If the player has to sacrifice their own power to split their power so to speak it creates an interesting dynamic. The more powerful the pet, the weaker the player is on scale.
I also like the idea of upkeep to maintain pet output and/or pet numbers to encourage more diverse playstyles with augments. Different pet classes or builds so to speak could have unique ways to upkeep pet through debuffs such as maintaining a bleed as the pet survives off of blood or even enemy corpses/souls for resource upkeep etc.
Necromantic and nature could have entirely different upkeep methods for pets.
I dont really think pets should be able to hold threat stronger than tanks or even be close to competing with them especially for PvE. Just game breaking and encourages solo play.
So, you're happy for a healing pet to outpace a bard at healing or match a bard at healing and a dps pet to assist an actual tank (tank doesn't need much power just defence) and yet you won't let dps have a tanking pet?
Honestly, I've seen a lot of broken pets in mmorpg's where the pet just tanks a group and the player sits back with their thumb in their a** while they melt the mob(s) lol. What an amazing skillset for such an immersive experience
Then you got pets that can pull threat and aggro from the tank and hold it quite easily. It's awful in my opinion. I'd rather a tug-o-war of power shifting between the player and the pet. Bring some more risk to the players side to prevent such detrimental design to the game.
I never mentioned anything about a healing pet outpacing a bard. To be honest, I feel there shouldn't be a healing pet especially to the degree you're imagining. Leave the healing to the players. Kind of reminds me of SWTOR where you could solo the first group dungeon with just a healer companion if you kited the boss around a pillar lol. That game definitely had its faults.
A tank sacrificing their power for a dps pet seems like a weird take but I suppose in some ways the primary and secondary archetypes do cross at some point if that's how it is for the tank/summoner. I do like the idea of the players sacrificing X% of power for pet 1, Y% power for pet 2, Z% power for pet 3 etc. How that directly translates to the pet should be an interesting dev discussion when they get to summoner archetype. Who knows, maybe a tank/summoner just uses summons as the spell shape? maybe soak effigy? we'll have to see
Yeah, I mean when I imagine a Tank Pet I think of the Dev Discussion on Tanks in general and how we all wanted Tanks to lose aggro sometimes to keep tanks on their toes. I envision the tank pets to use the same systems and not act like glue. Same applies to the tanks in general.
Summoner with Cleric Secondary can match or surpass Bard Heals with Summons already. I see no reason not to have a healing pet that is actually capable of healing better than not. Would i advise these healing pets are able to heal anyone but the master? I'm not so sure.
That's a fair point. A lot of tanking and threat management is very glue-like as you mentioned. This is why I mentioned the pet could be a spell shape or effigy. Maybe you summon an object that blocks for you or an animated "being", they're all shapes to me lol.
Say you sacrifice 30% of your power to summon, you only have 70% left. Ideally it's the same thing, you're just creating two entities for the power split. The pet in most situations isn't going to be able to do more than the 30% power output you gave it. Just a different way to do the same thing essentially. Pet's can come in all different shapes and forms ranging from animals, beasts, inanimate objects like totems/effigies. etc.
Add upkeep through output management and you got yourself an interesting dynamic in my opinion.
Well, I like that we can equip and level the pets. I prefer if the 30% power loss is not a direct charge of power to the pet. Thus, the pet is kind of in isolation but would die without support from the player. I want to be able to level pets and then sell pets at max level etc. I want to be able to build the pets up and watch the pets grow. I want the pets to be useful but not more powerful than my toon.
I'm not entirely sure what the direct transfer of power will be from player sacrifice to pet power but I don't see the pets being more powerful than the players. It's just a sacrifice X% to boost X%. Just more of an extension of the players versatility of class and design. Certain pets may have genetically exclusive traits/abilities if I am to go off your information about raising them. The player/host is ideally the primary.
Yeah I agree. I think we won't know the full scope until the live game. I think A2 will thrash out the actual details and a lot of changes will be made. Its pointless discussing the actual sums right now. Especially if the pet can be geared or bred differently by a breeder etc.
I will make an interesting point though going back to your cleric + summoner point.
Hypothetically, a cleric + summoner would be primarily a cleric first, with summoner like abilities while being able to potentially use cleric/summoner pets. We could see abilities come off as holy with spirit-like vfx such as a wave of holy spirits as an examples.
Similarly yet quite different,
a summoner + cleric would primarily be summoner first with the summons being more cleric-like with the allowance of similar pet types BUT they could also be allowed to use a larger range of pet types because primarily they are a summoner archetype. Hypothetically, we could see summons ranging drastically different while engaging with cleric-like VFX.
Of course then we get into augments, religion etc. I do believe we will see summoner primary have some sort of advantage with obviously summons. The players that split their power could have a drawback if the pet dies with cool down from returning lost power. That's why the tug-o-war could be interesting in temporarily shifting a little extra power back and forth while not undermining the initial power loss of different summon strengths vs sacrifice.
Also I will say with how players can group summon in sieges, I hope we see higher penalties for great battle summons like siege ogres or siege beasts brought into the battle field.
Well, a summoner+cleric can have dps minions (Death) or healing minions (Life) but, there are also two other augment schools hidden for Cleric. As you say, augments can come from elsewhere too. So its a difficult one to call but Summoner can replace any other class in a group - including support classes. Summons and pets can't buff others or the master so that means these creatures must only heal. So, its difficult to know until we see summoner in action.
Obviously we wont know until they let us know more. This is exactly why summoner classes are usually the last in development to be worked on and revealed. But this doesn't mean that the summoner + cleric wont be able to primarily heal/support while the pet theoretically does other actions around status effects going off what we previously discussed with power splitting to two entities.
Well, the summoner page on the wiki explains there are three types of summons (the same types as combat pets). I'm not certain a summoner can heal with active abilities except predominantly self heals through the 'life' augmented school. I imagine the 'life' augmented school would change the summons to healing pets which can heal others.
If the player has to sacrifice their own power to split their power so to speak it creates an interesting dynamic. The more powerful the pet, the weaker the player is on scale.
I also like the idea of upkeep to maintain pet output and/or pet numbers to encourage more diverse playstyles with augments. Different pet classes or builds so to speak could have unique ways to upkeep pet through debuffs such as maintaining a bleed as the pet survives off of blood or even enemy corpses/souls for resource upkeep etc.
Necromantic and nature could have entirely different upkeep methods for pets.
I dont really think pets should be able to hold threat stronger than tanks or even be close to competing with them especially for PvE. Just game breaking and encourages solo play.
So, you're happy for a healing pet to outpace a bard at healing or match a bard at healing and a dps pet to assist an actual tank (tank doesn't need much power just defence) and yet you won't let dps have a tanking pet?
Honestly, I've seen a lot of broken pets in mmorpg's where the pet just tanks a group and the player sits back with their thumb in their a** while they melt the mob(s) lol. What an amazing skillset for such an immersive experience
Then you got pets that can pull threat and aggro from the tank and hold it quite easily. It's awful in my opinion. I'd rather a tug-o-war of power shifting between the player and the pet. Bring some more risk to the players side to prevent such detrimental design to the game.
I never mentioned anything about a healing pet outpacing a bard. To be honest, I feel there shouldn't be a healing pet especially to the degree you're imagining. Leave the healing to the players. Kind of reminds me of SWTOR where you could solo the first group dungeon with just a healer companion if you kited the boss around a pillar lol. That game definitely had its faults.
A tank sacrificing their power for a dps pet seems like a weird take but I suppose in some ways the primary and secondary archetypes do cross at some point if that's how it is for the tank/summoner. I do like the idea of the players sacrificing X% of power for pet 1, Y% power for pet 2, Z% power for pet 3 etc. How that directly translates to the pet should be an interesting dev discussion when they get to summoner archetype. Who knows, maybe a tank/summoner just uses summons as the spell shape? maybe soak effigy? we'll have to see
Yeah, I mean when I imagine a Tank Pet I think of the Dev Discussion on Tanks in general and how we all wanted Tanks to lose aggro sometimes to keep tanks on their toes. I envision the tank pets to use the same systems and not act like glue. Same applies to the tanks in general.
Summoner with Cleric Secondary can match or surpass Bard Heals with Summons already. I see no reason not to have a healing pet that is actually capable of healing better than not. Would i advise these healing pets are able to heal anyone but the master? I'm not so sure.
That's a fair point. A lot of tanking and threat management is very glue-like as you mentioned. This is why I mentioned the pet could be a spell shape or effigy. Maybe you summon an object that blocks for you or an animated "being", they're all shapes to me lol.
