what I am fighting I am going to get the invulnerable anti-exploit check. I would not mind to see a “Master’s Bond” type of buff with this in which my pet could generate added bonus damage or something if I am defending a keep or on a ledge in a choke point. HOWEVER we already have a version of this that you can use right now. It’s called pet diversity =D
To explain, I really ONLY run 4 pets, ever. My wolf (Shadow) and lynx (Green Eyes) are my land pets, while in water I use my armor fish (Chauncy) and shark (Wakefin). That’s pretty well it. In WvW though, if I am on the walls of a keep I switch to a red moa and one of the devourer or spider family. I use the moa for the frenzy screech and the spiders for ranged attacks. I would RATHER use my standard animal companions, but if they can’t attack I can choose to switch em up and still benefit from my class mechanic. Maybe people have not really thought of this, maybe they have not found a pet they like, but while I am not CRAZY about a devourer and have ZERO “attachment” to it, using it is better than having a lazy cat laying at my feet =D
I am sorry that some people feel that they can like all other aspects of a “pet class” except for the pet and want to completely remove what makes that class “stand out” and that is simply a choice. It’s like I have said, you CAN do so, but if YOU are choosing to ignore an aspect of the class, it is no one’s fault but your own.
You can roll an elementalist and only run one attunement. That is absolutely your option. You are not going to get the damage / control of the other 3 “folded into” your fire build, nor are you going to get access to a weapon swap to compensate. You can run an engineer without either turrets, gadgets, or a kit. Your pistol damage is not going to be raised to compensate. You can ignore the Virtues on a Guardian, but you are not going to be able to say “If I choose to disable ALL my virtues I should get burning on every single attack to make up for it”… life just does not work that way.
Ranger is a pet class. Pets are our “thing”. Trying to remove our “thing” is not going to happen in a manner that will warrant an improvement in another area. A mesmer can never summon a clone/phantasm/etc, but that is not going to benefit them, and fact is if I did not enjoy that play style why in the world would I not play a necro or an ele?
You wrote all this to make point “Tough kitten Rangers are a pet class”? Well, here’s a counter point. Food for thought: If a suggestion is made that changes class mechanics to facilitate the option of a slightly different playstyle, but won’t necessarily outshine, outperform, or outdo the original inception, then why do you care so much? Is it a purist thing? “X” class was made this way so therefore it must always be like that? Here’s the thing. I don’t want pets to go away. I just want the option to forego the pet and still be viable. Because I love the Ranger, just not the companions.
You wrote all this to make point “Tough kitten Rangers are a pet class”? Well, here’s a counter point. Food for thought: If a suggestion is made that changes class mechanics to facilitate the option of a slightly different playstyle, but won’t necessarily outshine, outperform, or outdo the original inception, then why do you care so much? Is it a purist thing? “X” class was made this way so therefore it must always be like that? Here’s the thing. I don’t want pets to go away. I just want the option to forego the pet and still be viable. Because I love the Ranger, just not the companions.
The point that you are (choosing to) not see is this. It is pretty much impossible to love the ranger CLASS but at the same time hate its “class component” to the point you wish to remove it. I know you are not saying that you want ALL pets removed, just because you do not care for them, you simply want to remove them yourself, BUT be compensated for it. That is where I (and others) are against you.
You do not seem to understand how much time and effort it would take for the devs to start working the math and rebalance a class to compensate for not only the removal of the DPS from the pet, but also adjusting trait lines etc. You can sit there now and say “Oh just give us 20% increased damage” and think that is going to solve everything, but it is a LOT deeper than that.
IF Arena Net decided to forgo what they have envisioned for the ranger in favor for making a “pet-less pet class” viable then how long do you think it would be before you or someone else that would support this play style would be back on the forums saying “WTF Arena Net I love the Ranger as a class but I decided to go petless and most of the trait lines either have something to do with pets or do not benefit me playing without one, we need some love too!!”
That aside, no matter how you slice it, making a change from a pet class to a viable non-pet class is going to take developers time and effort to balance, even if they gave the perma-stow option right now. There are other things in the game that NEED attention, things that are in place with the direction they are going, that deserve the focus more than trying to rebalance away from what they wanted the class to be.
As I have said in MANY other posts but gonna try one more time, I fully support you in the concept of being able to dismiss your pet until called for. That should absolutely be your choice. However, it’s not up to you (or me) to decide to want to change a MAJOR aspect of a class at this stage, and revamping the ranger from a pet class to one that is viable without the pet is exactly that.
It may not be the answer you want, but yep, at this point it really is “tough kitten, the ranger is a pet class deal with it”. There are MANY other classes that offer you the play style you are EXACTLY looking for that do not have pets, try rolling one of them. If you do not want to do that, then as has been suggested before, use a small pet like a bird, put it on passive, and deal with the loss of that DPS.
That’s the only two choices you have, stamping your foot and demanding to be able to play “the way I wanna play” is most likely not going to get you the results you want.
