PvP Tamers

[Wenchkin]

Wenchy, you're a Good Samaritan. So am I, generally - I'll take 1/2 an hour out of my game-time to help strangers get a decent-stat GD, as long as they are polite.

That doesn't mean that being a Good Samaritan should not have risks. If you help out an ailing tamer, you're taking on that risk alongside him. Since no one forced you in the first place, you're responsible for the risk you take on.

I think my post gave a different impression to what I meant hehe. I fully accept the risk in stepping up to heal another tamer's pet, or if I die trying to res someone else. Usually I laugh about watching all the health bars but my own, but I certainly don't place the responsibility in those situations on anyone but myself.

The situations I'm discussing are like one the other night when I was firmly rooted by my pet while I contended with a stack of spawn as a champ bumped up a level. We were holding off all the spawn on that screen by ourselves quite well. Hard vetting, but greaters take a lot of punishment! Then another tamer arrived and got stuck in on the other side of the screen. I couldn't heal his pet because I was working full out to keep my own pet alive. Didn't get a chance to pull his bar off either. But rather than issue a warning, or try to pull his pet back, he and it just vanished. I hadn't had time to pull his bar off so I got precious little warning. I hid when my pet was clearly going to die and stealthed off before calling his ghost back to me.

In situations where I am that second tamer, I try and pull my pet and attached mobs back or warn the tamer. Then if my pet dies, it dies, but the spawn will lock onto me rather than that player. At the very least that tamer sees my pet die and knows trouble might follow. But if I am ganked myself, I try and die away from others. Not through being super virtuous, though I am generally kind in game, I just don't want anyone yelling at me because I got them killed.

I don't think, however, that should be hard-coded into the game. This game isn't, and in my opinion shouldn't be, about forcing players to make good choices. I'm not saying that luring and griefing is something that should be allowed... but I AM saying that, given the current set of rules we have, no one who is aware of these rules (and I have to assume you're more aware of these rules than most others) should complain when they're taken advantage of for selfish reasons.

I'm not wanting to force players to be nice. But as you can see from the suggestions I posted above, there are alternatives to logging out. The only time I've done it recently was when my drag went charging off into top level champ spawn after he died and I wasn't sure exactly which direction he ran in. But that's been in. I accept my pets die sometimes, but they gain skill fast enough that I don't get stressed by it. If anything annoys me it's the resurrect and instant die thing which afflicts pets. But just dying once just happens. I know that I can protect my pets by taking on easier situations, and if I go champing I fully expect things to get a bit crazy!

Griefing should be disallowed or paged to a GM as TOS violation. Selfish behavior should not. To behave selfishly or or not has to be OUR choice.

I don't want anything added to the TOS at all. The only time I'd page on someone for griefing etc is if I saw they were really upsetting another player, even then that's more to stop them getting the satisfaction in upsetting someone. I personally enjoy when another character tries to get me killed, because having to outwit a player is quite a fun diversion.

I guess my point is that while there are other options than simply logging out, all those options should be exhausted before you re-log. In the situations that Yalp described, there are a lot of other things I would do first, and without hesitation, before I logged out. I just raised the situation with the guy logging out beside another tamer to show that it can cause others and their pets to die if you take that course of action. When the alternative is that you need to retrain your pet and cough up a bit of insurance gold. To me, those aren't big losses.

Wenchy

 

[Hunters' Moon]

Do you have ANY idea how much griefing would be involved if people could kill pets in guard zones? If you think people are complaining about PvP tamers now, wait until you see the flood of tamers, non-tamers, and most especially resource-gatherers when their pets, mounts, and pack horses/beetles get whacked without recourse for them.

So you would rather that the tamer have the GZ as their own personal haven? Get into trouble and run to carebear zone and spam "Guards those reds are being mean to my pet!"

The sort of implications this kind of change might bring (intentionally or not) are so far reaching and so devastatingly powerful for bard characters in PvM, I'm wary of even considering letting the Devs take a crack at it.

So my 240 points in peace/music be damned? Your macro that commands your pet defeats my skill everytime...yeah thats fair.

Can you imagine Peace if it were effectively unbreakable?

Ummm what? Unbreakable? Can you imagine barding having the same chance of peacing a wild GD as you do taming it.

 

[Kazumi the Wild]

I understand where you're coming from, Wenchy, and even though I personally would rather still have the option, I wouldn't throw up my hands and quit if I couldn't log out to save a pet's life, even if only engaged in PvM. Honestly, I don't have that much trouble retraining pets after deaths either, unless its magery, poisoning, or eval int above 100... in which case its a pain and seems to take forever and a day.

I'd prefer the no-log-out-save, if it were to be applied, to be applied only to PvP, in the same way recall is (at least, I think it is... I don't PvP, so that's all hearsay). I don't think that sort of thing should be applied to PvM - otherwise it could easily become only a way to find lost BONDED pets, as any pet that wanders where you can't find it and into an aggressive area, even if they were merely lizardmen or the like, would never be unengaged enough to be logged off... and thus, if they can't be found (and that IS what the log-off mechanic is for, right?), they'll eventually die.

In that regard, I don't think finding lost pets in dangerous areas (especially in fel where your opponents can lead your pets specifically to those areas) should necessitate that that pet die, and thus necessitate that mechanic only work for bonded animals.

I'll admit its a niche area, but it could be frustrating. Like I said, I wouldn't quit over something so relatively small, but I would prefer that such a change to the system, if the change is implemented, be implemented only for PvP (where it is most needed for BALANCE, rather than preference in playstyles).

 

[Kazumi the Wild]

So you would rather that the tamer have the GZ as their own personal haven? Get into trouble and run to carebear zone and spam "Guards those reds are being mean to my pet!"

If the tamer wasn't the aggressor? You bet. Just like how a player can have the GZ as their own personal haven, getting into trouble and running to the carebear zone, spamming "Guards, those reds are being mean to me!"

So my 240 points in peace/music be damned? Your macro that commands your pet defeats my skill everytime...yeah thats fair.

I find it just as frustrating when a greater breaks peace when I'm trying to tame it, and "anger" it.

It is doubtlessly the same sort of coding that makes each situation happen... Which is why I say that those sorts of changes can have HUGE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES to the rest of the game.

Ummm what? Unbreakable? Can you imagine barding having the same chance of peacing a wild GD as you do taming it.

spamming all kill is a way of "aggressing" one's GD against a target. Every time a creature in peace "aggresses", as far as I can tell, it has a chance to break peace. If "aggressing" no longer allowed a creature to break peace, it would be... an unbreakable peace unless attacked. Among the global chances would be a difference in peace's effectiveness in taming creatures that anger.

Would they make the change global on purpose? Undoubtedly not. Have the Devs repeatedly shown that their attempts to fix things sometimes have wide-reaching unintended consequences? You bet your ass. I even gave the teleport "fix" as an example.

I don't want a fix for a problem for, at best, 2% of 10% of the population of any given shard (that being PvP bards) having wide-reaching effects on the rest of us.

How fast is peace broken, anyway? Macros can only work so fast, generally, and I'm pretty sure not everyone has exactly the right macro to deal with this situation...


Edit: Forgot about this:

Can you imagine barding having the same chance of peacing a wild GD as you do taming it.

Why yes, I can. With my 115 taming scroll, i have a roughly 20% chance of successfully taming a GD. I'm fairly sure, with 115 music/peace and a dragon slayer instrument, you have a roughly 15% chance of successfully target-peacing a wild GD. Note that I don't have a 120 taming scroll (waaay too expensive, moreso than 120 music/peace combined, I believe), which gives a tamer roughly a 30% chance of successfully taming it. 120 music/peace and a slayer instrument has a 30% chance of successfully peacing it.

Yeah, its quite imaginable.

Bards, however, don't have to start their peacing attempt within 2 tiles, nor stay relatively close to the beast for quite a few long, dangerous seconds. Nor do they aggro the beast 19 times out of 20 they attempt to use the skill.

What I'm really confused about is why we're talking about wild GDs at all - what does that have to do with PvP tamers?

 

[Frey Wavestrider]

Lots of ideas some good some bad. I agree that if you are to nerf dragon's breath you nerf the all damage. No archer or necro should be able to do 60+ damage. Before people say that only happens if the other guys suit is not full 70's that is false. With stacking, DI and all the other properties items give it happens alot, so two hits you are dead. Two hits you are dead by a dragon. Two hits by anything doing 60+ and most are dead. So if you want parity limit damage on everything. Some will say that would nerf tanks no it willnot, it will balance and you will need to use more tactics, not brute force.

I understand why the logging issue is a problem. I have logged to find my pet more than once after I died. Especially when I am fighting with my bakes as they tend to have minds of their own and look for the hardest spawn. But, I also tend to die alot and so do my pets as I will help anyone in trouble, including reds who may have pk'd me sometime. It is a game and I play it that way. If I see someone fighting spawn I will go help if I can. The joke with my guild mates is that if more than one or two pets and people are fighting watch my health bar I tend not too but I will heal anything I can while I vet my pet. Still there are people out there who will not do that and worry more about lost of gold and the work to re-train. I can see the issue about re-training as it may mean you cannot do the spawns you want etc. I will log if I am alone with a pet and I see no recourse. Taming is the only template that even after you max out you have to work skills. Not yours but your pets. So more time is invested.

As for those players who are, to be polite, idiots and bring down spawn on you as you are engaged because they; 1. think it is fun, 2. want to keep you busy so they can get the main reward or 3. they are too self absorbed in what they want . They will always be there, if you think it is deliberate report them for griefing. Otherwise get to know who they are and be prepared and ignore them for the most part. Sometimes even use them. If I am doing the spawn in Brit for hides and I know a certain player is there, I plan to get more hides.

I play on a small shard with some large guilds and some small ones, generally I help everyone that needs it and in return if I am healing my pet and need help other players help. It makes the game enjoyable. The other night I died while vetting my bakes in Skara while fighting the crimson. It was almost a complete wipe except for a guildie who had pulled out to rez her cu, She rezzed everyone and by the time I got my body (dying again) and bandages, my bakes were still fighting and almost healed. The first people rez, another guild, took over and were using close wounds to keep them healed. The bakes were then kept at full health and we took out the crimson. The other guild is made up of players who did not speak English well but like my guild understood that you should help if you can.

 

[YuriGaDaisukiDa]

Here's a good compromise:


You stop spamming the boards with this crap, and I will stop calling you a whining baby.

How's that?

AGREED

so far i havnt seen many people that agree with you, and all you do is spam about this, qq less please

TAMERS DONT NEED A NERF!

other classes need a balance

Here are some more reasonable balance suggestion

Allow spellweavers to bond and stable their humanoids, and change their controll slots based on power

allow necromancers to bond with dire wolves (take out bakes for them i think)

allow samurais to bond with lesser hiryus (can they already idk)

allow all players to bond with golems

make summons last longer or permanent

Ok, those changes will level the playing field a little, by allowing other classes to use pets as well, as for healing, perhaps something like this

bushi+heal works like lore and vet for lesser hiryues only
rez spells work on pets now
magic heals can work on golems, and they can be raised by magic
only problem is SS heal necros, but thats their loss i guess

ok now on to some other suggestions

Creat some work arounds for all classes, such as a paladin ability similar to EEO that increases their defenses against a certain creature

mages can have protection spells that increase defense against certain specials, such as 50% damage from fire breath (might make paragons ancient easier to kill too =p)

necros can some sort of bone cage spell to stop pets in their tracks maybe


All of the solutions you mentioned are bad, they nerf a perfectly fine class,

The main problem is that some pets kill players to easy, and the solution is to give players ways to get around them, and also give non tamers pets that are slightly weaker, without giving everyone a buff they dont deserve (greater dragons should still be able to kill a pure mage with no wrestle on foot dont you think?) unless the mage has dragon protection up

 

[Yalp]

I'm saying two wrongs don't make a right. If they're selfish idiots, you're no better for returning that behavior. Act in the way you'd like to be treated and set a good example.

If a tamer is needing to log off to save his pet, clearly he took on more than the pet could handle, or the situation got out of hand and he couldn't cope. I am not saying you should try to get your pet killed, I am saying you should try to take care of it so that you don't get in over your collective heads and die. There are better, more considerate ways to deal with a spawn swamping your pet than to hide and log off.


Players acting like jerks in an invasion spawn isn't anything new. I'm more surprised if they're polite and helpful! I behave in the way I would like others to behave towards me. Low level idiot behavior I ignore and refuse to res them. Usually if they're hauling spawn around like that, their death isn't far away, so I find that the most satisfying conclusion. Especially if I leave all their lured spawn waiting by their corpse....

However, if someone is deliberately luring, you have several obvious polite options.

1. asking them to stop and being prepared to page a GM on their sorry backsides because it's illegal, not something I've ever done, but the option is there.

2. put peace on your template and area peace then pull back.

3. ensure your tamer has supporting skills to kill spawn as you vet your pet.

4. herding is a great skill for controlling champ spawn animals and pinning them back from your pet, sometimes it's a handy support.

5. use a mount pet, let everything target it, then mount and run like heck out of there. This is my fall back with 2 of my tamers and if you can set a mount macro, it works a treat. If you can hide, it's up to you to choose if you take spawn away from the lurer or leave him in it

6. If the mobs aren't casters, you can call the pet to stop and follow and walk it while vetting and keeping the mobs from surrounding it. Once you've got the pet back at full health, you can set it back to kill and repeat that pulling and vetting as necessary.

Then, if none of that suits you, I'd suggest coming to the dark side and creating a hiding, ideally stealthing tamer....

The nice way that my stealther will deal with a lurer is to stand between her pet and the lurer and get the mobs to target her, so she can run away from her pet with the new mobs, hide and then usually she'll run past them back to her pet. Otherwise, she'll stealth the return if she has the time to do it. Sometimes I have to simply back off, wait for my pet to die and call it to me. I don't like that, but if I hated it, I'd have music/peace instead of hide and stealth

The nasty way, which gets the message over really quickly is to suggest to them in clear words that the next time they drop spawn, they'll be fighting it themselves. I give a warning and (I use a mount pet if I'm expecting idiots) I hide and mount when they come over the hill with spawn. Generally the best timing is to wait till they've invis'd so they think they've dumped on you, and be hidden in plenty of time, ready to mount your pet hidden, so the mobs sit around the invis'd lurer. If you hid in plenty of time that then lets you trot off and quite safely let the spawn target you and pull it away. Then I'll hide to break targets and go back to what I was doing. It's tempting to try getting a lurer killed, but much more satisfying to just breeze out the other side and leave them looking stupid. I'm not so nice if it's a repeat offender though. With those I just hide, mount and wait till their invis wears off.


This is why some tamers use peacemaking. If you don't have peace then greater confusion blast pots and invis spells or simply vetting like crazy will work too. My bard has provo on her alongside the disco specifically to control crazy spawns. My necro casts gift of renewal and gift of life on the tank pet if trouble kicks off, and can then combine vet with cast heals or more likely she'll spam wither as she vets like crazy to help her pets out. Sometimes these things go wrong, and I'm still learning to be a good necro/weaver, but if you're heading into an area with that kind of unpredictable spawn, you should have a good idea in mind for how to deal with it.


My dexers just back off a few tiles and don't cause the mob to re-target. Mostly I find folks will keep dexers healed when they're tanking, but if nobody is healing or x-healing I just try to dart to a gap in the spawn while I'm healing.


If I see a tamer who needs help then I don't sit and leave his pet any more than I would my own. I've died while healing other players pets and trying to res them at the same time, so please don't accuse me of leaving tamers to lose their pets. I don't! If I see someone genuinely struggling I help them out without question. I always have done. I've been my guild's healer mage for so many years I habitually pull off health bars and heal others. If a spawn is crazy you need to pull together.

But there are times when I have my hands full with vetting my own pets and killing the spawn, and I can't vet both pets simultaneously. So I make a habit of watching a tamer's health bar and if they suddenly vanish and the pet is near death I know what's coming. Fortunately it's only happened a few times, but the tamers concerned could have done better, because their pets would have coped if they had stood and vetted rather than bailing out. 1 didn't have vet so hardly passes the standard in preparation lol. But if that was me in the crap, I'd at least try to call my pets back to protect that other tamer. For one thing, if you're in a busy spawn and annoy others, you'll be the last person to get a heal or res when you really need it!

Wenchy

wow a dissertation on ways to play uo... ummm.. ok... but your suggestions are just that... suggestions on the way people should play... peeps have the right be be a$$e$. In game and in life. The also have the right to their own suggestions for how to play. Neither of you have the right to compel everyone to play your way. You may not like it, you may not condone it, but that is the way it is.

The thread is about nerfing tamers in pvp cause "everyone" knows they are overpowered. I don't agree. The op's ideas to ban login/logout for tamers is not a good one. It is a capricious and arbitrary burden that does not have equal among all templates. Finding balance among all templates and all weapons if far superior to submitting one class of template to unequaled burdens.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

The OP's only real interest in preventing a tamer from logging out/logging in to save a pet is so that he can kill it, and force the tamer to return to the scene of the battle...with his or her control slots occupied with a ghost that cannot fight...so that he can kill the tamer, who is now pet-less and vulnerable.

Hopefully the devs will see through this griefer crap and leave things as they are.


Just imagine everytime your pet died in an area that pet balls don't work, how much of a pain it would be to go and get them.


Here is a compromise:

What if pets do not return to the tamer on log out/log in, but our control slots are no longer taken up with dead pets.

I imagine that would change the OP's opinion in a hurry. When a tamer showed back up to claim his or her dead pet, with another Greater Dragon in tow...he would no longer have a chance to kill what equates to an unarmed foe.

 

[Wenchkin]

wow a dissertation on ways to play uo... ummm.. ok... but your suggestions are just that... suggestions on the way people should play... peeps have the right be be a$$e$. In game and in life. The also have the right to their own suggestions for how to play. Neither of you have the right to compel everyone to play your way. You may not like it, you may not condone it, but that is the way it is.

I was just posting options for a player (numerous) before they hit logging out. You seemed to be coming from the point of view that logging out was essential and players had to use it. So I explained why it wasn't essential and how you could work templates without it... I don't intend to compel players to play the way I do, but there are options which don't require logging out. So if the logging out option is curtailed, those players can stay alive, keep their pets and live another day. That was my point.

Seriously, it would be a dull UO if everyone was nice, heck it's the idiots in Tram who are most entertaining some days

The thread is about nerfing tamers in pvp cause "everyone" knows they are overpowered. I don't agree. The op's ideas to ban login/logout for tamers is not a good one. It is a capricious and arbitrary burden that does not have equal among all templates. Finding balance among all templates and all weapons if far superior to submitting one class of template to unequaled burdens.

That's a matter of opinion and as I stated earlier, there are other options for a tamer to take, and thus if you're going to nerf something, I would rather it was something we can live without. Surely that's better than leaving EA to make a crazy decision and nerf something really close to our hearts?

Let's be honest, if the devs have decided that, like it or not, tamers are being balanced, and they aren't going to be swayed by your arguments otherwise, they need to decide what to fix. I believe we've gone too far down the gimplate road for anyone to be able to balance the damage everyone does. I just think if that was do-able we'd have it by now. So if there are suggestions to make, the first ones I'm going for are ones that benefit players who train their skills up. Logging off is simply an option, so it can be changed and tamers can adapt to not using it so much. Preventing a tamer from being in a mounted speed form while commanding a GD is another. Then looking at which pets are too strong and making reasonable balances to them. I would rather just see the GD balanced and other pets left, but I think we'll be lucky to get away so lightly

Wenchy

 

[Yalp]

I was just posting options for a player (numerous) before they hit logging out. You seemed to be coming from the point of view that logging out was essential and players had to use it. So I explained why it wasn't essential and how you could work templates without it... I don't intend to compel players to play the way I do, but there are options which don't require logging out. So if the logging out option is curtailed, those players can stay alive, keep their pets and live another day. That was my point.

Seriously, it would be a dull UO if everyone was nice, heck it's the idiots in Tram who are most entertaining some days


That's a matter of opinion and as I stated earlier, there are other options for a tamer to take, and thus if you're going to nerf something, I would rather it was something we can live without. Surely that's better than leaving EA to make a crazy decision and nerf something really close to our hearts?

Let's be honest, if the devs have decided that, like it or not, tamers are being balanced, and they aren't going to be swayed by your arguments otherwise, they need to decide what to fix. I believe we've gone too far down the gimplate road for anyone to be able to balance the damage everyone does. I just think if that was do-able we'd have it by now. So if there are suggestions to make, the first ones I'm going for are ones that benefit players who train their skills up. Logging off is simply an option, so it can be changed and tamers can adapt to not using it so much. Preventing a tamer from being in a mounted speed form while commanding a GD is another. Then looking at which pets are too strong and making reasonable balances to them. I would rather just see the GD balanced and other pets left, but I think we'll be lucky to get away so lightly

Wenchy

pvp tamers who log out to save their pet have every right to do so. As morgana pointed out, the reason to prevent this ability has nothing to do with balancing, it's a means to force tamers to come back to retrieve their pets w/o any defense... an easy mark. That isn't balance. that's further reducing the ability of ONE template to pvp.... a template which *except on Seige* does not rule in pvp.

Dexer, Archer & Mage classes have no equal to this proposal. Never do their offensive weapons become dead, lost or in need of retrieval, rezzing, mana regening, and stamina regening.. Bows and Blades do not loose their mods when their holder is killed. Re-training the warforks' DI or SSI is not something even remotely on the minds of a fencer.

Until concrete changes actually are coded into the game nerfing tamers, I'll continue to voice my oppostion. I hate the "squeaky wheel" syndrome. Those shouting the loudest for "nerfing" of taming and/or pets hide behind a "balance" issue. Their arguments are full of fraud.. as they don't want actual balance.... they want dominance... they want tamers gone from pvp and the whole game if they can dare to dream.