Say you sacrifice 30% of your power to summon, you only have 70% left. Ideally it's the same thing, you're just creating two entities for the power split. The pet in most situations isn't going to be able to do more than the 30% power output you gave it. Just a different way to do the same thing essentially. Pet's can come in all different shapes and forms ranging from animals, beasts, inanimate objects like totems/effigies. etc.
Add upkeep through output management and you got yourself an interesting dynamic in my opinion.
Well, I like that we can equip and level the pets. I prefer if the 30% power loss is not a direct charge of power to the pet. Thus, the pet is kind of in isolation but would die without support from the player. I want to be able to level pets and then sell pets at max level etc. I want to be able to build the pets up and watch the pets grow. I want the pets to be useful but not more powerful than my toon.
I'm not entirely sure what the direct transfer of power will be from player sacrifice to pet power but I don't see the pets being more powerful than the players. It's just a sacrifice X% to boost X%. Just more of an extension of the players versatility of class and design. Certain pets may have genetically exclusive traits/abilities if I am to go off your information about raising them. The player/host is ideally the primary.
Yeah I agree. I think we won't know the full scope until the live game. I think A2 will thrash out the actual details and a lot of changes will be made. Its pointless discussing the actual sums right now. Especially if the pet can be geared or bred differently by a breeder etc.
I will make an interesting point though going back to your cleric + summoner point.
Hypothetically, a cleric + summoner would be primarily a cleric first, with summoner like abilities while being able to potentially use cleric/summoner pets. We could see abilities come off as holy with spirit-like vfx such as a wave of holy spirits as an examples.
Similarly yet quite different,
a summoner + cleric would primarily be summoner first with the summons being more cleric-like with the allowance of similar pet types BUT they could also be allowed to use a larger range of pet types because primarily they are a summoner archetype. Hypothetically, we could see summons ranging drastically different while engaging with cleric-like VFX.
Of course then we get into augments, religion etc. I do believe we will see summoner primary have some sort of advantage with obviously summons. The players that split their power could have a drawback if the pet dies with cool down from returning lost power. That's why the tug-o-war could be interesting in temporarily shifting a little extra power back and forth while not undermining the initial power loss of different summon strengths vs sacrifice.
Also I will say with how players can group summon in sieges, I hope we see higher penalties for great battle summons like siege ogres or siege beasts brought into the battle field.
Well, a summoner+cleric can have dps minions (Death) or healing minions (Life) but, there are also two other augment schools hidden for Cleric. As you say, augments can come from elsewhere too. So its a difficult one to call but Summoner can replace any other class in a group - including support classes. Summons and pets can't buff others or the master so that means these creatures must only heal. So, its difficult to know until we see summoner in action.
Obviously we wont know until they let us know more. This is exactly why summoner classes are usually the last in development to be worked on and revealed. But this doesn't mean that the summoner + cleric wont be able to primarily heal/support while the pet theoretically does other actions around status effects going off what we previously discussed with power splitting to two entities.
Well, the summoner page on the wiki explains there are three types of summons (the same types as combat pets). I'm not certain a summoner can heal with active abilities except predominantly self heals through the 'life' augmented school. I imagine the 'life' augmented school would change the summons to healing pets which can heal others.
It's possible, but if the power split exists it would in theory be less powerful than if the class casted it.
100 power - 30 power to the pet would imply the players allowances are 70%.
This does not necessarily mean the pet will have the same power of the healer as together they will still need to equal 100 power.
A summoner primary archetype on it's own may not have cleric heals but when combined with secondary archetype cleric it would essentially have access to heals and cleric-like abilities shared through its summoned pet of choice to some extent. As far as I know, we don't know how many active pets they can have either. I'm assuming 1 specifically from the power split. Maybe temporarily ones through augments and abilities as means to potentially buff host, pet and indirectly party? Maybe we'll see some holy circles of power where if the host and pet stay in proximity there could be benefits
If the player has to sacrifice their own power to split their power so to speak it creates an interesting dynamic. The more powerful the pet, the weaker the player is on scale.
I also like the idea of upkeep to maintain pet output and/or pet numbers to encourage more diverse playstyles with augments. Different pet classes or builds so to speak could have unique ways to upkeep pet through debuffs such as maintaining a bleed as the pet survives off of blood or even enemy corpses/souls for resource upkeep etc.
Necromantic and nature could have entirely different upkeep methods for pets.
I dont really think pets should be able to hold threat stronger than tanks or even be close to competing with them especially for PvE. Just game breaking and encourages solo play.
So, you're happy for a healing pet to outpace a bard at healing or match a bard at healing and a dps pet to assist an actual tank (tank doesn't need much power just defence) and yet you won't let dps have a tanking pet?
Honestly, I've seen a lot of broken pets in mmorpg's where the pet just tanks a group and the player sits back with their thumb in their a** while they melt the mob(s) lol. What an amazing skillset for such an immersive experience
Then you got pets that can pull threat and aggro from the tank and hold it quite easily. It's awful in my opinion. I'd rather a tug-o-war of power shifting between the player and the pet. Bring some more risk to the players side to prevent such detrimental design to the game.
I never mentioned anything about a healing pet outpacing a bard. To be honest, I feel there shouldn't be a healing pet especially to the degree you're imagining. Leave the healing to the players. Kind of reminds me of SWTOR where you could solo the first group dungeon with just a healer companion if you kited the boss around a pillar lol. That game definitely had its faults.
A tank sacrificing their power for a dps pet seems like a weird take but I suppose in some ways the primary and secondary archetypes do cross at some point if that's how it is for the tank/summoner. I do like the idea of the players sacrificing X% of power for pet 1, Y% power for pet 2, Z% power for pet 3 etc. How that directly translates to the pet should be an interesting dev discussion when they get to summoner archetype. Who knows, maybe a tank/summoner just uses summons as the spell shape? maybe soak effigy? we'll have to see
Yeah, I mean when I imagine a Tank Pet I think of the Dev Discussion on Tanks in general and how we all wanted Tanks to lose aggro sometimes to keep tanks on their toes. I envision the tank pets to use the same systems and not act like glue. Same applies to the tanks in general.
Summoner with Cleric Secondary can match or surpass Bard Heals with Summons already. I see no reason not to have a healing pet that is actually capable of healing better than not. Would i advise these healing pets are able to heal anyone but the master? I'm not so sure.
That's a fair point. A lot of tanking and threat management is very glue-like as you mentioned. This is why I mentioned the pet could be a spell shape or effigy. Maybe you summon an object that blocks for you or an animated "being", they're all shapes to me lol.
Say you sacrifice 30% of your power to summon, you only have 70% left. Ideally it's the same thing, you're just creating two entities for the power split. The pet in most situations isn't going to be able to do more than the 30% power output you gave it. Just a different way to do the same thing essentially. Pet's can come in all different shapes and forms ranging from animals, beasts, inanimate objects like totems/effigies. etc.
Add upkeep through output management and you got yourself an interesting dynamic in my opinion.
Well, I like that we can equip and level the pets. I prefer if the 30% power loss is not a direct charge of power to the pet. Thus, the pet is kind of in isolation but would die without support from the player. I want to be able to level pets and then sell pets at max level etc. I want to be able to build the pets up and watch the pets grow. I want the pets to be useful but not more powerful than my toon.
I'm not entirely sure what the direct transfer of power will be from player sacrifice to pet power but I don't see the pets being more powerful than the players. It's just a sacrifice X% to boost X%. Just more of an extension of the players versatility of class and design. Certain pets may have genetically exclusive traits/abilities if I am to go off your information about raising them. The player/host is ideally the primary.
Yeah I agree. I think we won't know the full scope until the live game. I think A2 will thrash out the actual details and a lot of changes will be made. Its pointless discussing the actual sums right now. Especially if the pet can be geared or bred differently by a breeder etc.
I will make an interesting point though going back to your cleric + summoner point.
Hypothetically, a cleric + summoner would be primarily a cleric first, with summoner like abilities while being able to potentially use cleric/summoner pets. We could see abilities come off as holy with spirit-like vfx such as a wave of holy spirits as an examples.
Similarly yet quite different,
a summoner + cleric would primarily be summoner first with the summons being more cleric-like with the allowance of similar pet types BUT they could also be allowed to use a larger range of pet types because primarily they are a summoner archetype. Hypothetically, we could see summons ranging drastically different while engaging with cleric-like VFX.
