Healing the pet is not synergy. The trait Cultivated synergy, that is synergy. But it’s the only synergy the pet has with the Druid. And you would have to heal the pet a lot less if it wouldn’t be so stupid.
There is no more synergy in healing your pet than there is in healing your allies. And if that is considered synergy, then I can happily renounce it.
I absolutely love Druid, I think it’s worth my time and guess what? If I get bored of healing I Could always…wait for it … wait for it….
DROP THAT TRAIT LINE FOR ANOTHER!!!!!
But I doubt ill get bored of being supportive
So go full heal or stay old and lame? Yeah… I heard more convincing arguments before.
Your pet is taking up a slot that otherwise a player could have taken. And I fail to see how that would be synergy. How is healing your pet synergy by any means?
Heh. Was a little short, was it not? And it doesn’t show anything about the actual game either. Was that just a preview or is that really supposed to hook players who have no clue about GW2 whatsoever?
Warrior’s new mechanic is leaving the original mechanic not touched? It is literally a double up on the old mechanic. Ele’s can now overload their original mechanic. Herald can channel all his skills at once. The Thief has atleast great synergy with his other traitlines. How are those not connected to their old mechanics?
The Scrapper was the only profession which didn’t got an improved profession mechanic, but atleast the Engineer mechanic was integrated into the Scrapper.
The Druid however gets a completely new mechanic and the only interaction with the old mechanic, the pets, is one adept trait. I wont ask the theatrical question wether or not the pets are considered broken beyond repair, but I would like to know what the devs have planned for the pet. Because right now it certainly seems like something they would want to avoid rather than to improve.
Well based on the pets that were previewed on the stream, they ALL had base condi damage, the non condi pet had 700, the condi pet had 1000, so this has a lot of potential to buff pets damage substantially through some traits such as companions might and sharpened edges or stones w/e that trait in skirmishing is called.
But those pets still don’t increase the synergy with the Druid, they still wont be any more effective than the Ranger (or Druid) himself and they wont fix the overall clunkyness of the pet design in general.
Why would I want a pet that deals damage if I would be just as good in delivering that damage myself? One could argue that now that the Druid focusses more on supporting and not on dealing damage, we could use the pets to deal damage (yay!… or nay?), but I want the pet to support me. The pet shouldn’t do its own thing, it should enhance my capability. Just as any other profession mechanic enhances the durability of the respective profession.
Then take a fernhound, or a moa, or one of several bears, or a pig, we have support pets, no one takes them, not because they’re bad, but because no one ever wants to take support.
the point of pets having their own stats is so that you can have them do their own thing, or help you double down on whatever your role is, it’s up to you, there’s a large variety of pets, and if they go through and rebalance some of the kittenty abilities on pets (like the vuln ability on moas, and giving many pets the condi damage they need) then our pool of pets just gets larger.
and as several people pointed out in several threads already, the pets had very little startup to their F2s, i’d be completely baffled if that was only present on the NEW pets. Wait until we see how Ranger has changed in the balance preview before you start complaining about the pet.
If I’d take any of those pets, I’d cut down my own damage. And the support those pets provide is fairly limited, if not to say completely kittenty.
I have a version linked in my signature that would give the Ranger way more control over the pet while giving each pet a distinct role that is not primarily damage.
If you want support, you take a support pet, your damage will go down just like if you took support yourself, if you want more damage, take a damage pet. You’re essentially complaining that you’d lose damage for taking clerics, despite wanting the healing. Well no kitten.
The pet is cutting away from the Ranger’s damage. You should know that very well. And you should also know very well that the pet has pathing issues and acts not very smart in general. Why should I entrust something that is so unreliable with damage that was taken away from me?
The pet is just one giant walking surprise bag. Sometimes is succeeds, sometimes it doesn’t. With the potential exception of the Mesmer, no other class has to rely on a mechanic that simply might not work.
And no, I don’t want healing from my pet. I want the pet to do what I tell it to do and not what it thinks might be best in the situation.