 

[drinkbeerallday]

The OP's only real interest in preventing a tamer from logging out/logging in to save a pet is so that he can kill it

this is 100 percent correct. if you attack me with your pet i should be able to kill it without you saving it with an exploit.

and force the tamer to return to the scene of the battle...with his or her control slots occupied with a ghost that cannot fight...

so that he can kill the tamer, who is now pet-less and vulnerable.

under my plan, if the tamer does not want to participate in the PvP arena, he/she can go to a stable to retrieve the pet.

Hopefully the devs will see through this griefer crap and leave things as they are.

the only "griefer" here is you. you are exploiting a game mechanic to cheat at PvP

Here is a compromise:

What if pets do not return to the tamer on log out/log in, but our control slots are no longer taken up with dead pets.

I imagine that would change the OP's opinion in a hurry. When a tamer showed back up to claim his or her dead pet, with another Greater Dragon in tow...he would no longer have a chance to kill what equates to an unarmed foe.

you will still have to exit the dungeon/t2a to get the second pet. you still won't be able to use the pet ball/stable until you are unflagged. your pet will have suffered the stat loss. i don't see why you wouldn't want to get the ghosted pet back to you and into the stable before going back into the field?

but okay I agree with this compromise in theory.

 

[drinkbeerallday]

I say again.. tell me the equivalent for archers, dexer, and/or mages?

There is no equivalent because tamers are so overpowered they are at a totally different level.

 

[drinkbeerallday]

and if the dragon became all dead?

so the dead tamer has NO right to use his hard earned, trained and cared for pet to his own purposes? He must leave it for your use?

as far as i'm concerned you are just exploiting game mechanics. how is that a "right"

maybe you should go re-read that comic and think about what you are saying here.

 

[Yalp]

There is no equivalent because tamers are so overpowered they are at a totally different level.

I whole-heartedly disagree.

If this were indeed true, any PvM tamer could take their dragon to fel and wipe the floor with all PvP'rs. Since this is NOT happening on my shard, I must extrapolate it is not happening on ANY production shard.

 

[Yalp]

maybe you should go re-read that comic and think about what you are saying here.

really? this is the best you've got? nothing to say regarding the actual issue? no response which supports your p.o.v.? Just a personal attack on someone who doesn't agree with your position? intellectual laziness? or mental midget? critical thinking skills? or mush for brains? Fraudulent position? or actual problem?

I would suggest, sir, if you are only interested in 100% agreement with your thoughts, opinions and positions, you carry on a conversation with a mirror.

 

[Wenchkin]

pvp tamers who log out to save their pet have every right to do so. As morgana pointed out, the reason to prevent this ability has nothing to do with balancing, it's a means to force tamers to come back to retrieve their pets w/o any defense... an easy mark. That isn't balance. that's further reducing the ability of ONE template to pvp.... a template which *except on Seige* does not rule in pvp.

If a pet times out after a few minutes and then returns to the stable, the tamer doesn't have to go near the players who killed him/her, and the pet is safe. All newly resurrected players are an easy mark, but I still recover my corpse and pet.

Dexer, Archer & Mage classes have no equal to this proposal. Never do their offensive weapons become dead, lost or in need of retrieval, rezzing, mana regening, and stamina regening.. Bows and Blades do not loose their mods when their holder is killed. Re-training the warforks' DI or SSI is not something even remotely on the minds of a fencer.

You said it yourself that the tamer and pet are a team, like 2 players are. If you want them to be considered a team, both parties of that team have to regen their mana and stamina and get a res when they die. Pets are dealt with as part of a team, not treated like a weapon.

First off, you need to decide if the pet is to be treated as a weapon or a team mate. Not flip between the two. Either he's a team mate that can die and needs to regen himself, or he's a weapon that needs to be kept in repair. And if a tamer wields a bow alongside his pet, surely that bow is his weapon. And a tamer can cast and use weapons alongside their pets, so it's their choice if they rely on that pet for all the damage.

If that GD is supposed to be equal to a weapon, what's he doing off screen fighting beyond the tamer's normal range of attack? If the tamer dies, he should be out of action, not still able to fight. In other words he needs a lot of nerfing before he's following the normal rules of casting and fighting which apply to weapons. So I think you'd be better sticking to one description or another and accepting the limitations which apply.

As for your concern about resurrecting your weapon/pet it costs zero gold if you res with bandies you crafted yourself, and in minutes you can retrain that tiny 0.1 skill loss. If you train pets on monsters you actually make a profit during your retraining, covering your insurance losses too. I find it very convenient and I haven't once worried about skill loss on a PvP pet. I don't think tamers should enter PvP if they're going to worry about waiting for their pet to meditate etc.

Wenchy

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

under my plan, if the tamer does not want to participate in the PvP arena, he/she can go to a stable to retrieve the pet.

I would have no issue with that.

the only "griefer" here is you. you are exploiting a game mechanic to cheat at PvP

:yawn:

you will still have to exit the dungeon/t2a to get the second pet. you still won't be able to use the pet ball/stable until you are unflagged. your pet will have suffered the stat loss. i don't see why you wouldn't want to get the ghosted pet back to you and into the stable before going back into the field?

but okay I agree with this compromise in theory.

See how much better it is when you approach the subject from a reasonable stand point?

As long as there is a mechanism in place to prevent PvP tamers from having to return to the area where the pet died, with their control slots taken up with a dead pet...leaving the tamer a sitting duck, then I have no issue with making a change.

But if there are going to be places that pets cannot be retrieved from, then no...I would not support such a change.

When a mage dies, he doesn't have to go and retrieve his spellbook before he can cast any spells does he? Why should a tamer have to retrieve their pets, essentially unarmed, when no other template has to do so?

Like I said, as long as the pet is retrievable without having to go back into an active PvP (or PvM) area, I have no issue with it.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

Here's a suggestion that might make both sides of this "discussion" happy:

- When a bonded pet dies, the tamer's control slots are free. The pet cannot be rez'ed unless the tamer has open control slots.

- The pet cannot be retrieved by any method while flagged as an aggressor.

- The pet takes the normal skill loss when it is killed, regardless of PvP or PvM.

- Pets, like weapons and armor, should have to be insured. When a player kills a pet in PvP, the player should get half the insurrance money.

- If the tamer dies, and the pet is insurred, when the tamer is rez'ed, a gump should appear and ask the tamer if he or she would like to retrieve the pet. If they choose yes, the pet is retrieved at the cost of insurance...unless the pet was flagged as an aggressor, in which case it would not be be retrieved.

- Make pet balls use the same amount of charges that the pet takes in control slots, but make them work everywhere...unless the pet is flagged as an aggressor.

Thoughts?

 

[drawn]

We all know PvP tamers are insanely overpowered. What type of compromise would you all be comfortable with?

(This is not a political thread, if you want to debate whether Taming is overpowered please start a new thread with that premise)

I think Pet Stat loss should probably be 25 percent, maybe compromise to 10 percent.

Log out/Log in needs to be fixed. (should only work near a stable master and player cannot be flagged)

Pet ball cannot be used in dungeon/t2a of Fel and uses up as many charges as the control slots the pet uses. Also cannot be flagged.

