Curse

Ashleigh McMahon · Dec 18, 2005, 03:44 PM // 15:44

Hey there.

Well, first of all, I think wolfs should not be the only pvp pet.

It makes wolfs to common in pvp, they need to make it a random pet for pvp ( excluding spider), also, they should make the evolution random.

I also remember that there used to be a template character called a wolf master or something, that used a wolf. Who else agrees that the pet given should be random? It's not fair on people who use a wolf, it makes them look to common.

Ash.

RotteN · Dec 18, 2005, 03:54 PM // 15:54

are pets are the same statwise, and pvp isn't about looks ...

Ashleigh McMahon · Dec 18, 2005, 03:57 PM // 15:57

Yes- Due to recent findings, bear is the only disadvantaged with a slower attack speeds.

I know that pvp isn't about looks, but why make wolf the default pet? It makes them to common, and people want them less.

Ash.

Lady Frost Bite · Dec 18, 2005, 03:59 PM // 15:59

i like the idea of having a random pet for pvp. it would be nice to have somthing other than a wolf. the wolf howles and makes noise and when your with an i way group and everyone has pets its kinda annoying to have a bunch of wolves howling at you.i also think they should do something about your pets blocking you when you try to attack cause that can sometimes mean the difference between life and death or +6% moral and +10% moral. its makes me really mad when a warrior or even a ranger is in a tombs group and because they got to close their pet set off the timer and not only does their pet set off the timer we get blocked so we lose even more time and even more moral.

Deadlyjunk · Dec 18, 2005, 04:29 PM // 16:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ashleigh McMahon

Yes- Due to recent findings, bear is the only disadvantaged with a slower attack speeds.

I know that pvp isn't about looks, but why make wolf the default pet? It makes them to common, and people want them less.

Ash.

Bears are bad? Oh no! I just got rid of my spider to get one...

Though I agree we need more pets, both for PvE and PvP (see my monkey pet thread

)

Ashleigh McMahon · Dec 18, 2005, 04:33 PM // 16:33

Then again, bears can be good if you aren't using them to dish out damage, they are good tanks, and hearty bears look super cool

Ash.

Jenosavel · Dec 18, 2005, 04:40 PM // 16:40

While not the exact same suggestion, I think this thread really treads the same ground as this one.

I have pretty much the same response here as I did there. There's no reason to worry about weapon skins, including the pet, in PvP. If they were to include pet variety that covered actual functional differences between the pets, then I would be for it. To make that aspect random, though, would be counter productive. A functionally different pet requires a different strategy and to not be able know what pet you're going to be dealing with would be a horrible blow to beastmasters.

If different pet skins are to be implemented in PvP that are completely separate from functional use, then random would be the way to go with it though. However, I feel that if any difference of pets should be implemented, it should be as a choice between functionally different pets. Epinephrine suggested in the other thread that the PvP player be given a choice between the Wolf and the Dune Lizard (slashing and piercing damage), and also if the pet would be Hearty, Elder, or Dire. This would solve the issue of pets as I see it. Not only would the PvP player be able to choose which pet best suits his strategic needs, but it would also allow for a little change of pace for those who simply can't stand the wolf any longer without infriging on a PvEer's territory (ie: the spider).

On a different note, to the complaint about pets body-blocking: pet body-blocking is a key element in some pet strategies. To remove it would greatly hurt the pet. I think that the real problem lies in the pet's pathing AI. If the AI were better I don't think you'd find pets clumping up, trapping players, or causing the troubles that are currently attributed to the pet's ability to body-block.