Of course then we get into augments, religion etc. I do believe we will see summoner primary have some sort of advantage with obviously summons. The players that split their power could have a drawback if the pet dies with cool down from returning lost power. That's why the tug-o-war could be interesting in temporarily shifting a little extra power back and forth while not undermining the initial power loss of different summon strengths vs sacrifice.
Also I will say with how players can group summon in sieges, I hope we see higher penalties for great battle summons like siege ogres or siege beasts brought into the battle field.
Well, a summoner+cleric can have dps minions (Death) or healing minions (Life) but, there are also two other augment schools hidden for Cleric. As you say, augments can come from elsewhere too. So its a difficult one to call but Summoner can replace any other class in a group - including support classes. Summons and pets can't buff others or the master so that means these creatures must only heal. So, its difficult to know until we see summoner in action.
Obviously we wont know until they let us know more. This is exactly why summoner classes are usually the last in development to be worked on and revealed. But this doesn't mean that the summoner + cleric wont be able to primarily heal/support while the pet theoretically does other actions around status effects going off what we previously discussed with power splitting to two entities.
Well, the summoner page on the wiki explains there are three types of summons (the same types as combat pets). I'm not certain a summoner can heal with active abilities except predominantly self heals through the 'life' augmented school. I imagine the 'life' augmented school would change the summons to healing pets which can heal others.
It's possible, but if the power split exists it would in theory be less powerful than if the class casted it.
100 power - 30 power to the pet would imply the players allowances are 70%.
This does not necessarily mean the pet will have the same power of the healer as together they will still need to equal 100 power.
A summoner primary archetype on it's own may not have cleric heals but when combined with secondary archetype cleric it would essentially have access to heals and cleric-like abilities shared through its summoned pet of choice to some extent. As far as I know, we don't know how many active pets they can have either. I'm assuming 1 specifically from the power split. Maybe temporarily ones through augments and abilities as means to potentially buff host, pet and indirectly party? Maybe we'll see some holy circles of power where if the host and pet stay in proximity there could be benefits
Well, 3 x 30 = 90 so they might be 10 off a Cleric. Of course, you'd prefer a full Cleric to be in the group (at least I would) for various reasons, but, a summoner at 90 cleric power plus a Bard at 100% Bard power (can heal based on procs and also buff the heals of the summons) means you won't have the overheal equivalent of a buffed cleric but you would have more than a full Cleric. Add to that a healing combat pet and you have 4 pets that are healing, which should surpass a full cleric in terms of raw power but not necessarily in terms of skill. I'm not stating these as facts but I've used your calculations.
If the player has to sacrifice their own power to split their power so to speak it creates an interesting dynamic. The more powerful the pet, the weaker the player is on scale.
I also like the idea of upkeep to maintain pet output and/or pet numbers to encourage more diverse playstyles with augments. Different pet classes or builds so to speak could have unique ways to upkeep pet through debuffs such as maintaining a bleed as the pet survives off of blood or even enemy corpses/souls for resource upkeep etc.
Necromantic and nature could have entirely different upkeep methods for pets.
I dont really think pets should be able to hold threat stronger than tanks or even be close to competing with them especially for PvE. Just game breaking and encourages solo play.
So, you're happy for a healing pet to outpace a bard at healing or match a bard at healing and a dps pet to assist an actual tank (tank doesn't need much power just defence) and yet you won't let dps have a tanking pet?
Honestly, I've seen a lot of broken pets in mmorpg's where the pet just tanks a group and the player sits back with their thumb in their a** while they melt the mob(s) lol. What an amazing skillset for such an immersive experience
Then you got pets that can pull threat and aggro from the tank and hold it quite easily. It's awful in my opinion. I'd rather a tug-o-war of power shifting between the player and the pet. Bring some more risk to the players side to prevent such detrimental design to the game.
I never mentioned anything about a healing pet outpacing a bard. To be honest, I feel there shouldn't be a healing pet especially to the degree you're imagining. Leave the healing to the players. Kind of reminds me of SWTOR where you could solo the first group dungeon with just a healer companion if you kited the boss around a pillar lol. That game definitely had its faults.
A tank sacrificing their power for a dps pet seems like a weird take but I suppose in some ways the primary and secondary archetypes do cross at some point if that's how it is for the tank/summoner. I do like the idea of the players sacrificing X% of power for pet 1, Y% power for pet 2, Z% power for pet 3 etc. How that directly translates to the pet should be an interesting dev discussion when they get to summoner archetype. Who knows, maybe a tank/summoner just uses summons as the spell shape? maybe soak effigy? we'll have to see
Yeah, I mean when I imagine a Tank Pet I think of the Dev Discussion on Tanks in general and how we all wanted Tanks to lose aggro sometimes to keep tanks on their toes. I envision the tank pets to use the same systems and not act like glue. Same applies to the tanks in general.
Summoner with Cleric Secondary can match or surpass Bard Heals with Summons already. I see no reason not to have a healing pet that is actually capable of healing better than not. Would i advise these healing pets are able to heal anyone but the master? I'm not so sure.
That's a fair point. A lot of tanking and threat management is very glue-like as you mentioned. This is why I mentioned the pet could be a spell shape or effigy. Maybe you summon an object that blocks for you or an animated "being", they're all shapes to me lol.
Say you sacrifice 30% of your power to summon, you only have 70% left. Ideally it's the same thing, you're just creating two entities for the power split. The pet in most situations isn't going to be able to do more than the 30% power output you gave it. Just a different way to do the same thing essentially. Pet's can come in all different shapes and forms ranging from animals, beasts, inanimate objects like totems/effigies. etc.
Add upkeep through output management and you got yourself an interesting dynamic in my opinion.
Well, I like that we can equip and level the pets. I prefer if the 30% power loss is not a direct charge of power to the pet. Thus, the pet is kind of in isolation but would die without support from the player. I want to be able to level pets and then sell pets at max level etc. I want to be able to build the pets up and watch the pets grow. I want the pets to be useful but not more powerful than my toon.
I'm not entirely sure what the direct transfer of power will be from player sacrifice to pet power but I don't see the pets being more powerful than the players. It's just a sacrifice X% to boost X%. Just more of an extension of the players versatility of class and design. Certain pets may have genetically exclusive traits/abilities if I am to go off your information about raising them. The player/host is ideally the primary.
Yeah I agree. I think we won't know the full scope until the live game. I think A2 will thrash out the actual details and a lot of changes will be made. Its pointless discussing the actual sums right now. Especially if the pet can be geared or bred differently by a breeder etc.
I will make an interesting point though going back to your cleric + summoner point.
Hypothetically, a cleric + summoner would be primarily a cleric first, with summoner like abilities while being able to potentially use cleric/summoner pets. We could see abilities come off as holy with spirit-like vfx such as a wave of holy spirits as an examples.
Similarly yet quite different,
a summoner + cleric would primarily be summoner first with the summons being more cleric-like with the allowance of similar pet types BUT they could also be allowed to use a larger range of pet types because primarily they are a summoner archetype. Hypothetically, we could see summons ranging drastically different while engaging with cleric-like VFX.
Of course then we get into augments, religion etc. I do believe we will see summoner primary have some sort of advantage with obviously summons. The players that split their power could have a drawback if the pet dies with cool down from returning lost power. That's why the tug-o-war could be interesting in temporarily shifting a little extra power back and forth while not undermining the initial power loss of different summon strengths vs sacrifice.
Also I will say with how players can group summon in sieges, I hope we see higher penalties for great battle summons like siege ogres or siege beasts brought into the battle field.
Well, a summoner+cleric can have dps minions (Death) or healing minions (Life) but, there are also two other augment schools hidden for Cleric. As you say, augments can come from elsewhere too. So its a difficult one to call but Summoner can replace any other class in a group - including support classes. Summons and pets can't buff others or the master so that means these creatures must only heal. So, its difficult to know until we see summoner in action.
Obviously we wont know until they let us know more. This is exactly why summoner classes are usually the last in development to be worked on and revealed. But this doesn't mean that the summoner + cleric wont be able to primarily heal/support while the pet theoretically does other actions around status effects going off what we previously discussed with power splitting to two entities.
Well, the summoner page on the wiki explains there are three types of summons (the same types as combat pets). I'm not certain a summoner can heal with active abilities except predominantly self heals through the 'life' augmented school. I imagine the 'life' augmented school would change the summons to healing pets which can heal others.
It's possible, but if the power split exists it would in theory be less powerful than if the class casted it.