The pet isn’t some surprise bag, the fact you think it is shows that you’re inexperienced as a ranger. The pets behave a very specific way, and any half decent ranger knows what their pet is going to do. They’re hardly unreliable, they can be slow to activate their F2 due to the insanely long cast time, and their pathing can be pretty kittenty at times, but it’s pretty apparent that they’re changing that.
As I’ve mentioned earlier, the new pets activate their F2 very quickly, so there’s a very good chance ALL our pets are getting that love. They’ve said repeatedly that our pets (and AI in general) are getting some much needed love, so calm your kittens and wait until we see how everything changes before acting like the pet is staying the same way.
Even as is, the pet is not nearly as bad as you’re making it out to be, and if you took like 10 minutes and learned what your pet does and when, and pay attention to your pet you’ll be fine. As many good rangers have pointed out multiple times on this forum, ranger is an easy profession to do OK with, but hard to do well with because you need to pay attention to your pet. So i suggest you sit down and learn your pet and learn to watch where he is before you start kittening.
Can you control when and how your pets use their skills? Can you control where your pets are running? No you can’t.
And please do not try to argue with “Oh, you can totally control where the pets go and what skills they activate. You just have to work around it”.
Why it is my duty to eliminate all the possible shortcomings the pet could have? Why do I have to fight my profession mechanic when I want to fight the enemy?
I am not arguing against having to care for my pet and having to keep an eye on it. But I’m arguing against having to play babysitter for a deaf child.
The Scrapper was the only profession which didn’t got an improved profession mechanic, but atleast the Engineer mechanic was integrated into the Scrapper.
The Druid however gets a completely new mechanic and the only interaction with the old mechanic, the pets, is one adept trait. I wont ask the theatrical question wether or not the pets are considered broken beyond repair, but I would like to know what the devs have planned for the pet. Because right now it certainly seems like something they would want to avoid rather than to improve.
Well based on the pets that were previewed on the stream, they ALL had base condi damage, the non condi pet had 700, the condi pet had 1000, so this has a lot of potential to buff pets damage substantially through some traits such as companions might and sharpened edges or stones w/e that trait in skirmishing is called.
But those pets still don’t increase the synergy with the Druid, they still wont be any more effective than the Ranger (or Druid) himself and they wont fix the overall clunkyness of the pet design in general.
Why would I want a pet that deals damage if I would be just as good in delivering that damage myself? One could argue that now that the Druid focusses more on supporting and not on dealing damage, we could use the pets to deal damage (yay!… or nay?), but I want the pet to support me. The pet shouldn’t do its own thing, it should enhance my capability. Just as any other profession mechanic enhances the durability of the respective profession.
Then take a fernhound, or a moa, or one of several bears, or a pig, we have support pets, no one takes them, not because they’re bad, but because no one ever wants to take support.
the point of pets having their own stats is so that you can have them do their own thing, or help you double down on whatever your role is, it’s up to you, there’s a large variety of pets, and if they go through and rebalance some of the kittenty abilities on pets (like the vuln ability on moas, and giving many pets the condi damage they need) then our pool of pets just gets larger.
and as several people pointed out in several threads already, the pets had very little startup to their F2s, i’d be completely baffled if that was only present on the NEW pets. Wait until we see how Ranger has changed in the balance preview before you start complaining about the pet.
If I’d take any of those pets, I’d cut down my own damage. And the support those pets provide is fairly limited, if not to say completely kittenty.
I have a version linked in my signature that would give the Ranger way more control over the pet while giving each pet a distinct role that is not primarily damage.
If you want support, you take a support pet, your damage will go down just like if you took support yourself, if you want more damage, take a damage pet. You’re essentially complaining that you’d lose damage for taking clerics, despite wanting the healing. Well no kitten.
The pet is cutting away from the Ranger’s damage. You should know that very well. And you should also know very well that the pet has pathing issues and acts not very smart in general. Why should I entrust something that is so unreliable with damage that was taken away from me?
The pet is just one giant walking surprise bag. Sometimes is succeeds, sometimes it doesn’t. With the potential exception of the Mesmer, no other class has to rely on a mechanic that simply might not work.
And no, I don’t want healing from my pet. I want the pet to do what I tell it to do and not what it thinks might be best in the situation.
The Scrapper was the only profession which didn’t got an improved profession mechanic, but atleast the Engineer mechanic was integrated into the Scrapper.
The Druid however gets a completely new mechanic and the only interaction with the old mechanic, the pets, is one adept trait. I wont ask the theatrical question wether or not the pets are considered broken beyond repair, but I would like to know what the devs have planned for the pet. Because right now it certainly seems like something they would want to avoid rather than to improve.
Well based on the pets that were previewed on the stream, they ALL had base condi damage, the non condi pet had 700, the condi pet had 1000, so this has a lot of potential to buff pets damage substantially through some traits such as companions might and sharpened edges or stones w/e that trait in skirmishing is called.
But those pets still don’t increase the synergy with the Druid, they still wont be any more effective than the Ranger (or Druid) himself and they wont fix the overall clunkyness of the pet design in general.
Why would I want a pet that deals damage if I would be just as good in delivering that damage myself? One could argue that now that the Druid focusses more on supporting and not on dealing damage, we could use the pets to deal damage (yay!… or nay?), but I want the pet to support me. The pet shouldn’t do its own thing, it should enhance my capability. Just as any other profession mechanic enhances the durability of the respective profession.
Then take a fernhound, or a moa, or one of several bears, or a pig, we have support pets, no one takes them, not because they’re bad, but because no one ever wants to take support.
the point of pets having their own stats is so that you can have them do their own thing, or help you double down on whatever your role is, it’s up to you, there’s a large variety of pets, and if they go through and rebalance some of the kittenty abilities on pets (like the vuln ability on moas, and giving many pets the condi damage they need) then our pool of pets just gets larger.
and as several people pointed out in several threads already, the pets had very little startup to their F2s, i’d be completely baffled if that was only present on the NEW pets. Wait until we see how Ranger has changed in the balance preview before you start complaining about the pet.
If I’d take any of those pets, I’d cut down my own damage. And the support those pets provide is fairly limited, if not to say completely kittenty.
I have a version linked in my signature that would give the Ranger way more control over the pet while giving each pet a distinct role that is not primarily damage.
There are 2 possibilities the way I see it: Raids will have loads of damage that has to be healed → Druid mandatory.
Or the raids will have not that much damage that has to be healed → Druid will be replaced with classes that can heal, buff and still provide decent damage.
The Scrapper was the only profession which didn’t got an improved profession mechanic, but atleast the Engineer mechanic was integrated into the Scrapper.
The Druid however gets a completely new mechanic and the only interaction with the old mechanic, the pets, is one adept trait. I wont ask the theatrical question wether or not the pets are considered broken beyond repair, but I would like to know what the devs have planned for the pet. Because right now it certainly seems like something they would want to avoid rather than to improve.
Well based on the pets that were previewed on the stream, they ALL had base condi damage, the non condi pet had 700, the condi pet had 1000, so this has a lot of potential to buff pets damage substantially through some traits such as companions might and sharpened edges or stones w/e that trait in skirmishing is called.
But those pets still don’t increase the synergy with the Druid, they still wont be any more effective than the Ranger (or Druid) himself and they wont fix the overall clunkyness of the pet design in general.
Why would I want a pet that deals damage if I would be just as good in delivering that damage myself? One could argue that now that the Druid focusses more on supporting and not on dealing damage, we could use the pets to deal damage (yay!… or nay?), but I want the pet to support me. The pet shouldn’t do its own thing, it should enhance my capability. Just as any other profession mechanic enhances the durability of the respective profession.
Well, I’m not too happy about this, since I think that the pet can very well be a cool and engaging mechanic that would also work with the Druid. Just not in its current form.
As always, I am happy to point to my signature, where I have put atleast some thought in how the pet could be made more engaging.
The Scrapper was the only profession which didn’t got an improved profession mechanic, but atleast the Engineer mechanic was integrated into the Scrapper.
The Druid however gets a completely new mechanic and the only interaction with the old mechanic, the pets, is one adept trait. I wont ask the theatrical question wether or not the pets are considered broken beyond repair, but I would like to know what the devs have planned for the pet. Because right now it certainly seems like something they would want to avoid rather than to improve.
