Status of Pet(s)?
39 posts
• Page 3 of 3 • 1, 2, 3
|
okay if your PET is in clear view of your target ![]() ![]() |
|
Well I don't care how it should be called, this should just be removed, or at least changed so it's not too annoying for pet classes. Like having the mob in view for the pet OR for the caster if the pet can't see it. The current system just sucks in an area like emain with hills everywhere.
|
|
true however atm it is the only counter to people who abuse it to interrupt/kill people they shouldn't be able to send pets to kill in the first place |
|
Think logically, how often would it occur that someone finds someone inside a keep in OF that they targeted before and that they kill that someone with a pet that hits for 20 damage, before the pet itself dies to guards.
Certainly not as often as it happens for my pet to ignore my attack command for whatever reason (which is almost at every fight). |
|
So it's right nerf everyone because of a missing feature ? As if pet classes were too overpowered with the 20 damage that pets do, you can hardly send them to rupt because of custom stuff. Btw good luck to kill anyone in an OF keep by just sending a pet. It will get killed by guards in 5 seconds... providing you targeted the player in the keep before he enters... This "exploit" isn't even one. |
|
Maybe the pet controlling mage is in a group. Yeah. Then he can passive the pet, his group kills the guards and he sends the pet back on the poor unsuspecting afk victim. Yeah. There's a whole group just running around OF stalking keeps and waiting for some poor traveler to enter the keep so they can kill him 2 minutes later when they're sure the person is afk. Realm points, serious business.
|
|
I would like to know where on earth you have proof that on live, the underhill companion broke his own snare nuke with a normal nuke? He is supposed to cast a snare nuke.... not a sometimes snare nuke sometimes normal nuke... I hope this isnt some dumb issue of the snare being resisted seprarely either... because that is not livelike. The spell and snare component were all rolled in one and applied together if the spell landed.
Also, Why is there so much blatant pet hate coming from the creators of these servers? Even their melee dmg is completely gimped... Even if you think the under hill companion breaking his own snare was livelike... you choose to keep that function but wont keep the function of pets being able to path thru walls, keeps, and ****** LOS to their target, run down stealthers etc. That was something that was a VERY common part of the old live-like experience, that we all found ways to endure... yet the change that and keep the bugs that gimp the pets. /boggle |
|
There is none of such and I suggest you drop that kind of attitude because it will bring you no good on the forums if you bothered to look around you would know that ALL mob dmg is bugged and is going to be fixed soon (Blue is making tests as of now) and the snare issue - well on live the enchanter pet has 2 spells - it might however be an issue that spell 2 breaks the snare.. however if you wanna prove it doesn't - go make some tests on live and prove it.. |
|
On live, I am fairly certain the underhill zealot (broken pet cant cast atm) had two spells... a heat debuff and a snare nuke. The companion should only have a snare nuke. I dont understand where you think I have an attitude from? I just observed and stated an open conflict and bias in how things were programmed here, that you didnt even bother to respond to... like the fact that Uthgard keeps what are percieved as pet gimping bugs and customs away live-like mechanics that people still deal with on live today - like not needing to have 100% los on your target to send for attack, or pets being able to unstealth a semi visible stealther, or run him down unless he vanishes. etc.
Wouldnt it be common sense to perceive something odd about that type of behavior? What customs have been implemented to actually give pet classes any kind of love or benefit? None to my knowledge. It was even asked that they implement the change to make send range 2000 but no one seems to want to make a concession there. <shrug> I hope you can understand how this makes things look. |
39 posts
• Page 3 of 3 • 1, 2, 3
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests