PVP Dodge/Hitrate/Damage/HP

[Ohko]

No matter what you do no one is going to kill the pet before the player in PVP first. Just want to point that out.

I was thinking about this yesterday about how pets are just ignored in PvP. What if we give pets the ability to step in front of their master like a guardian, but not 100% of the time? Say like 10-20% of the time.

[NiteHawk]

That is not a bad idea overall to give them. Maybe depends on their taunt level so kind of the pets designed for tanking which have more taunt and ac would get a brunt of a attack instead.

[Tucker]

No matter what you do no one is going to kill the pet before the player in PVP first. Just want to point that out.

In any situation, even if we buff pets to super mario with a star mode, no one will deal with the pet first. Having to deal with 1000 HP (three times), no one cares to do. Other stuff could come into effect to help rangers but they aren't honestly bad.

It's not about people killing the pet first and you're correct that that prolly wont really happen, especially since with the current state of the summon there's not cooldown (afaik) on re-summoning pets that die so if there was a pet so impactful as to be targeted before the player it'd be OP as fuck and would just be re-summoned and healed.

I'm just talking about giving them useful auras and a /protect type feature that blocks a % of hits would be a great one. They would help Rangers in 1v1's with the % based /protect feature or even a pet that buffed in an aura (affecting parties) str, agi, magic resist, AC. The big focus though is that they could be helpful to parties like Bards and make them of use for party vs party fights and PVE.

I feel like if they were ever the kings of 1v1 PVP they'd be OP since they have good utility but with the decent bow dmg they already have paired with some utility you could get from adding pet auras and things they could be better contenders and excel in party stuff.

[Lateralus]

No matter what you do no one is going to kill the pet before the player in PVP first. Just want to point that out.

In any situation, even if we buff pets to super mario with a star mode, no one will deal with the pet first. Having to deal with 1000 HP (three times), no one cares to do. Other stuff could come into effect to help rangers but they aren't honestly bad.

It's not about people killing the pet first and you're correct that that prolly wont really happen, especially since with the current state of the summon there's not cooldown (afaik) on re-summoning pets that die so if there was a pet so impactful as to be targeted before the player it'd be OP as fuck and would just be re-summoned and healed.

I'm just talking about giving them useful auras and a /protect type feature that blocks a % of hits would be a great one. They would help Rangers in 1v1's with the % based /protect feature or even a pet that buffed in an aura (affecting parties) str, agi, magic resist, AC. The big focus though is that they could be helpful to parties like Bards and make them of use for party vs party fights and PVE.

I feel like if they were ever the kings of 1v1 PVP they'd be OP since they have good utility but with the decent bow dmg they already have paired with some utility you could get from adding pet auras and things they could be better contenders and excel in party stuff.

Yea giving their pet a protect chance based on taunt / special slot or aura special type thing might give them a little more utility in pvp combat (both 1v1 and party)

[NiteHawk]

I think the aura is a bit much for them. They aren't a weak class by far, but some sort of protect maybe even to the party itself a small chance might be an idea. Auras etc seem over complicating things to me and what you are basically doing is killing off bards in place of something more useful if they could do all that too. You need to be very careful you don't overshadow classes and auras would do just that.

Some sort of protect however is an interesting thing, though if its a party protect it would probably be limited do one pet doing it in the party per attack, otherwise 6 rangers would be immune and it would be silly. Thing is, this cannot really be done right now with current scripting easily, least not party wide. There's some serious risk of using cycles by having to check if the party has a pet(s) and how the protect portion would work on them. You'd also want to pick the pet with the highest protection chance too etc.

[Folder]

Taunt = the party wide protect, no need to complicate it with an actual party wide protect system.

If it's just for the ranger that's fine, although I don't think it should be a huge chance to intercept. Rangers are not terrible right now imo. MY OPINION the problem with rangers is that sword/shield is better than a bow and that's just goofy. I dunno if we wanna give bows AC or parry chance or some other bullshit but they are a bow class. They shouldn't prefer to not use a bow.

[Dan]

I think pets should protect only the owner, they are already useful tanking blows in a party and healing part of the time.

I just think the spells chance should be raised (with practice over time maybe) so they get like trained pets, 15% is too few, feels like they act by themselves, it should be like 50%.

[Folder]

It can't be 50% intercept rate. That effectively gives a ranger, napkin math here, +500HP if we assume every hit on the pet lands and it eventually dies. Although then the ranger just summons another pet .

[Ohko]

50% is way too high. 25% would be the highest I would go and would have a cooldown for this. Pet can't possibly protect that many times if there's 6 people targetting the stalker.

[Tucker]

I think the aura is a bit much for them. They aren't a weak class by far, but some sort of protect maybe even to the party itself a small chance might be an idea. Auras etc seem over complicating things to me and what you are basically doing is killing off bards in place of something more useful if they could do all that too. You need to be very careful you don't overshadow classes and auras would do just that.

Some sort of protect however is an interesting thing, though if its a party protect it would probably be limited do one pet doing it in the party per attack, otherwise 6 rangers would be immune and it would be silly. Thing is, this cannot really be done right now with current scripting easily, least not party wide. There's some serious risk of using cycles by having to check if the party has a pet(s) and how the protect portion would work on them. You'd also want to pick the pet with the highest protection chance too etc.

To that same point though chanters can kind of overshadow power song from bards with stone-skin and power since the buffs don't stack. a proc based block from pets overlaps paladin protect as well. I'm just thinking giving different pets different options so that there will be a use for multiple pokemons instead of just the best taunter. Buffs already look to be coded so that only the highest buff sticks which means that none of the pets would have a better buff than the Bard or Sorc anyhow so you'd pick a pet accordingly. Pets that deal magic dmg instead of physical, pets that poison enemies with their physical attacks could be used as viable picks just like pets that have buffs that overlap but are weaker to existing buffs (AC, Str, Int) or buffs that don't exist yet for new mechanics (MR, Dodge or Hitrate buffs or just flat Agi buffs (would have to be minor)). I'm not sure if a magic damage pet exists but it would be a very interesting addition if not since there is a big population of low MR lizards running around.

sword/shield is better than a bow and that's just goofy

How is that I'm curious, I haven't used a ranger of thief much at all but the dmg seems good for bow on paper? Maybe they just need a buff to arrows to make the option more viable which could be easy to introduce that'd also be an inadvertent buff to Thieves which'd be cool. I guess the AC from shield just outweighs the dmg bonus from bows maybe?