Stealth skill uses 5 Control Slots. (not hiding)

Anything else? I think these are all very reasonable ideas that will make it so pets are still powerful but because of that power, comes risk.

120 Vet required to heal pet with G-Heal etc..

I think by limiting the damage that pets do to players is the best way to go- limit firebreath to a cap of 35 LIKE ARMOR IGNORE and not allow for 2 screen casting.

Leave PVM alone for the tamers. my 2 cents

 

[drinkbeerallday]

- If the tamer dies, and the pet is insurred, when the tamer is rez'ed, a gump should appear and ask the tamer if he or she would like to retrieve the pet. If they choose yes, the pet is retrieved at the cost of insurance...unless the pet was flagged as an aggressor, in which case it would not be be retrieved.

not in dungeon/t2a of felucca or faction base.

 

[Yalp]

If a pet times out after a few minutes and then returns to the stable, the tamer doesn't have to go near the players who killed him/her, and the pet is safe. All newly resurrected players are an easy mark, but I still recover my corpse and pet.

what is the timer restriction for dexers, archers and mages weapons? Which template does not have immediate access to their offensive weapons the minute after they rez? Can an archer immediately equip their bow even while dressing? How about that fencer? Does his blade work if it is in his hands regardless if he is newly rezzed?

You said it yourself that the tamer and pet are a team, like 2 players are. If you want them to be considered a team, both parties of that team have to regen their mana and stamina and get a res when they die. Pets are dealt with as part of a team, not treated like a weapon.

First off, you need to decide if the pet is to be treated as a weapon or a team mate. Not flip between the two. Either he's a team mate that can die and needs to regen himself, or he's a weapon that needs to be kept in repair. And if a tamer wields a bow alongside his pet, surely that bow is his weapon. And a tamer can cast and use weapons alongside their pets, so it's their choice if they rely on that pet for all the damage.

the issue is tamers and pvp? i think you muddy the waters when you add additional weapon skills the tamer may or may not have on their template.

If that GD is supposed to be equal to a weapon, what's he doing off screen fighting beyond the tamer's normal range of attack? If the tamer dies, he should be out of action, not still able to fight. In other words he needs a lot of nerfing before he's following the normal rules of casting and fighting which apply to weapons. So I think you'd be better sticking to one description or another and accepting the limitations which apply.

If treating the pet as a weapon, indeed.. many adjustments need made to balance them to the abilities of other weapons.. and not just in the ways you imagine.

As for your concern about resurrecting your weapon/pet it costs zero gold if you res with bandies you crafted yourself, and in minutes you can retrain that tiny 0.1 skill loss. If you train pets on monsters you actually make a profit during your retraining, covering your insurance losses too. I find it very convenient and I haven't once worried about skill loss on a PvP pet. I don't think tamers should enter PvP if they're going to worry about waiting for their pet to meditate etc.

You make a lot of assumptions about what people SHOULD think, how people play and/or SHOULD play. Bandies cost.. where did they come from? Minutes of training to regains skill loss? Well yeah.. if you are playing with the right mobs, or have the right spells cast on your pet, and it's not 0.1..... it's 0.1 X #of skills. for greaters, that's 0.7 skill loss... as i"m sure you know well..

Wenchy

I personally hold the view in pvp a tamer's pet is part of a pvp team. That is my view and neither confirmed nor denied by the developers. Until they determine their philosophy on pets, tamers and pvp, it's perfectly valid and appropriate to discuss issues whether they relate to a pet as weapon or a pet as teammate.

 

[Yalp]

- The pet cannot be retrieved by any method while flagged as an aggressor.

- Pets, like weapons and armor, should have to be insured. When a player kills a pet in PvP, the player should get half the insurrance money.

- Make pet balls use the same amount of charges that the pet takes in control slots, but make them work everywhere...unless the pet is flagged as an aggressor.

Thoughts?

Just a quick one... the tamer can't retrieve their weapon if the pet is flagged? Can a dexer use their blade when they are flagged? Can an archer use their bow when they are flagged?

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

Just a quick one... the tamer can't retrieve their weapon if the pet is flagged? Can a dexer use their blade when they are flagged? Can an archer use their bow when they are flagged?

But can a dexxer or a mage recall after they have attacked you?

No. If you attack someone with your pet, and you consider your pet to be a part of your "PvP team" as you stated above, then your pet should not be able to escape the consequences of your action...just like a dexxer or mage can't.

My point is that we tamers do have to give up something, and I think this is more than fair.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

not in dungeon/t2a of felucca or faction base.

Do your insured items remain in dungeons/t2a of Fel or factions bases when you die?

Again...why the need for double standards?

Pets should work just like any other insured item. If my pet dies now, it costs me nothing but time to re-train it, and like Wenchkin pointed out, I actually make money during this time.

It would seem to me, being that you seem to want to stick-it-to tamers...that this suggestion would be right up your alley. If you manage to kill a pet, not only would you be sticking it to the tamer in terms of time, but also gold.

 

[Wenchkin]

I personally hold the view in pvp a tamer's pet is part of a pvp team. That is my view and neither confirmed nor denied by the developers. Until they determine their philosophy on pets, tamers and pvp, it's perfectly valid and appropriate to discuss issues whether they relate to a pet as weapon or a pet as teammate.

Well I was really just hoping you'd stick to one of the two arguments because a team mate is very different to a mere weapon. I'm not asking what EA has decided. I was just hoping you would pick one of the two and not bounce between them at will.... If I say 'balance the pets in x, y and z so they're comparable to a weapon" and you then say "but the tamer is a team with their pet" the discussion will go nowhere but circles. Which may well be what you intended, but I don't think it helps move the discussion forward.

Wenchy

 

[drinkbeerallday]

Again...why the need for double standards?

you want a way to resurrect your pet without having Vet.

every time your pet dies you could run off and kill yourself and with Gem of Salvation or Gift of Renewal you could res your pet.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

you want a way to resurrect your pet without having Vet.

every time your pet dies you could run off and kill yourself and with Gem of Salvation or Gift of Renewal you could res your pet.

Umm...no.

I have 110 Vet thanks. But if you re-read what I posted, I said that the tamer could retrieve the pet, not rez it with this method.

Pets should only be ressurrected through the Vet skill...no other method.

 

[Yalp]

But can a dexxer or a mage recall after they have attacked you?

No. If you attack someone with your pet, and you consider your pet to be a part of your "PvP team" as you stated above, then your pet should not be able to escape the consequences of your action...just like a dexxer or mage can't.

My point is that we tamers do have to give up something, and I think this is more than fair.

ok . if your pet is a teammate, and it's flagged, you've removed it from the action altogether.. so 2 or 3 non-tamer templates would have the ability to regroup and re-attack where the tamer templates would not be able to use their pets for a period of however long it takes them to drop their flagging.

if your pet is a weapon, the the tamer looses his weapon where no one else does, again until they drop their flagging. Either way it's penalty only the tamer has to bear.

other templates do indeed have the ability to remove oneself from pvp, even if they have started the fight... hiding, invising and running far enough off screen.. should pets.. especially if they are part of a pvp team not have the same ability?

I don't believe tamers are overpowered or in need of nerfing.. however the ability of anything to cast from off screen needs to be fixed.. sooner the better... so I'm not of the school there needs to be a compromise.. the only thing that does is reward the squeeky wheels.

just more food for thought.

