Seyha wrote:If Mythic asked the TL to submit logs to prove that the pet did not halve evade rate then this proves it was a bug.

Otherwise Mythic would have told the TL flat-out "the pet does not count as a second attacker" by design.

ya but mythic had a habit of adopting bugs as livelike behavior. The thread showing that this is how it worked sat on the internal forums for ages, no action was ever taken.


I think the dog might at least count toward the to-hit bonus though...testing would have to be done to know for sure.

Rector wrote:Shouldn't evade be capped at 50% btw?
In my tests results its more than 50%.
Dou you think its measuring inaccuracy or did I calculate it wrong?

There can be a 50% cap and they can still evade more than 50% of the time, the longer the fight gets the closer to 50% they should be. At infinite attacks it would be 50%.

I know I've been evaded 7-10 times in a row before

Force wrote:ya but mythic had a habit of adopting bugs as livelike behavior. The thread showing that this is how it worked sat on the internal forums for ages, no action was ever taken.

You're right, but like any small video game company Mythic's resources were limited. It's possible that Mythic was unwilling to allocate the time to re-code the Hunter pet as a second attacker because it was an under-played class and they had bigger priorities.

I mean this is Mythic we're talking about. They're not exactly the Paragons of MMORPG design, managment and coding.

Rector wrote:... If there are no mistakes, this means that the Hunters pet has no influence on an enemy Assassin's defense.

Of all the chars in Daoc I like the hunter the most ... the concept of the lonely stealther with his faithful companion. But unfortunatly it also offers the most frustrating playing experience by far. It's amazing how sloppy I can play an Inf for example and still win most 1 on 1s. But as a hunter I lose even if the conditions are almost perfect.

Just yesterday I was up against a direct realm counterpart, a ranger. He hit me with his bow and I was not able to answer that, because both my bow and my pet have a shorter range. This gets topped by the fact that the ranger is far(!) superior in melee range. What am I supposed to do here?

Speaking of melee ... I also lose most 1 on 1s against infs or nss, even if they miss their pa, have no poison on their weapon or I have purge up. They simply hit more often and a LOT harder.
I cross-checked this, just to make sure that it's not my lack of playing skill (granted I'm definitly not a pro player though). So I made an inf, went to bg and ... surprise!! ... had no problem whatsoever killing a hunter who was orange to me (I even missed pa).

Now to the pet:
I understand the concept that a hunter's pet is not meant to be a dmg dealer, but its performance is SO very bad that it simply gets ignored by enemies. I experience that a lot in grp fights. People don't even care to try to get rid of the pet, because there's no need to most of the times. All other pets in the game pose a far greater threat than the hunter's pet. And now I learn that it doesn't have any influence on the enemy in melee combat whatsoever. This means that from now on I can completely do without the pet in melee because the dmg it does is not worth mentioning

Conclusion:
Yes, this IS QQ and slightly OT. But nevertheless I thought it might be useful to also get a feedback from an average player besides the "usual suspect" hunter advocates Rector and Seyha, who I assume to be lvl 50 + high RR hunters.

Seyha wrote:If Mythic asked the TL to submit logs to prove that the pet did not halve evade rate then this proves it was a bug.

Otherwise Mythic would have told the TL flat-out "the pet does not count as a second attacker" by design.

omg how do they need logs to prove something is actual or not, just look at the code !!!
I moded some DOL and nothing had to be tested, just put right maths!!