100 power - 30 power to the pet would imply the players allowances are 70%.
This does not necessarily mean the pet will have the same power of the healer as together they will still need to equal 100 power.
A summoner primary archetype on it's own may not have cleric heals but when combined with secondary archetype cleric it would essentially have access to heals and cleric-like abilities shared through its summoned pet of choice to some extent. As far as I know, we don't know how many active pets they can have either. I'm assuming 1 specifically from the power split. Maybe temporarily ones through augments and abilities as means to potentially buff host, pet and indirectly party? Maybe we'll see some holy circles of power where if the host and pet stay in proximity there could be benefits
Well, 3 x 30 = 90 so they might be 10 off a Cleric. Of course, you'd prefer a full Cleric to be in the group (at least I would) for various reasons, but, a summoner at 90 cleric power plus a Bard at 100% Bard power (can heal based on procs and also buff the heals of the summons) means you won't have the overheal equivalent of a buffed cleric but you would have more than a full Cleric. Add to that a healing combat pet and you have 4 pets that are healing, which should surpass a full cleric in terms of raw power but not necessarily in terms of skill. I'm not stating these as facts but I've used your calculations.
That's all part of the versatility you can bring to the table with summons and archetype manipulation via augments. If the minimum you can sacrifice to the pet is 30%, that 30% is gone from you, that may also include your HP and Resource. If the player just has to sacrifice literal attack power then that is quite detrimental to design lol.
Again, this is assuming you're allowed to have multiple pets summoned at once by your comment, if you summon 3 pets at 30%, you're only left with 10% which means if you take a big hit, you pretty much failed at your role lol as if you die, your pets would die too and eventually your party.
If you're over healing a lot outside of things like Heal Over Time abilities, this would imply you're not doing a great job in higher end content because of resource management and group play. Healing isn't supposed to a spam fest as you would see in wow where the combat is wet sponges and the healer is a water hydrant lol
If the player has to sacrifice their own power to split their power so to speak it creates an interesting dynamic. The more powerful the pet, the weaker the player is on scale.
I also like the idea of upkeep to maintain pet output and/or pet numbers to encourage more diverse playstyles with augments. Different pet classes or builds so to speak could have unique ways to upkeep pet through debuffs such as maintaining a bleed as the pet survives off of blood or even enemy corpses/souls for resource upkeep etc.
Necromantic and nature could have entirely different upkeep methods for pets.
I dont really think pets should be able to hold threat stronger than tanks or even be close to competing with them especially for PvE. Just game breaking and encourages solo play.
So, you're happy for a healing pet to outpace a bard at healing or match a bard at healing and a dps pet to assist an actual tank (tank doesn't need much power just defence) and yet you won't let dps have a tanking pet?
Honestly, I've seen a lot of broken pets in mmorpg's where the pet just tanks a group and the player sits back with their thumb in their a** while they melt the mob(s) lol. What an amazing skillset for such an immersive experience
Then you got pets that can pull threat and aggro from the tank and hold it quite easily. It's awful in my opinion. I'd rather a tug-o-war of power shifting between the player and the pet. Bring some more risk to the players side to prevent such detrimental design to the game.
I never mentioned anything about a healing pet outpacing a bard. To be honest, I feel there shouldn't be a healing pet especially to the degree you're imagining. Leave the healing to the players. Kind of reminds me of SWTOR where you could solo the first group dungeon with just a healer companion if you kited the boss around a pillar lol. That game definitely had its faults.
A tank sacrificing their power for a dps pet seems like a weird take but I suppose in some ways the primary and secondary archetypes do cross at some point if that's how it is for the tank/summoner. I do like the idea of the players sacrificing X% of power for pet 1, Y% power for pet 2, Z% power for pet 3 etc. How that directly translates to the pet should be an interesting dev discussion when they get to summoner archetype. Who knows, maybe a tank/summoner just uses summons as the spell shape? maybe soak effigy? we'll have to see
Yeah, I mean when I imagine a Tank Pet I think of the Dev Discussion on Tanks in general and how we all wanted Tanks to lose aggro sometimes to keep tanks on their toes. I envision the tank pets to use the same systems and not act like glue. Same applies to the tanks in general.
Summoner with Cleric Secondary can match or surpass Bard Heals with Summons already. I see no reason not to have a healing pet that is actually capable of healing better than not. Would i advise these healing pets are able to heal anyone but the master? I'm not so sure.
That's a fair point. A lot of tanking and threat management is very glue-like as you mentioned. This is why I mentioned the pet could be a spell shape or effigy. Maybe you summon an object that blocks for you or an animated "being", they're all shapes to me lol.
Say you sacrifice 30% of your power to summon, you only have 70% left. Ideally it's the same thing, you're just creating two entities for the power split. The pet in most situations isn't going to be able to do more than the 30% power output you gave it. Just a different way to do the same thing essentially. Pet's can come in all different shapes and forms ranging from animals, beasts, inanimate objects like totems/effigies. etc.
Add upkeep through output management and you got yourself an interesting dynamic in my opinion.
Well, I like that we can equip and level the pets. I prefer if the 30% power loss is not a direct charge of power to the pet. Thus, the pet is kind of in isolation but would die without support from the player. I want to be able to level pets and then sell pets at max level etc. I want to be able to build the pets up and watch the pets grow. I want the pets to be useful but not more powerful than my toon.
I'm not entirely sure what the direct transfer of power will be from player sacrifice to pet power but I don't see the pets being more powerful than the players. It's just a sacrifice X% to boost X%. Just more of an extension of the players versatility of class and design. Certain pets may have genetically exclusive traits/abilities if I am to go off your information about raising them. The player/host is ideally the primary.
Yeah I agree. I think we won't know the full scope until the live game. I think A2 will thrash out the actual details and a lot of changes will be made. Its pointless discussing the actual sums right now. Especially if the pet can be geared or bred differently by a breeder etc.
I will make an interesting point though going back to your cleric + summoner point.
Hypothetically, a cleric + summoner would be primarily a cleric first, with summoner like abilities while being able to potentially use cleric/summoner pets. We could see abilities come off as holy with spirit-like vfx such as a wave of holy spirits as an examples.
Similarly yet quite different,
a summoner + cleric would primarily be summoner first with the summons being more cleric-like with the allowance of similar pet types BUT they could also be allowed to use a larger range of pet types because primarily they are a summoner archetype. Hypothetically, we could see summons ranging drastically different while engaging with cleric-like VFX.
Of course then we get into augments, religion etc. I do believe we will see summoner primary have some sort of advantage with obviously summons. The players that split their power could have a drawback if the pet dies with cool down from returning lost power. That's why the tug-o-war could be interesting in temporarily shifting a little extra power back and forth while not undermining the initial power loss of different summon strengths vs sacrifice.
Also I will say with how players can group summon in sieges, I hope we see higher penalties for great battle summons like siege ogres or siege beasts brought into the battle field.
Well, a summoner+cleric can have dps minions (Death) or healing minions (Life) but, there are also two other augment schools hidden for Cleric. As you say, augments can come from elsewhere too. So its a difficult one to call but Summoner can replace any other class in a group - including support classes. Summons and pets can't buff others or the master so that means these creatures must only heal. So, its difficult to know until we see summoner in action.
Obviously we wont know until they let us know more. This is exactly why summoner classes are usually the last in development to be worked on and revealed. But this doesn't mean that the summoner + cleric wont be able to primarily heal/support while the pet theoretically does other actions around status effects going off what we previously discussed with power splitting to two entities.
Well, the summoner page on the wiki explains there are three types of summons (the same types as combat pets). I'm not certain a summoner can heal with active abilities except predominantly self heals through the 'life' augmented school. I imagine the 'life' augmented school would change the summons to healing pets which can heal others.
It's possible, but if the power split exists it would in theory be less powerful than if the class casted it.
100 power - 30 power to the pet would imply the players allowances are 70%.
This does not necessarily mean the pet will have the same power of the healer as together they will still need to equal 100 power.
A summoner primary archetype on it's own may not have cleric heals but when combined with secondary archetype cleric it would essentially have access to heals and cleric-like abilities shared through its summoned pet of choice to some extent. As far as I know, we don't know how many active pets they can have either. I'm assuming 1 specifically from the power split. Maybe temporarily ones through augments and abilities as means to potentially buff host, pet and indirectly party? Maybe we'll see some holy circles of power where if the host and pet stay in proximity there could be benefits
Well, 3 x 30 = 90 so they might be 10 off a Cleric. Of course, you'd prefer a full Cleric to be in the group (at least I would) for various reasons, but, a summoner at 90 cleric power plus a Bard at 100% Bard power (can heal based on procs and also buff the heals of the summons) means you won't have the overheal equivalent of a buffed cleric but you would have more than a full Cleric. Add to that a healing combat pet and you have 4 pets that are healing, which should surpass a full cleric in terms of raw power but not necessarily in terms of skill. I'm not stating these as facts but I've used your calculations.