 

[Yalp]

Well I was really just hoping you'd stick to one of the two arguments because a team mate is very different to a mere weapon. I'm not asking what EA has decided. I was just hoping you would pick one of the two and not bounce between them at will.... If I say 'balance the pets in x, y and z so they're comparable to a weapon" and you then say "but the tamer is a team with their pet" the discussion will go nowhere but circles. Which may well be what you intended, but I don't think it helps move the discussion forward.

Wenchy

Absolute statements never move the discussion forward.

There is not clear agreement that tamers are in need of nerfing, that they rule pvp, and/or that greaters are the bane of UO. There are opinions on both sides.. and that makes the discussion of "solutions" almost impossible to complete to any resolution.

There's the rub.. chants of "Nerf,Nerf, Nerf" require thoughtful review from all angles.... if you take away the ability of one class to do something other classes can.. can you justify it? Until its clear what the dev's intend to be their philosophy on tamers/pvp.. then solutions need to work for BOTH scenarios, a near impossible task at the moment I am afraid.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

ok . if your pet is a teammate, and it's flagged, you've removed it from the action altogether.. so 2 or 3 non-tamer templates would have the ability to regroup and re-attack where the tamer templates would not be able to use their pets for a period of however long it takes them to drop their flagging.

if your pet is a weapon, the the tamer looses his weapon where no one else does, again until they drop their flagging. Either way it's penalty only the tamer has to bear.

other templates do indeed have the ability to remove oneself from pvp, even if they have started the fight... hiding, invising and running far enough off screen.. should pets.. especially if they are part of a pvp team not have the same ability?

I can see your points. And I would personally prefer that things remain as they are...but I can also see the points that some of the other posters have made. It has to be frustrating for other templates to fight our pets, kill us, and not be able to kill our pets.

Then again, I think they are more frustrated because they die to us more often than we die to them...hence the desire to nerf tamers.

I don't believe tamers are overpowered or in need of nerfing.. however the ability of anything to cast from off screen needs to be fixed.. sooner the better... so I'm not of the school there needs to be a compromise.. the only thing that does is reward the squeeky wheels.

just more food for thought.

I am not sure why people don't understand the breath weapon/casting from off screen thing. When the breath weapon or spell was initiated, the player was on screen. If they run away, they cannot escape the effects of the original attack. It doesn't work in PvM, and it shouldn't work in PvP. If the attack was initiated on screen, then you run, you should still get hit.

 

[Kazumi the Wild]

Considering I've been hit by poison from off-screen of NPCs before, which as far as I know happens instantly (unlike fireballs, etc., which have an animation that takes time to travel to the player), It at least seems to me that NPC's initial target is considered valid if it STARTS casting when the player is onscreen, even if the target is NOT onscreen when the NPC actually finishes casting the spell.

I've also found that, despite not having finished casting before I got my invisibility off, I have been targetted while invisible.

Maybe my perceptions are wrong... I'd like to know if I'm alone in this experience.

 

[Wenchkin]

Absolute statements never move the discussion forward.

There is not clear agreement that tamers are in need of nerfing, that they rule pvp, and/or that greaters are the bane of UO. There are opinions on both sides.. and that makes the discussion of "solutions" almost impossible to complete to any resolution.

Well, you can be in denial all you like, but perhaps you'll re-think your stance when a list of changes hits test centre.

There's the rub.. chants of "Nerf,Nerf, Nerf" require thoughtful review from all angles.... if you take away the ability of one class to do something other classes can.. can you justify it? Until its clear what the dev's intend to be their philosophy on tamers/pvp.. then solutions need to work for BOTH scenarios, a near impossible task at the moment I am afraid.

Aside from the extremists, who nobody listens to, none of the nerfs proposed will stop a tamer from killing players in PvP. Did changing pet balls end PvP tamers? No. Did balancing runeys do it? No. Did changing the control requirement? Again, no. Players who aren't so determined to dig their heels in will realise that they can adapt to changes and still come out tops. It's possible that other tamers are simply better at PvP than you feel you are. Who knows?

You can argue till you're as blue as your avatar, but the truth is, you could nerf tamers a lot and it won't end them in PvP. If you want to bounce different arguments around because the devs won't share their philosophy with you, be my guest. To me it looks like a convenient excuse to use 2 arguments to support your reluctance to have tamers toned down in the slightest. And your denial that there's a clear argument for the nerfing of tamers supports that view.

Wenchy

 

[Wenchkin]

Considering I've been hit by poison from off-screen of NPCs before, which as far as I know happens instantly (unlike fireballs, etc., which have an animation that takes time to travel to the player), It at least seems to me that NPC's initial target is considered valid if it STARTS casting when the player is onscreen, even if the target is NOT onscreen when the NPC actually finishes casting the spell.

That's how I think it works, the mob targets you and then keeps gunning at you as you run. Happens to me all the time when taming aggressive casters, and it never fails to amaze me how far some can gun you down as you run off to heal

I've also found that, despite not having finished casting before I got my invisibility off, I have been targetted while invisible.

Maybe my perceptions are wrong... I'd like to know if I'm alone in this experience.

I often get hit by stuff when hidden or invis'd. I think the target is set like it is when you're off screen, and the mob has cast and targeted, so regardless of where you are/your visibility, it can hit you. Which means quite often you either need to time your invis between when you think a mob is going to cast, or be prepared to re-cast or hide a second time to properly break target.

Between the issues you raise and the auto casting of aggressive mobs, situations a mage would once have escaped easily are often lethal I don't mind the increased risk to the point of screaming about it (though when it arrived I yelled at imps a lot ), but I understand the frustrations of being killed 2 screens away while invisible lol.

Wenchy

 

[TimberWolf]

I think the only pet/tamer combo that is over-powering is the tamer/Greater drag combo in PVP.

What if greater dragons were just removed from PVP....these Dragons being Super intelligent refuse to get involved in petty squabbles between humaniods.

A Grt will defend his/her Masterf attacked ( ie the guard command works) but will refuse to attack (ie all kill command) when it is directed toward a character.

I love that Dragons are once again the top of the food chain....but they are just too powerful for PVP.

TW

 

[RichDC]

Not a troll, but that idea wasn't very thought out...

A guarded pet will attack a person the master attacks, thus GD's wouldnt be removed they would just become slightly...some would say easier to target with...

All guard...exp, fs, GD!! (not a combo i would want to be on the end of)

 

[Yalp]

Well, you can be in denial all you like, but perhaps you'll re-think your stance when a list of changes hits test centre.


Aside from the extremists, who nobody listens to, none of the nerfs proposed will stop a tamer from killing players in PvP. Did changing pet balls end PvP tamers? No. Did balancing runeys do it? No. Did changing the control requirement? Again, no. Players who aren't so determined to dig their heels in will realise that they can adapt to changes and still come out tops. It's possible that other tamers are simply better at PvP than you feel you are. Who knows?

You can argue till you're as blue as your avatar, but the truth is, you could nerf tamers a lot and it won't end them in PvP. If you want to bounce different arguments around because the devs won't share their philosophy with you, be my guest. To me it looks like a convenient excuse to use 2 arguments to support your reluctance to have tamers toned down in the slightest. And your denial that there's a clear argument for the nerfing of tamers supports that view.