See, the thing is, there are only so many pets used at the moment, because there are only a few pets that are good at certain things. Either the new pets will be good and replace the old ones, making the old ones obsolete, or the new ones will be obsolete.
Agreed. Going from unwanted to mandatory means that it will be “Druid or kick” for all group content. Rangers wanted a spec that would make us useful, instead we are going to be pigeonholed into a healer role that NO ONE HAS EVER ROLLED A RANGER TO PLAY.
Now that you mention it, I really didn’t picked the Ranger to be a full support character. ^^
And then, to top it all off, the developer that designed this legitimately overpowered specialization outright declares the death of the berserker meta at the hands of the Druid, announces that he’s been reading and taking note of the ranger forum’s criticisms for probably the last year (!!!!), and says he can’t wait to put down a red thread and interact with you guys, and that further details about the future of the base ranger class will be discussed later on during the balance segment of the presentation.
I think this is most of the problem. People don’t think that the zerker meta will die when HoT releases. Then…the super squishies will run into the new jungle, get their zerker selfs mowed down and complain that it’s OP. I am quite happy to let our awful ZERK OR NOTHING meta die already.
Ok, here is something that might be new for you: Zerker isn’t about easymode. Zerker is about being most effective by being as quick as possible. People who facetank stuff die and they deserve to die because zerker was never about facetanking stuff. The game has just been so stupidly easy until now that you could facetank everything. Will the new content stop some people from running zerker gear? Probably. Will it “kill” the zerker meta? No.
I’m wondering if all the people complaining even watched the same stream I did. For YEARS all this subforum has complained about is “we’re not in the meta”, “we don’t have a place”, “people don’t want us because we’re a selfish class”, “the devs don’t listen to us”, “we’re bogged down by our pets” etc. etc. ad infinium.
The Druid gives the Ranger legitimate group support across multiple game modes and is frankly probably the best elite specialization they’ve revealed. They truly did save the best for last. You don’t even need to take the staff, you can spec into Druid for the celestial mode (WHICH IS A BRAND SPANKING NEW CLASS MECHANIC NOT BOGGED DOWN BY YOUR PET HELLO IS ANYONE THERE?) and give yourself crazy amounts of healing that’s affected by your traits WHILE you continue to carry two weapon sets and two other trait lines to help those weapon sets or your pet.
What are you guys even complaining about? I see this and I see my ranger taking his longbow, axe/torch, sword/dagger whatever into a dungeon, laying down dps
And then, to top it all off, the developer that designed this legitimately overpowered specialization outright declares the death of the berserker meta at the hands of the Druid
Yay… At best this new pets will replace pets that were previously good, so that those will now not be used again. And at worst, those new pets will not be worth it and wont be used. So either way, pets are still underwhelming…
But atleast now they look cool.
I am not talking about the Druid, I am talking about the Ranger in general. Irenio said that the Ranger needs niches. I am responding to this with the statement that we don’t need niches but a properly working profession mechanic and not more.
Well for a very long time rangers were asking what the class should be according to Anet. Last this was mentioned by Anet they talked about ranger being the best ranged damage dealer in the game. If you think of PvP there is also almost no role ranger can play (at least that’s the impression I get from PvPers). So yeah we need niches. The hard content probably will put players into niches anyways if it is required to bring certain functionality into raids (i.e. hevy heals, heavy cc, ranged condition damage dealer….).
No, we don’t need niches. We need working mechanics. It comes to no surprise that the Ranger is never seen in high PvP games when spirits, shouts and the profession mechanic, the pets, are not up to par compared to the other mechanics. Fix those shortcomings, then think about if you still need to give the Ranger a niche.
I am not talking about the Druid, I am talking about the Ranger in general. Irenio said that the Ranger needs niches. I am responding to this with the statement that we don’t need niches but a properly working profession mechanic and not more.
You complain about the ranger having too much reliance on pets and then you guys complain about too little. Can’t please some people…
The Ranger currently reliese on the pet to deal damage. That is bad because the Ranger will always be better in dealing damage than the pet will ever be.
However, if we don’t rely on teh pet at all, then what use does it have? We would be a profession without a proper profession mechanic, which would also cripple the Ranger.