Main: Dariak Wulfsbayne (Norn Ranger)
Proud member of [OMFG]
Proud member of [OMFG]
Ranger in this game is a pet class. You may disagree, but in GW2, pets are what make a Ranger a Ranger.
Pet perma-stow has made the rounds several times, and as I have said elsewhere, if you choose to ignore having a a pet that SHOULD be your choice, just like a thief choosing to only have a single sword vs having an off hand. However, just like the thief losing 2 skills, Arena Net should not be responsible for undoing your “self nerf”.
If you enjoy the ranger but do not want the pet at all, use a hawk / crow on passive and ignore it. They take up VERY little screen space and will not be impacting your play that way.
However, it is ludicrous to expect a complete revamp of the class AWAY from what Arena Net intends when other classes offer a play style similar to what you are wanting. Try a thief or a warrior if you want a pet less ranger, but don’t expect Anet to completely change the dynamics of an entire class to fit your expectations when they have SO many other things that need to be addressed.
Your point would make sense, except for the hyperbole of calling something like this a “complete revamp”.
I agree with the OP, if a simple tweak would make more play style options viable, then Anet needs to do it. I also feel this way about the lack of single-wielding viability, especially for the thief. No class in the game is defined by a single mechanic, they are each defined by a broad concept. The classes represent flavors, not gameplay gimmicks. There is nothing wrong with the concept of petless rangers. Period. In fact, it would have made more sense for Rangers and Beastmasters to be separate classes, with the latter being weaker themselves and having stronger pets.
(edited by Einlanzer.1627)
Rangers without pet, is luckily not ever going to happen. I chose ranger because they have pets, it is their class mechanic, and once they get pets working properly so they are actually useful in pvp, it will be a powerful companion. No MMOrpg is complete without a beastmaster, there’s just too many people that enjoy having a controllable animal companion.
In GW1 you could be a petless Ranger and there were pet Rangers. Sadly they have taken that freedom away in GW2 and force you to work with pets. It wouldn’t be such a big deal if pet Ai isn’t so atrocious.
It’s particularly sad in pvp when your pet barley attacks anyone because they have to stop and attack. Pet animations for there abilities take a long time to get off and are fairly obvious in tpvp.
3. No. Passive pets shouldn’t provide special passive buffs to their Ranger. That’s what F2 and spirits already do.
Err…no. We’re talking about two different issues.
Pet damage is a separate beast from F2 skills. In theory, pet damage is part of the class’ damage. F2s are just a subset of their overall attack repertoire. But since pets don’t attack or can’t attack sometimes, that’s why a passive buff is warranted.
You can’t suggest F2 itself is enough to offset the potential missing damage when the pet is not able to attack.
I guess I don’t have problems with my pet being able to attack 99.9% of the time. I don’t see that as a problem. If the pet dies, that’s part of the mechanics of playing a ranger. If the enemy is on a ledge, except for PvP, kite it where you can get your pet to it.
The only real situation where my pet doesn’t attack is sometimes when I’m destroying an inanimate object. Well, the inanimate object isn’t fighting back, so it’s no real loss.
Buffing petless rangers is a fundamental change that I personally oppose. We’re a pet class. If you have issues where the pet doesn’t attack that’s not caused by poor gameplay, then offer suggestions to fix that issue. Don’t use it as a lame excuse for why pets are bad and we need a way to roll without them.
Mmmk, I think it’s pointless to have this discussion with you seeing how you think “I guess I don’t have problems with my pet being able to attack 99.9% of the time.”
It’s not even close to 99% of the time, especially if you PVP.
In GW1 you could be a petless Ranger and there were pet Rangers. Sadly they have taken that freedom away in GW2 and force you to work with pets. It wouldn’t be such a big deal if pet Ai isn’t so atrocious.
It’s particularly sad in pvp when your pet barley attacks anyone because they have to stop and attack. Pet animations for there abilities take a long time to get off and are fairly obvious in tpvp.
There’s no way to fix this which is why I’m strongly in favor of a damage buff when the pet is on passive mode to reclaim your lost potential damage. Go to a dungeon, the mobs there can hit you on the run. They’ll not make the pets like that since it’ll be grossly overpowered in pvp because it’ll be like having two players against victim where one never misses.
They need to find a happy medium between doing no damage due to no fault of the player and being able to hit all moving targets at all times, which is why I think power buff on passive pets makes sense. It’s a stop gap that doesn’t swing to the extremes and still forces people to manage their pets.
forget the stat increase. just allow us to stow the pet…
“But you can stow the pet!!!!!1”
Sure. You can put the pet away. But it pops back out automatically when you attack, get attacked, or even take damage. Yup. You read that correctly: “or even take damage.”
“Well gee-whiz, Cap’n Flummox. I sure do want my pet to help me when I am getting attacked!”
Sure you do. We all do. But there is no reason in the world for the pet to come out when you take 1 point of damage because you fell off a cliff.
Why does damage make the pet come out of stow?
Why does FALL DAMAGE make the pet come out of stow?