Wenchy

You just love to go after people instead of defending your position.. it's pretty common motis operandi for you. Pity. The weak mind lobs attacks on their opponent instead of strengthening their position. Want the dev's to do as you command? Then present articles which are free of attacks on the opposing sides. Convince them your point of view is correct, proper and/or necessary. Unless I missed the announcement and/or publish, the dev's continue to "Look at" the greater in pvp issue... which means they might be reviewing the issue from all angles, and are taking their time to make a sound, wise decision. I take the fact that there are no changes to pets in this latest round of testing to be a good sign.. one that the dev's are listening to ALL sides of the issue and not acting in haste to silence the "squeeky wheels" on the stratics board.

1) Tamers DO NOT RULE pvp now.. neither by number of people playing that template in pvp, nor by their abilities on the field of combat. *Seige ex.*
2) Greater dragons are powerful but there are just as many weaknesses which make it defeatable in pvp combat.
3) There exists currently in the game mechanics, both the necessary skills and tactics make the tamer/greater combo easily defeated.
4) In order to accomplish "balancing" changes to the taming template and/or game mechanics developers must consider whether other templates are able to accomplish the same actions through alternative mechanics and/or tools.

 

[TimberWolf]

Not a troll, but that idea wasn't very thought out...

A guarded pet will attack a person the master attacks, thus GD's wouldnt be removed they would just become slightly...some would say easier to target with...

All guard...exp, fs, GD!! (not a combo i would want to be on the end of)

That is easily modified with some very basic code....it is time we stopped hanging on to these restricted ideals.....let try to think outside the little UO box.

 

[RichDC]

Your point as far as i understood it was to allow tamers who are in fel to be protected as long as they dont command there pet to kill the target,

The problem is that for the guard command to work as soon as a player(or Non-player) becomes aggressive to the owner the pet will guard...no matter how that aggression is engaged.

 

[Wenchkin]

You just love to go after people instead of defending your position.. it's pretty common motis operandi for you. Pity. The weak mind lobs attacks on their opponent instead of strengthening their position.

Well I was trying to get you to decide what argument you would stick to, but that's a lost cause

Want the dev's to do as you command? Then present articles which are free of attacks on the opposing sides. Convince them your point of view is correct, proper and/or necessary. Unless I missed the announcement and/or publish, the dev's continue to "Look at" the greater in pvp issue... which means they might be reviewing the issue from all angles, and are taking their time to make a sound, wise decision. I take the fact that there are no changes to pets in this latest round of testing to be a good sign.. one that the dev's are listening to ALL sides of the issue and not acting in haste to silence the "squeeky wheels" on the stratics board.

Well I hope the devs are making a sensible balanced decision. There were no taming changes posted to TC, as they're testing other changes just now. But Draconi has already said that those are not the only changes, so you'll have to wait and see like the rest of us.

1) Tamers DO NOT RULE pvp now.. neither by number of people playing that template in pvp, nor by their abilities on the field of combat. *Seige ex.*

I didn't say tamers ruled. You don't need to rule to be overpowered.

2) Greater dragons are powerful but there are just as many weaknesses which make it defeatable in pvp combat.

Rune beetles were defeatable too, but the devs still agreed they were too powerful and toned them down.... Being killable doesn't necessarily mean you're not too strong.

3) There exists currently in the game mechanics, both the necessary skills and tactics make the tamer/greater combo easily defeated.

And? Again, just because it can be killed with the right tactics and skills, doesn't mean it's not out of whack or overpowered.

4) In order to accomplish "balancing" changes to the taming template and/or game mechanics developers must consider whether other templates are able to accomplish the same actions through alternative mechanics and/or tools.

Agreed. However, considering that diminishing returns has popped up in a few places we didn't expect, I think it's safe to say that quite a few other changes will arrive to address the balance in those other skills. And if there are a lot of balances pulling other things down in power, that could strengthen the argument in favour of changing GDs or something we haven't even discussed. I don't recall many folks discussing talon bite lol. But if non tamers get pulled down too far, that tamer is going to stand out even more. And even if you're left untouched, you'll be on everyone's kill list even more than before.

Wenchy

 

[Wenchkin]

Your point as far as i understood it was to allow tamers who are in fel to be protected as long as they dont command there pet to kill the target,

The problem is that for the guard command to work as soon as a player(or Non-player) becomes aggressive to the owner the pet will guard...no matter how that aggression is engaged.

Isn't there some issue with flagging when guarded too? I seem to remember laughing at a Yew gater who said everyone could attack him when he set his pet to guard.

Interesting idea though. I think it would get a lot of GDs out of Fel, if only because players attacked the tamer and lured the dragon away. If the tamer couldn't do more than call it back and set it to guard again, that would likely end with them stabling the GD. Which is a pretty good scenario for the GD haters out there

Or something crazy like I dunno, if you want to say all kill and target a player, you need 120 tame lore and vet, real skill? Then a tamer could possibly engage their GD at someone directly, but they'd need a stack of skill commitment to do it. And would be balanced a little in requiring vet. I wouldn't say 120 straight skills in any other circumstance though, but for that 1 pet in that particular situation, I'll throw the idea in the ring too.

Wenchy

 

[RichDC]

I will be honest and say that i dont really mind what they do to balance the GD, as long as its not a tamer nerf.

Even when i play my tamer in fel i will only tend to use a beetle bake/mare and carry bolas. I tend to think those guys are far worse than a GD!!

 

[Turdnugget]

Omfgoose... this is so ridiculous.

drinkbeer apparently gets owned 24/7 by tamers and this is all he can talk about.

The only reasonable 'nerf' ideas that i've seen that would level out the playing field in PvP combat with tamers.

-Cap damage on GD/Dreadmare firebreath/physical attack in PvP ONLY.
-Line of sight casting
-FC/FCR for pets
-Require at least 80 real skill in Vet to get full benefits of control of pets that you need lore/taming to control normally. That would cut down a lot on the gimp templates. Not mine though, I have 100 vet as well since I use that toon for PvM/Champ spawns.

Here's an example of the proposed 80 real skill vet for full benefits.

Ex: I've got 110 animallore/taming and 80 vet. I have a 99% chance to control my GD.

Now let's say I have 110 lore/taming, but no vet. I now have a 50% chance to control my GD.

That would make people rethink their PvP tamer template as they would need at least 80 real skill in Vet in order to successfully use their pet. At 50% chance to control, your pet is going to get pissed, and go wild. That and you'd have to spam All Kill X amount of times in order for it to even do anything. Heck, even lowering control chance to 25% w/out Vet would be fine.

Requiring Vet to greater heal a tamer's pet would hurt a lot of people's playstyle. What about those that do Peerless and need multiple healers to keep the pets alive? It's not the safest thing to stand next to your pet using veterinary when the Peerless/boss starts hitting you.

Those are the biggest issues I see complained about. I think that would solve a lot of problems w/people's complaints about these pets in PvP.

I don't think it fair for the PvM tamer who does Fel champ spawns to be subjected to such harsh penalties for defending themselves/their spawn just because some people can't deal with them.


Quit trying to get tamers nerfed completely out of Fel. Not everyone enjoys playing a necro or dexer to do Champ spawns. Not everyone is a PvPer who does Champ spawns. Wtf do you expect them to use? A bard?

I think the problem is more with Yew trash PvP that this PvP tamer nerf is being cried for. And probably with faction fights as well, OUTSIDE of Yew.