We need a properly working class. That does include first and foremost the pet. There have been countless lists why the current pet is bad and countless ideas how to improve it.
I myself have a suggestion linked in my signature.
And by the way, it does suck that it seems like the Druid will add no further synergy with the pet whatsoever. It’s like you know that the pet is lackluster and thus try to work around it. If you’re at this point already, then rework it!
Ug. General balance passes (the ONLY thing that will “save” Rangers) take place separately from and alongside Elite Specialization development. And it’s an ongoing activity — it doesn’t just STOP because they’re working a new sub-class.
The balance pass info being announced at Twitchcon this weekend is the news to watch for if you’re concerned about Rangers.
Well, some of the issues the ranger has are as old as the game. So they wont stop throwing out some tweaks. But substantial changes need more than just the normal balance pass.
Now the title might give you a wrong impression, but what I am meaning is, now that the Druid reveal is about to happen and since the reveal will come with some dev attention, do you think that the devs will revisit the criticism we have about the Ranger and give it another thought? Do you think that the Druid could reinforce the devs on tackling the shortcomings the Ranger has? Or do you think that the interaction will be solely about the Druid and that no manpower will be diverted to work on the base class in the future?
For me, the Dream is part of the hive mind Mordremoth uses to control and communicate with his minions, the Pale Tree, due to its premature growing and Vantari’s Tablet, was able to encapsulate a part of this hive mind to protect the Sylvari who are connected to the Dream.
It’s also outright stated to not be a hive mind by sylvari (Ghosts of Ascalon, page 21).
I think we should take everything an ordinary NPC says with a grain of salt. The Sylvari may not experience the Dream as a hive mind (and frankly it doesn’t act like one, since we, the players, would otherwise be unable to control our characters) because the Pale Tree is not using its power to control them or is blocking the one who is trying to control the Sylvari.
Anyhow, I don’t think that dragon corruption in general is working like a hive mind, it seemed like the Risen in Orr have a personality, atleast the higher-ups, and that they act like Zhaitan wants them to, rather than Zhaitan controlling them directly.
As for physically entering the Dream, I’d take that with a grain of salt too, since the way it was dispalyed how we entered the Dream could very well have been restricted by the engine. Meaning, that, for the sake of the game, the way we entered the Dream is not exactly the way it would usually work.
I want a T-Rex. And I want that T-Rex to kick kitten .
Is it what i think it is in the background?
One can dream… right?
That’s what I’m talking about! The Ranger needs a T-Rex he can mount. That’s what the other professions get for talking smack about the Ranger for the past 3 years! :P
For me it’s the opposite. It makes no sense how a dragon minion could reproduce, asexually, yet create sterile creatures.
Why are Blighting Trees capable of being minion factories via more ‘natural’ (albeit twisted) methods, when no other dragon minion – mordrem or otherwise – is?
Well, if we consider for a moment that Mordremoth or any other Elder Dragon doesn’t create his minions through sexual reproduction, not because he can’t, but because he doesn’t want to. He wants his minions to fight, not to create offsprings. Creating more minions is a task assigned to only a few minions, in the case of Mordremoth, the trees.
As far as I understood how Mordremoth creates minions, he doesn’t corrupt anything. He creates everything himself. He just takes the most advanced beings he can find and copies them. Just as the Pale Tree modeled the Sylvari after the humans burried below the tree.
For me, the Dream is part of the hive mind Mordremoth uses to control and communicate with his minions, the Pale Tree, due to its premature growing and Vantari’s Tablet, was able to encapsulate a part of this hive mind to protect the Sylvari who are connected to the Dream.
There is no direct proof for this theory, but we know that the Pale Tree is not the source of the Dream, but merely someone who protects it. This leaves the question who or what is the source of the Dream.
We also know that Elder Dragons know everything their monions know, which sounds like all Elder Dragons have some sort of network that allows them to control their minions and to learn everything their minions know. The Dream does fit this description perfectly, with the only difference being that we have no direct proof that Sylvari get controlled through the Dream (outside of the Pale Tree’s protection).
Mounting a dinosaur while gunning people down with the longbow? Call me in!