That's all part of the versatility you can bring to the table with summons and archetype manipulation via augments. If the minimum you can sacrifice to the pet is 30%, that 30% is gone from you, that may also include your HP and Resource. If the player just has to sacrifice literal attack power then that is quite detrimental to design lol.
Again, this is assuming you're allowed to have multiple pets summoned at once by your comment, if you summon 3 pets at 30%, you're only left with 10% which means if you take a big hit, you pretty much failed at your role lol as if you die, your pets would die too and eventually your party.
If you're over healing a lot outside of things like Heal Over Time abilities, this would imply you're not doing a great job in higher end content because of resource management and group play. Healing isn't supposed to a spam fest as you would see in wow where the combat is wet sponges and the healer is a water hydrant lol
bear in mind, the summons boost the summoners power unlike the combat pet. SO without the summons the summoner would be at 10% power with your calculations, but, with the summons the summoner would be at 100%. With the combat pet at your calculations the summoner would be at 70%.
If the player has to sacrifice their own power to split their power so to speak it creates an interesting dynamic. The more powerful the pet, the weaker the player is on scale.
I also like the idea of upkeep to maintain pet output and/or pet numbers to encourage more diverse playstyles with augments. Different pet classes or builds so to speak could have unique ways to upkeep pet through debuffs such as maintaining a bleed as the pet survives off of blood or even enemy corpses/souls for resource upkeep etc.
Necromantic and nature could have entirely different upkeep methods for pets.
I dont really think pets should be able to hold threat stronger than tanks or even be close to competing with them especially for PvE. Just game breaking and encourages solo play.
So, you're happy for a healing pet to outpace a bard at healing or match a bard at healing and a dps pet to assist an actual tank (tank doesn't need much power just defence) and yet you won't let dps have a tanking pet?
Honestly, I've seen a lot of broken pets in mmorpg's where the pet just tanks a group and the player sits back with their thumb in their a** while they melt the mob(s) lol. What an amazing skillset for such an immersive experience
Then you got pets that can pull threat and aggro from the tank and hold it quite easily. It's awful in my opinion. I'd rather a tug-o-war of power shifting between the player and the pet. Bring some more risk to the players side to prevent such detrimental design to the game.
I never mentioned anything about a healing pet outpacing a bard. To be honest, I feel there shouldn't be a healing pet especially to the degree you're imagining. Leave the healing to the players. Kind of reminds me of SWTOR where you could solo the first group dungeon with just a healer companion if you kited the boss around a pillar lol. That game definitely had its faults.
A tank sacrificing their power for a dps pet seems like a weird take but I suppose in some ways the primary and secondary archetypes do cross at some point if that's how it is for the tank/summoner. I do like the idea of the players sacrificing X% of power for pet 1, Y% power for pet 2, Z% power for pet 3 etc. How that directly translates to the pet should be an interesting dev discussion when they get to summoner archetype. Who knows, maybe a tank/summoner just uses summons as the spell shape? maybe soak effigy? we'll have to see
Yeah, I mean when I imagine a Tank Pet I think of the Dev Discussion on Tanks in general and how we all wanted Tanks to lose aggro sometimes to keep tanks on their toes. I envision the tank pets to use the same systems and not act like glue. Same applies to the tanks in general.
Summoner with Cleric Secondary can match or surpass Bard Heals with Summons already. I see no reason not to have a healing pet that is actually capable of healing better than not. Would i advise these healing pets are able to heal anyone but the master? I'm not so sure.
That's a fair point. A lot of tanking and threat management is very glue-like as you mentioned. This is why I mentioned the pet could be a spell shape or effigy. Maybe you summon an object that blocks for you or an animated "being", they're all shapes to me lol.
Say you sacrifice 30% of your power to summon, you only have 70% left. Ideally it's the same thing, you're just creating two entities for the power split. The pet in most situations isn't going to be able to do more than the 30% power output you gave it. Just a different way to do the same thing essentially. Pet's can come in all different shapes and forms ranging from animals, beasts, inanimate objects like totems/effigies. etc.
Add upkeep through output management and you got yourself an interesting dynamic in my opinion.
Well, I like that we can equip and level the pets. I prefer if the 30% power loss is not a direct charge of power to the pet. Thus, the pet is kind of in isolation but would die without support from the player. I want to be able to level pets and then sell pets at max level etc. I want to be able to build the pets up and watch the pets grow. I want the pets to be useful but not more powerful than my toon.
I'm not entirely sure what the direct transfer of power will be from player sacrifice to pet power but I don't see the pets being more powerful than the players. It's just a sacrifice X% to boost X%. Just more of an extension of the players versatility of class and design. Certain pets may have genetically exclusive traits/abilities if I am to go off your information about raising them. The player/host is ideally the primary.
Yeah I agree. I think we won't know the full scope until the live game. I think A2 will thrash out the actual details and a lot of changes will be made. Its pointless discussing the actual sums right now. Especially if the pet can be geared or bred differently by a breeder etc.
I will make an interesting point though going back to your cleric + summoner point.
Hypothetically, a cleric + summoner would be primarily a cleric first, with summoner like abilities while being able to potentially use cleric/summoner pets. We could see abilities come off as holy with spirit-like vfx such as a wave of holy spirits as an examples.
Similarly yet quite different,
a summoner + cleric would primarily be summoner first with the summons being more cleric-like with the allowance of similar pet types BUT they could also be allowed to use a larger range of pet types because primarily they are a summoner archetype. Hypothetically, we could see summons ranging drastically different while engaging with cleric-like VFX.
Of course then we get into augments, religion etc. I do believe we will see summoner primary have some sort of advantage with obviously summons. The players that split their power could have a drawback if the pet dies with cool down from returning lost power. That's why the tug-o-war could be interesting in temporarily shifting a little extra power back and forth while not undermining the initial power loss of different summon strengths vs sacrifice.
Also I will say with how players can group summon in sieges, I hope we see higher penalties for great battle summons like siege ogres or siege beasts brought into the battle field.
Well, a summoner+cleric can have dps minions (Death) or healing minions (Life) but, there are also two other augment schools hidden for Cleric. As you say, augments can come from elsewhere too. So its a difficult one to call but Summoner can replace any other class in a group - including support classes. Summons and pets can't buff others or the master so that means these creatures must only heal. So, its difficult to know until we see summoner in action.
Obviously we wont know until they let us know more. This is exactly why summoner classes are usually the last in development to be worked on and revealed. But this doesn't mean that the summoner + cleric wont be able to primarily heal/support while the pet theoretically does other actions around status effects going off what we previously discussed with power splitting to two entities.
Well, the summoner page on the wiki explains there are three types of summons (the same types as combat pets). I'm not certain a summoner can heal with active abilities except predominantly self heals through the 'life' augmented school. I imagine the 'life' augmented school would change the summons to healing pets which can heal others.
It's possible, but if the power split exists it would in theory be less powerful than if the class casted it.
100 power - 30 power to the pet would imply the players allowances are 70%.
This does not necessarily mean the pet will have the same power of the healer as together they will still need to equal 100 power.
A summoner primary archetype on it's own may not have cleric heals but when combined with secondary archetype cleric it would essentially have access to heals and cleric-like abilities shared through its summoned pet of choice to some extent. As far as I know, we don't know how many active pets they can have either. I'm assuming 1 specifically from the power split. Maybe temporarily ones through augments and abilities as means to potentially buff host, pet and indirectly party? Maybe we'll see some holy circles of power where if the host and pet stay in proximity there could be benefits
Well, 3 x 30 = 90 so they might be 10 off a Cleric. Of course, you'd prefer a full Cleric to be in the group (at least I would) for various reasons, but, a summoner at 90 cleric power plus a Bard at 100% Bard power (can heal based on procs and also buff the heals of the summons) means you won't have the overheal equivalent of a buffed cleric but you would have more than a full Cleric. Add to that a healing combat pet and you have 4 pets that are healing, which should surpass a full cleric in terms of raw power but not necessarily in terms of skill. I'm not stating these as facts but I've used your calculations.