 

[TimberWolf]

Your point as far as i understood it was to allow tamers who are in fel to be protected as long as they dont command there pet to kill the target,

The problem is that for the guard command to work as soon as a player(or Non-player) becomes aggressive to the owner the pet will guard...no matter how that aggression is engaged.

Not to be a troll.....
I guess you don't understand to well then.

My point is Grt Dragons are way too powerful for pvp. I love them...I think they are wonderful and necessary part of UO. I don't want to see them or tamers nerfed, but lets face it...they are just too powerful.

I have killed and seen killed plenty of "leet" tamers with their rune/mare combo, They aren't close to the sheer awesome power of a GRT Dragon!!

Nor should they be, the Grt Dragon should strike fear in to the hearts of a pvper.

At 44 years of age I am just now teaching myself code and even I can see it wouldn't be hard at all to limit the parameters of the Grt Dragon with how it interacts with other player characters. I my elementary level I am pretty sure I could write about 10 lines of code to handle the entire issue.

If given an all kill command targeted to a PC it does nothing. If the PC is attacked while the Dragon is guarding it defends. All stop command breaks off pursuit by the Dragon causing it to return to it's Master.

For 90 percent of PCs a Grt Dragon will insta kill them. This is how it should be! But it isn't fair to use as a weapon. No other class can kill 90% of all PCs in under 2 secs.

Is Wenchy right? Will that make people leave their Grt Dragons in the stable when they are pvping?? Maybe, and I don't think that is a bad thing.

I am not a Grt Dragon hater, if anything I am the opposite. I want them to be one of the most powerful creatures in the game. They should be, these are Dragons of Lore....But you can't have one class or one group with such a powerful weapon.

Don't nerf them, just remove them from the pvp equation.


Just my TWo cents

 

[RichDC]

I wasnt saying they shouldnt be balanced...i dont use em for pvp so it doesnt bother me either way,

I was mearly stating that a guarded pet can be forced to engage a target at will by the owner, without using the all kill command.

 

[TimberWolf]

I wasnt saying they shouldnt be balanced...i dont use em for pvp so it doesnt bother me either way,

I was mearly stating that a guarded pet can be forced to engage a target at will by the owner, without using the all kill command.

Ok I guess you are purposely ignoring the part where I said ( repeatedly) it would be simple to change the code for Grt Dragons for them NOT to behave this way!

That is the core of the entire idea. Grt Dragons being Super intelligent Beast of Lore would not respond the way all other pets do! They feel they are above the petty squabbles of men and elves....

 

[Kazumi the Wild]

Ok I guess you are purposely ignoring the part where I said ( repeatedly) it would be simple to change the code for Grt Dragons for them NOT to behave this way!

That is the core of the entire idea. Grt Dragons being Super intelligent Beast of Lore would not respond the way all other pets do! They feel they are above the petty squabbles of men and elves....

And as I've said before, I think we want to make balancing changes deal with as little code alteration as possible, especially with things that are already apparently buggy, like pet aggression flagging.

I think I'm going to keep hammering away at the Teleport "fix" the Devs put through recently. In trying to keep pets from teleporting INTO PRIVATE HOUSES, they 'accidentally' disabled Teleporting for the ENTIRE NPC population - NPCs will still cast the spell, but they won't go anywhere.

I do NOT trust the Devs, as much as I wish I could, to fiddle around with something so apparently delicate as aggression flagging for pets when they have the potential to cause unintended consequences to pets in PvP, or worse, to the 85%+ people who don't PvP at all.




My suggestion has always been to halve Fire Breath damage, as it is ALREADY the most powerful version of Fire breath available to pets.

Seriously... Every other Fire Breathing pet, and heck, every Fire Breathing NPC, does 10% of its current HP as damage for its Fire Breath.

A TAMED GD, though? 20%. A GD which, tamed, has 800 hp? He'll do 160 damage with his FB... the same that he did before he was tamed. I don't think that is intended... that really strikes me as a bug in the stat-loss.

Pets should also not be able to successfully finish casting at things they can't see (hidden, invis) or are too far away (1+ screens). That aspect of the system should be no different than it is for PCs.

 

[Wenchkin]

Ah, I didn't realise that discrepancy existed for the GD firebreath. Perhaps the most logical fix to begin with would be to work out their firebreath as 10%.

Wenchy

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

As unpopular as this will be...and in theory I complete agree with the counter argument that will be given...

...I think the devs should require 120 taming/120 lore to control a Greater Dragon.

This should be REAL skill, no jewels or items.

Taming a Greater Dragon should be the Holy Grail of taming (well, actually...taming an Ancient Wyrm should be the Holy Grail of taming...but I digress).

I know that this would cause a greater demand for powerscrolls, which I have never felt should be required. But keep in mind, every other pet in the game would be accessible to everyone that did not invest the time and the skill points and the resources into reaching the highest level of their skills.

I would still suggest to the devs that they find an alternate graphic for greater dragons. I think a re-hued (not one color like too many of our re-hued objects and creatures are) Ancient Wyrm would be perfect. It would immediately identify the creature as a Greater Dragon, and the tamer controlling it as a Legendary Tamer. It serves two purposes.

This would eliminate many of the Greater Dragons that are used in PvP, and reward tamers that reach the pinnacle of taming...for which right now, there is no real reward.

And for the record, my taming is currently 115...so this would affect me as much as it would any other tamer. I would have buy, or obtain, a 120 powerscroll, and spend the time raising my taming up to 120, and my lore as well.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

Pets should also not be able to successfully finish casting at things they can't see (hidden, invis) or are too far away (1+ screens). That aspect of the system should be no different than it is for PCs.

They aren't.

Currently, pets have the exact same casting rules as any other NPC. If they initiate the casting/fire breath while you are on screen, it follows you reguardless.

The same applies for an archer. If an archer targets you, and an arrow/bolt is fired, the effects are felt immediately. This did not used to be the case. A long time ago, there were silly animations of arrows that would chase you for screens on end, even turning corners like some kind of guided missile.

Image if you could just outrun arrows, magic, and firebreath.

No one would ever die in combat again unless they were incredibly stupid, or lost connection.

 

[Kazumi the Wild]

They aren't.

Currently, pets have the exact same casting rules as any other NPC. If they initiate the casting/fire breath while you are on screen, it follows you reguardless.

The same applies for an archer. If an archer targets you, and an arrow/bolt is fired, the effects are felt immediately. This did not used to be the case. A long time ago, there were silly animations of arrows that would chase you for screens on end, even turning corners like some kind of guided missile.

Image if you could just outrun arrows, magic, and firebreath.

No one would ever die in combat again unless they were incredibly stupid, or lost connection.

I don't think we're on the same page here, Morgana.

I was saying that, while a target that was onscreen when casting was FINISHED should still be able to be hit, I don't think a target that WAS visible and in range when casting STARTED should still be a valid target of a pet if, by the time the pet finishes casting, the target is NOT visible and/or NOT in range.

That was convoluted, so let me restate: If the target is not on screen or visible the instant a spell is finished casting, no one (NPC or PC) should be able to target them with a spell. If the target is on screen and visible, but in the time the animation takes to actually hit the PC the PC is offscreen and/or not visible, the PC should be hit (as they were a valid target when the NPC FINISHED casting).


My experience is that NPCs break targetting rules that PCs have to follow (with the exception of that archery bug). Are you arguing that NPCs should be able to break targetting rules that PCs have to follow, or have you misinterpreted my previous statements?