This is THE most annoying part about being a ranger: My lack of control over my pet. I am supposed to be a Master at Controlling Animals, yet I can’t even get the thing to stay in it’s cage when I tell it to.
Let’s rub salt into the wound, shall we?
If I stow my pet to do a jumping puzzle because the pet is totally useless here. In fact, it’s not useless. The pet is a detriment to performing [most] jumping puzzles. And now the salt: I stow my pet, start a jump puzzle and fall off on the 2nd jump. I take 1 point of damage, and now my pet pops out. Awesome (that’s sarcasm there). Now let’s retry this puzzle. I’ll just stow my pet again (thanks for the hotkey, btw)… Oh what’s this!!! There is a timer on the stow pet command…?!?! Wait… what?! Seriously… What the senufo is this about?? A TIMER on Stow Pet???? Are you senufo kidding me?
The pet needs an ability to “call” and to “cage” the pet. Not just have it be an annoyance to me for reasons I do not need it for. Such as a jumping puzzle.
And for the love of whatever you believe in, change the “pop pet out on [any] damage” option.
I am a Master of Animals and I expect my pet to stay in the cage when I tell it to.
oh I forgot to mention:
the pet pops out when you move in and out of water, too.
did it ever occur to any of the Devs that we might not want the pet out all the time?
There are MANY other classes that offer you the play style you are EXACTLY looking for that do not have pets, try rolling one of them.
Which other ones can fight at a range above 12ØØ exactly?
Because that was the biggest draw for me.
Gone for good after Halloween 2Ø12.
A shame fun things could not simply be fun.
A shame fun things could not simply be fun.
You do not seem to understand how much time and effort it would take for the devs to start working the math and rebalance a class to compensate for not only the removal of the DPS from the pet, but also adjusting trait lines etc. You can sit there now and say “Oh just give us 20% increased damage” and think that is going to solve everything, but it is a LOT deeper than that.
the exact amount of time it took to put it in the first place.
You:
IF Arena Net decided to forgo what they have envisioned for the ranger in favor for making a “pet-less pet class” viable then how long do you think it would be before you or someone else that would support this play style would be back on the forums saying “WTF Arena Net I love the Ranger as a class but I decided to go petless and most of the trait lines either have something to do with pets or do not benefit me playing without one, we need some love too!!”
Me:
completely irregardless to this discussion. this would be objected and sustained in any court of law.
You:
That aside, no matter how you slice it, making a change from a pet class to a viable non-pet class is going to take developers time and effort to balance, even if they gave the perma-stow option right now. There are other things in the game that NEED attention, things that are in place with the direction they are going, that deserve the focus more than trying to rebalance away from what they wanted the class to be.
Me:
wrong. sit down. also, this is mostly opinion. thrown out.
You:
It may not be the answer you want, but yep, at this point it really is “tough kitten, the ranger is a pet class deal with it”. There are MANY other classes that offer you the play style you are EXACTLY looking for that do not have pets, try rolling one of them. If you do not want to do that, then as has been suggested before, use a small pet like a bird, put it on passive, and deal with the loss of that DPS.
Me:
EXACTLY…? okay, troll. which class offers me the play style i am EXACTLY looking for that don’t have pets?
this is where I point out the flaw: so, you’re telling me that the Ranger is simply one of the other classes, exact in EVERY way BUT for the pet? Wow. So… Is it the Mesmer class? No? Hmm… Oh! Thief!!! Wait. No. Warrior? Um… wait no. NONE. NONE of the classes are an EXACT match for the Ranger.
You:
That’s the only two choices you have, stamping your foot and demanding to be able to play “the way I wanna play” is most likely not going to get you the results you want.
Me:
Awesome advice, brah. You should take it.
======
Preface:
I IN NO WAY CONDONE A “pet-less ranger”. I SIMPLY WANT THE CLASS TO WORK AS INTENDED.
A Master of Animals that can’t keep a pet in the cage is not a Master of Animals. Fin.
Take away our pet if they compensate our personal damage. As it is pets die waaaay too easily in WvW to the point of being pointless. My pet is put on passive 100% of the time..
Ezendor [SYN] – Synapse, Ranger
Sea of Sorrows
Sea of Sorrows
I am not going to go back and forth on this, though I will say that I should not have used the term “exactly” and instead said similar. Heat of the moment typing there made me state it in a way that DID come across in a manner I didn’t intend. I stand behind every other point that I made though, and while I hope that ANet does not take developer time away from the things that need to be fixed and focused on to look at making rangers “petless and viable” I DO hope they can find a way to end this debate.
Main: Dariak Wulfsbayne (Norn Ranger)
Proud member of [OMFG]
Proud member of [OMFG]
for now, let’s just work on the permanent stow ability. i could care less about loss of power. i simply want to have a choice with my pet. and, a small bit of an easier time on the weirder jumping puzzles. and the immersion that i am actually a Master of Animals.
(p.s. i hate the name “Ranger” for this class because MOST people think it means they attack at range. a Ranger is not just a distance class. in fact, a true Ranger would be proficient with a variety of weapons, just like any other “fighter” class would be.)