That's all part of the versatility you can bring to the table with summons and archetype manipulation via augments. If the minimum you can sacrifice to the pet is 30%, that 30% is gone from you, that may also include your HP and Resource. If the player just has to sacrifice literal attack power then that is quite detrimental to design lol.
Again, this is assuming you're allowed to have multiple pets summoned at once by your comment, if you summon 3 pets at 30%, you're only left with 10% which means if you take a big hit, you pretty much failed at your role lol as if you die, your pets would die too and eventually your party.
If you're over healing a lot outside of things like Heal Over Time abilities, this would imply you're not doing a great job in higher end content because of resource management and group play. Healing isn't supposed to a spam fest as you would see in wow where the combat is wet sponges and the healer is a water hydrant lol
bear in mind, the summons boost the summoners power unlike the combat pet. SO without the summons the summoner would be at 10% power with your calculations, but, with the summons the summoner would be at 100%. With the combat pet at your calculations the summoner would be at 70%.
If the summons essentially mitigate some of the power loss to boost the summoner that significantly as you imply then that's just not good at all in terms of design. The point of sacrifice is to play around the loss not cancel it out for abuse. As mentioned, we don't know how many summons a summoner is allowed to have with or without universal combat pets added into the mix. For all we know, the summons of a summoner work the same way through sacrifice or upkeep management.
If the player has to sacrifice their own power to split their power so to speak it creates an interesting dynamic. The more powerful the pet, the weaker the player is on scale.
I also like the idea of upkeep to maintain pet output and/or pet numbers to encourage more diverse playstyles with augments. Different pet classes or builds so to speak could have unique ways to upkeep pet through debuffs such as maintaining a bleed as the pet survives off of blood or even enemy corpses/souls for resource upkeep etc.
Necromantic and nature could have entirely different upkeep methods for pets.
I dont really think pets should be able to hold threat stronger than tanks or even be close to competing with them especially for PvE. Just game breaking and encourages solo play.
So, you're happy for a healing pet to outpace a bard at healing or match a bard at healing and a dps pet to assist an actual tank (tank doesn't need much power just defence) and yet you won't let dps have a tanking pet?
Honestly, I've seen a lot of broken pets in mmorpg's where the pet just tanks a group and the player sits back with their thumb in their a** while they melt the mob(s) lol. What an amazing skillset for such an immersive experience
Then you got pets that can pull threat and aggro from the tank and hold it quite easily. It's awful in my opinion. I'd rather a tug-o-war of power shifting between the player and the pet. Bring some more risk to the players side to prevent such detrimental design to the game.
I never mentioned anything about a healing pet outpacing a bard. To be honest, I feel there shouldn't be a healing pet especially to the degree you're imagining. Leave the healing to the players. Kind of reminds me of SWTOR where you could solo the first group dungeon with just a healer companion if you kited the boss around a pillar lol. That game definitely had its faults.
A tank sacrificing their power for a dps pet seems like a weird take but I suppose in some ways the primary and secondary archetypes do cross at some point if that's how it is for the tank/summoner. I do like the idea of the players sacrificing X% of power for pet 1, Y% power for pet 2, Z% power for pet 3 etc. How that directly translates to the pet should be an interesting dev discussion when they get to summoner archetype. Who knows, maybe a tank/summoner just uses summons as the spell shape? maybe soak effigy? we'll have to see
Yeah, I mean when I imagine a Tank Pet I think of the Dev Discussion on Tanks in general and how we all wanted Tanks to lose aggro sometimes to keep tanks on their toes. I envision the tank pets to use the same systems and not act like glue. Same applies to the tanks in general.
Summoner with Cleric Secondary can match or surpass Bard Heals with Summons already. I see no reason not to have a healing pet that is actually capable of healing better than not. Would i advise these healing pets are able to heal anyone but the master? I'm not so sure.
That's a fair point. A lot of tanking and threat management is very glue-like as you mentioned. This is why I mentioned the pet could be a spell shape or effigy. Maybe you summon an object that blocks for you or an animated "being", they're all shapes to me lol.
Say you sacrifice 30% of your power to summon, you only have 70% left. Ideally it's the same thing, you're just creating two entities for the power split. The pet in most situations isn't going to be able to do more than the 30% power output you gave it. Just a different way to do the same thing essentially. Pet's can come in all different shapes and forms ranging from animals, beasts, inanimate objects like totems/effigies. etc.
Add upkeep through output management and you got yourself an interesting dynamic in my opinion.
Well, I like that we can equip and level the pets. I prefer if the 30% power loss is not a direct charge of power to the pet. Thus, the pet is kind of in isolation but would die without support from the player. I want to be able to level pets and then sell pets at max level etc. I want to be able to build the pets up and watch the pets grow. I want the pets to be useful but not more powerful than my toon.
I'm not entirely sure what the direct transfer of power will be from player sacrifice to pet power but I don't see the pets being more powerful than the players. It's just a sacrifice X% to boost X%. Just more of an extension of the players versatility of class and design. Certain pets may have genetically exclusive traits/abilities if I am to go off your information about raising them. The player/host is ideally the primary.
Yeah I agree. I think we won't know the full scope until the live game. I think A2 will thrash out the actual details and a lot of changes will be made. Its pointless discussing the actual sums right now. Especially if the pet can be geared or bred differently by a breeder etc.
I will make an interesting point though going back to your cleric + summoner point.
Hypothetically, a cleric + summoner would be primarily a cleric first, with summoner like abilities while being able to potentially use cleric/summoner pets. We could see abilities come off as holy with spirit-like vfx such as a wave of holy spirits as an examples.
Similarly yet quite different,
a summoner + cleric would primarily be summoner first with the summons being more cleric-like with the allowance of similar pet types BUT they could also be allowed to use a larger range of pet types because primarily they are a summoner archetype. Hypothetically, we could see summons ranging drastically different while engaging with cleric-like VFX.
Of course then we get into augments, religion etc. I do believe we will see summoner primary have some sort of advantage with obviously summons. The players that split their power could have a drawback if the pet dies with cool down from returning lost power. That's why the tug-o-war could be interesting in temporarily shifting a little extra power back and forth while not undermining the initial power loss of different summon strengths vs sacrifice.
Also I will say with how players can group summon in sieges, I hope we see higher penalties for great battle summons like siege ogres or siege beasts brought into the battle field.
Well, a summoner+cleric can have dps minions (Death) or healing minions (Life) but, there are also two other augment schools hidden for Cleric. As you say, augments can come from elsewhere too. So its a difficult one to call but Summoner can replace any other class in a group - including support classes. Summons and pets can't buff others or the master so that means these creatures must only heal. So, its difficult to know until we see summoner in action.
Obviously we wont know until they let us know more. This is exactly why summoner classes are usually the last in development to be worked on and revealed. But this doesn't mean that the summoner + cleric wont be able to primarily heal/support while the pet theoretically does other actions around status effects going off what we previously discussed with power splitting to two entities.
Well, the summoner page on the wiki explains there are three types of summons (the same types as combat pets). I'm not certain a summoner can heal with active abilities except predominantly self heals through the 'life' augmented school. I imagine the 'life' augmented school would change the summons to healing pets which can heal others.
It's possible, but if the power split exists it would in theory be less powerful than if the class casted it.
100 power - 30 power to the pet would imply the players allowances are 70%.
This does not necessarily mean the pet will have the same power of the healer as together they will still need to equal 100 power.
A summoner primary archetype on it's own may not have cleric heals but when combined with secondary archetype cleric it would essentially have access to heals and cleric-like abilities shared through its summoned pet of choice to some extent. As far as I know, we don't know how many active pets they can have either. I'm assuming 1 specifically from the power split. Maybe temporarily ones through augments and abilities as means to potentially buff host, pet and indirectly party? Maybe we'll see some holy circles of power where if the host and pet stay in proximity there could be benefits
Well, 3 x 30 = 90 so they might be 10 off a Cleric. Of course, you'd prefer a full Cleric to be in the group (at least I would) for various reasons, but, a summoner at 90 cleric power plus a Bard at 100% Bard power (can heal based on procs and also buff the heals of the summons) means you won't have the overheal equivalent of a buffed cleric but you would have more than a full Cleric. Add to that a healing combat pet and you have 4 pets that are healing, which should surpass a full cleric in terms of raw power but not necessarily in terms of skill. I'm not stating these as facts but I've used your calculations.