The only difficult weapon to port to mounted combat would be the sword. Swoop would simply be a charge with an evade frame at the end, that should be easy to design.
With Anet’s track record with rangers this is completely my belief. Gaile I want to trust you, but my distrust of the attitude for rangers we’ve seen makes me doubt this. When saying the ranger is not good is as prevalent a joke as moose abuse in livestreams. When one of the more vocal devs champions bearbow, the build that basically ruined the ranger community, on these livestreams. When an article offering some legitimate criticisms about this attitude and some possible ways to address it comes out and is taken down and not by the writer’s choice. I think it is completely justified to still be a little concerned and take this statement with a grain of salt.
To put it differently, we, or atleast I, do appreciate that you (can) joke about your own games and the flaws it has. But making jokes about the Ranger is like, to exaggerate the issue completely, making jokes about a severely injured person.
Thief revealed!
Beta weekend!
Major updates to all revealed classes!
Engineer revealed! Break!
Beta weekend!
Major updates to all revealed classes!
Ranger revealed!
Release!
6 month break!
Minor bug fixes!
6 months break!
balance update!
I read through the article that got released and I watched WP’s video about it and it sounds like the drones will have more utility than the Ranger pet has. Not only that, but it sounds like the drones will be what the pet should have been in the first place.
I have to say that I’m honestly not even mad anymore, I just find it hilarious how the Ranger gets outclassed more and more in literally every aspect you could think of.
I probably doesn’t, but it would be a nice change if it would. Because that would mean that ANet would actually invest some time into the Ranger again, something I think didn’t happen for a long time now.
I don’t get this. Are people saying they’re rather have the game launch delayed longer so that we can have more BWE’s to flesh out the elite specializatons. There were always going to be differences in when things are released.
To me I’d rather see the game launch on time and see the problems addressed as time goes on. Because even a long open beta, like we had with EoTM doesn’t guarantee there won’t be myriad problems after release anyway.
What is “on time?”
Until recently (recent by ANet standards), the game didn’t have a release date other than “before December 31st 2015,” yet instead of giving themselves ample development time and testing time, it seems like they are trying to make an unnecessary rush to push out a barely finished expansion by Oct 23rd because they made a poor decision to lock in to a date before development was complete, the reveals were over, and equal public testing could be done.
So “on time” to you could be this ridiculous, over the top early date, but people looking for quality content, on time would be when all of the features were polished and ready to be shipped, which is quite clearly not the case at the moment, and won’t be the case by the 23rd.
So enjoy the early half finished, half polished content, while ANet gets another 3 years of dangling promises of fixes to everything that they never fix and will just announce another expansion and build it on top of the issues instead of fixing.
The last 100% bug free game I played that never had a single patch was in 2008. Those games don’t exist anymore. Whether the game releases “on time” or “before december 31st, 2015”, its going to have bugs. Its going to be unbalanced. Its going to disappoint people. Its going to have issues that may never be fully resolved because even the developers don’t fully grasp the complexity of the game they made. Giving Anet more time isn’t going to do much if things are broken now.
That said, I’m not sure what level of asinine on the scale I would pick for the preceeding comment that basically says its okay for some things to be more broken than others so the game can release “on time”
That is by no means an argument for releasing the game early with the Druid barely polished. The Ranger is already the profession with the most issues in GW2 and I fail to see why anyone would think that one weekend of testing is enough to balance this class properly, given the extensive changes that were applied to the other professions.
The Druid wont be my cup of tea anyways, I am looking for more damage.
What would really excite me would be changes to the base class.
I’m also looking forward to the new profession mechanic the Druid gets, tho I’m doubtful.
All former elite specializations got their mechanic upgraded, not completely overhauled.
So if the Ranger will trade the pets for aspects, we would play the only profession which got it’s mechanic replaced. I would find that a desultory change, because it means that Anet has capitulated trying to fix the pets and because it could very well mean that our mechainc is undertuned, because it is not one-upping an already exsisting mechanic.
However, if ANet just slaps new mechanics onto the pet, then I would not be happy either, because it would not fix all the exsisting problems the pet has. It would just inherit all the flaws the pet still has.