That's all part of the versatility you can bring to the table with summons and archetype manipulation via augments. If the minimum you can sacrifice to the pet is 30%, that 30% is gone from you, that may also include your HP and Resource. If the player just has to sacrifice literal attack power then that is quite detrimental to design lol.
Again, this is assuming you're allowed to have multiple pets summoned at once by your comment, if you summon 3 pets at 30%, you're only left with 10% which means if you take a big hit, you pretty much failed at your role lol as if you die, your pets would die too and eventually your party.
If you're over healing a lot outside of things like Heal Over Time abilities, this would imply you're not doing a great job in higher end content because of resource management and group play. Healing isn't supposed to a spam fest as you would see in wow where the combat is wet sponges and the healer is a water hydrant lol
bear in mind, the summons boost the summoners power unlike the combat pet. SO without the summons the summoner would be at 10% power with your calculations, but, with the summons the summoner would be at 100%. With the combat pet at your calculations the summoner would be at 70%.
If the summons essentially mitigate some of the power loss to boost the summoner that significantly as you imply then that's just not good at all in terms of design. The point of sacrifice is to play around the loss not cancel it out for abuse. As mentioned, we don't know how many summons a summoner is allowed to have with or without universal combat pets added into the mix. For all we know, the summons of a summoner work the same way through sacrifice or upkeep management.
No, the devs explicitly state that the summons increase the summoners power. Also, not all summoners will have a minion. I merely used the maximum calculations provided in both instances. I'm not an advocate either way, I simply make my theory crafting and let steven or the devs make the decisions. A lot of the time my ideas aren't used but a lot of the time my ideas make changes happen which I don't request. I often find either way that the changes are beneficial in the end. Thus, I am not privy to all facts and facets, I only give what I can whilst i'm here.
If the player has to sacrifice their own power to split their power so to speak it creates an interesting dynamic. The more powerful the pet, the weaker the player is on scale.
I also like the idea of upkeep to maintain pet output and/or pet numbers to encourage more diverse playstyles with augments. Different pet classes or builds so to speak could have unique ways to upkeep pet through debuffs such as maintaining a bleed as the pet survives off of blood or even enemy corpses/souls for resource upkeep etc.
Necromantic and nature could have entirely different upkeep methods for pets.
I dont really think pets should be able to hold threat stronger than tanks or even be close to competing with them especially for PvE. Just game breaking and encourages solo play.
So, you're happy for a healing pet to outpace a bard at healing or match a bard at healing and a dps pet to assist an actual tank (tank doesn't need much power just defence) and yet you won't let dps have a tanking pet?
Honestly, I've seen a lot of broken pets in mmorpg's where the pet just tanks a group and the player sits back with their thumb in their a** while they melt the mob(s) lol. What an amazing skillset for such an immersive experience
Then you got pets that can pull threat and aggro from the tank and hold it quite easily. It's awful in my opinion. I'd rather a tug-o-war of power shifting between the player and the pet. Bring some more risk to the players side to prevent such detrimental design to the game.
I never mentioned anything about a healing pet outpacing a bard. To be honest, I feel there shouldn't be a healing pet especially to the degree you're imagining. Leave the healing to the players. Kind of reminds me of SWTOR where you could solo the first group dungeon with just a healer companion if you kited the boss around a pillar lol. That game definitely had its faults.
A tank sacrificing their power for a dps pet seems like a weird take but I suppose in some ways the primary and secondary archetypes do cross at some point if that's how it is for the tank/summoner. I do like the idea of the players sacrificing X% of power for pet 1, Y% power for pet 2, Z% power for pet 3 etc. How that directly translates to the pet should be an interesting dev discussion when they get to summoner archetype. Who knows, maybe a tank/summoner just uses summons as the spell shape? maybe soak effigy? we'll have to see
Yeah, I mean when I imagine a Tank Pet I think of the Dev Discussion on Tanks in general and how we all wanted Tanks to lose aggro sometimes to keep tanks on their toes. I envision the tank pets to use the same systems and not act like glue. Same applies to the tanks in general.
Summoner with Cleric Secondary can match or surpass Bard Heals with Summons already. I see no reason not to have a healing pet that is actually capable of healing better than not. Would i advise these healing pets are able to heal anyone but the master? I'm not so sure.
That's a fair point. A lot of tanking and threat management is very glue-like as you mentioned. This is why I mentioned the pet could be a spell shape or effigy. Maybe you summon an object that blocks for you or an animated "being", they're all shapes to me lol.
Say you sacrifice 30% of your power to summon, you only have 70% left. Ideally it's the same thing, you're just creating two entities for the power split. The pet in most situations isn't going to be able to do more than the 30% power output you gave it. Just a different way to do the same thing essentially. Pet's can come in all different shapes and forms ranging from animals, beasts, inanimate objects like totems/effigies. etc.
Add upkeep through output management and you got yourself an interesting dynamic in my opinion.
Well, I like that we can equip and level the pets. I prefer if the 30% power loss is not a direct charge of power to the pet. Thus, the pet is kind of in isolation but would die without support from the player. I want to be able to level pets and then sell pets at max level etc. I want to be able to build the pets up and watch the pets grow. I want the pets to be useful but not more powerful than my toon.
I'm not entirely sure what the direct transfer of power will be from player sacrifice to pet power but I don't see the pets being more powerful than the players. It's just a sacrifice X% to boost X%. Just more of an extension of the players versatility of class and design. Certain pets may have genetically exclusive traits/abilities if I am to go off your information about raising them. The player/host is ideally the primary.
Yeah I agree. I think we won't know the full scope until the live game. I think A2 will thrash out the actual details and a lot of changes will be made. Its pointless discussing the actual sums right now. Especially if the pet can be geared or bred differently by a breeder etc.
I will make an interesting point though going back to your cleric + summoner point.
Hypothetically, a cleric + summoner would be primarily a cleric first, with summoner like abilities while being able to potentially use cleric/summoner pets. We could see abilities come off as holy with spirit-like vfx such as a wave of holy spirits as an examples.
Similarly yet quite different,
a summoner + cleric would primarily be summoner first with the summons being more cleric-like with the allowance of similar pet types BUT they could also be allowed to use a larger range of pet types because primarily they are a summoner archetype. Hypothetically, we could see summons ranging drastically different while engaging with cleric-like VFX.
Of course then we get into augments, religion etc. I do believe we will see summoner primary have some sort of advantage with obviously summons. The players that split their power could have a drawback if the pet dies with cool down from returning lost power. That's why the tug-o-war could be interesting in temporarily shifting a little extra power back and forth while not undermining the initial power loss of different summon strengths vs sacrifice.
Also I will say with how players can group summon in sieges, I hope we see higher penalties for great battle summons like siege ogres or siege beasts brought into the battle field.
Well, a summoner+cleric can have dps minions (Death) or healing minions (Life) but, there are also two other augment schools hidden for Cleric. As you say, augments can come from elsewhere too. So its a difficult one to call but Summoner can replace any other class in a group - including support classes. Summons and pets can't buff others or the master so that means these creatures must only heal. So, its difficult to know until we see summoner in action.
Obviously we wont know until they let us know more. This is exactly why summoner classes are usually the last in development to be worked on and revealed. But this doesn't mean that the summoner + cleric wont be able to primarily heal/support while the pet theoretically does other actions around status effects going off what we previously discussed with power splitting to two entities.
Well, the summoner page on the wiki explains there are three types of summons (the same types as combat pets). I'm not certain a summoner can heal with active abilities except predominantly self heals through the 'life' augmented school. I imagine the 'life' augmented school would change the summons to healing pets which can heal others.
It's possible, but if the power split exists it would in theory be less powerful than if the class casted it.
100 power - 30 power to the pet would imply the players allowances are 70%.
This does not necessarily mean the pet will have the same power of the healer as together they will still need to equal 100 power.
A summoner primary archetype on it's own may not have cleric heals but when combined with secondary archetype cleric it would essentially have access to heals and cleric-like abilities shared through its summoned pet of choice to some extent. As far as I know, we don't know how many active pets they can have either. I'm assuming 1 specifically from the power split. Maybe temporarily ones through augments and abilities as means to potentially buff host, pet and indirectly party? Maybe we'll see some holy circles of power where if the host and pet stay in proximity there could be benefits
Well, 3 x 30 = 90 so they might be 10 off a Cleric. Of course, you'd prefer a full Cleric to be in the group (at least I would) for various reasons, but, a summoner at 90 cleric power plus a Bard at 100% Bard power (can heal based on procs and also buff the heals of the summons) means you won't have the overheal equivalent of a buffed cleric but you would have more than a full Cleric. Add to that a healing combat pet and you have 4 pets that are healing, which should surpass a full cleric in terms of raw power but not necessarily in terms of skill. I'm not stating these as facts but I've used your calculations.
That's all part of the versatility you can bring to the table with summons and archetype manipulation via augments. If the minimum you can sacrifice to the pet is 30%, that 30% is gone from you, that may also include your HP and Resource. If the player just has to sacrifice literal attack power then that is quite detrimental to design lol.
Again, this is assuming you're allowed to have multiple pets summoned at once by your comment, if you summon 3 pets at 30%, you're only left with 10% which means if you take a big hit, you pretty much failed at your role lol as if you die, your pets would die too and eventually your party.
If you're over healing a lot outside of things like Heal Over Time abilities, this would imply you're not doing a great job in higher end content because of resource management and group play. Healing isn't supposed to a spam fest as you would see in wow where the combat is wet sponges and the healer is a water hydrant lol
bear in mind, the summons boost the summoners power unlike the combat pet. SO without the summons the summoner would be at 10% power with your calculations, but, with the summons the summoner would be at 100%. With the combat pet at your calculations the summoner would be at 70%.
If the summons essentially mitigate some of the power loss to boost the summoner that significantly as you imply then that's just not good at all in terms of design. The point of sacrifice is to play around the loss not cancel it out for abuse. As mentioned, we don't know how many summons a summoner is allowed to have with or without universal combat pets added into the mix. For all we know, the summons of a summoner work the same way through sacrifice or upkeep management.
No, the devs explicitly state that the summons increase the summoners power. Also, not all summoners will have a minion. I merely used the maximum calculations provided in both instances. I'm not an advocate either way, I simply make my theory crafting and let steven or the devs make the decisions. A lot of the time my ideas aren't used but a lot of the time my ideas make changes happen which I don't request. I often find either way that the changes are beneficial in the end. Thus, I am not privy to all facts and facets, I only give what I can whilst i'm here.
No offense but dev's say a lot things during development (not specifically just intrepid). The wiki changes with updates.
That doesn't mean how it's going to be for final product. The wiki does "currently" state that the summoners summons do not have a sacrifice like how combat pet do but if combat pets are going to be that meta then it's bad design to implement as summoner archetype get a significant boost across the board in theory. There will have to be some sort of trade off to make it relatively fair. But again, we dont know the full exent of summoners summons in terms of duration, strength etc. The summoner usually is the target to kill and not the summons.
If the player has to sacrifice their own power to split their power so to speak it creates an interesting dynamic. The more powerful the pet, the weaker the player is on scale.
I also like the idea of upkeep to maintain pet output and/or pet numbers to encourage more diverse playstyles with augments. Different pet classes or builds so to speak could have unique ways to upkeep pet through debuffs such as maintaining a bleed as the pet survives off of blood or even enemy corpses/souls for resource upkeep etc.
Necromantic and nature could have entirely different upkeep methods for pets.
I dont really think pets should be able to hold threat stronger than tanks or even be close to competing with them especially for PvE. Just game breaking and encourages solo play.
So, you're happy for a healing pet to outpace a bard at healing or match a bard at healing and a dps pet to assist an actual tank (tank doesn't need much power just defence) and yet you won't let dps have a tanking pet?
Honestly, I've seen a lot of broken pets in mmorpg's where the pet just tanks a group and the player sits back with their thumb in their a** while they melt the mob(s) lol. What an amazing skillset for such an immersive experience
Then you got pets that can pull threat and aggro from the tank and hold it quite easily. It's awful in my opinion. I'd rather a tug-o-war of power shifting between the player and the pet. Bring some more risk to the players side to prevent such detrimental design to the game.
I never mentioned anything about a healing pet outpacing a bard. To be honest, I feel there shouldn't be a healing pet especially to the degree you're imagining. Leave the healing to the players. Kind of reminds me of SWTOR where you could solo the first group dungeon with just a healer companion if you kited the boss around a pillar lol. That game definitely had its faults.
A tank sacrificing their power for a dps pet seems like a weird take but I suppose in some ways the primary and secondary archetypes do cross at some point if that's how it is for the tank/summoner. I do like the idea of the players sacrificing X% of power for pet 1, Y% power for pet 2, Z% power for pet 3 etc. How that directly translates to the pet should be an interesting dev discussion when they get to summoner archetype. Who knows, maybe a tank/summoner just uses summons as the spell shape? maybe soak effigy? we'll have to see
Yeah, I mean when I imagine a Tank Pet I think of the Dev Discussion on Tanks in general and how we all wanted Tanks to lose aggro sometimes to keep tanks on their toes. I envision the tank pets to use the same systems and not act like glue. Same applies to the tanks in general.
Summoner with Cleric Secondary can match or surpass Bard Heals with Summons already. I see no reason not to have a healing pet that is actually capable of healing better than not. Would i advise these healing pets are able to heal anyone but the master? I'm not so sure.
That's a fair point. A lot of tanking and threat management is very glue-like as you mentioned. This is why I mentioned the pet could be a spell shape or effigy. Maybe you summon an object that blocks for you or an animated "being", they're all shapes to me lol.
Say you sacrifice 30% of your power to summon, you only have 70% left. Ideally it's the same thing, you're just creating two entities for the power split. The pet in most situations isn't going to be able to do more than the 30% power output you gave it. Just a different way to do the same thing essentially. Pet's can come in all different shapes and forms ranging from animals, beasts, inanimate objects like totems/effigies. etc.
Add upkeep through output management and you got yourself an interesting dynamic in my opinion.
Well, I like that we can equip and level the pets. I prefer if the 30% power loss is not a direct charge of power to the pet. Thus, the pet is kind of in isolation but would die without support from the player. I want to be able to level pets and then sell pets at max level etc. I want to be able to build the pets up and watch the pets grow. I want the pets to be useful but not more powerful than my toon.
I'm not entirely sure what the direct transfer of power will be from player sacrifice to pet power but I don't see the pets being more powerful than the players. It's just a sacrifice X% to boost X%. Just more of an extension of the players versatility of class and design. Certain pets may have genetically exclusive traits/abilities if I am to go off your information about raising them. The player/host is ideally the primary.
Yeah I agree. I think we won't know the full scope until the live game. I think A2 will thrash out the actual details and a lot of changes will be made. Its pointless discussing the actual sums right now. Especially if the pet can be geared or bred differently by a breeder etc.
I will make an interesting point though going back to your cleric + summoner point.
Hypothetically, a cleric + summoner would be primarily a cleric first, with summoner like abilities while being able to potentially use cleric/summoner pets. We could see abilities come off as holy with spirit-like vfx such as a wave of holy spirits as an examples.
Similarly yet quite different,
a summoner + cleric would primarily be summoner first with the summons being more cleric-like with the allowance of similar pet types BUT they could also be allowed to use a larger range of pet types because primarily they are a summoner archetype. Hypothetically, we could see summons ranging drastically different while engaging with cleric-like VFX.
Of course then we get into augments, religion etc. I do believe we will see summoner primary have some sort of advantage with obviously summons. The players that split their power could have a drawback if the pet dies with cool down from returning lost power. That's why the tug-o-war could be interesting in temporarily shifting a little extra power back and forth while not undermining the initial power loss of different summon strengths vs sacrifice.
Also I will say with how players can group summon in sieges, I hope we see higher penalties for great battle summons like siege ogres or siege beasts brought into the battle field.
Well, a summoner+cleric can have dps minions (Death) or healing minions (Life) but, there are also two other augment schools hidden for Cleric. As you say, augments can come from elsewhere too. So its a difficult one to call but Summoner can replace any other class in a group - including support classes. Summons and pets can't buff others or the master so that means these creatures must only heal. So, its difficult to know until we see summoner in action.
Obviously we wont know until they let us know more. This is exactly why summoner classes are usually the last in development to be worked on and revealed. But this doesn't mean that the summoner + cleric wont be able to primarily heal/support while the pet theoretically does other actions around status effects going off what we previously discussed with power splitting to two entities.
Well, the summoner page on the wiki explains there are three types of summons (the same types as combat pets). I'm not certain a summoner can heal with active abilities except predominantly self heals through the 'life' augmented school. I imagine the 'life' augmented school would change the summons to healing pets which can heal others.
It's possible, but if the power split exists it would in theory be less powerful than if the class casted it.
100 power - 30 power to the pet would imply the players allowances are 70%.
This does not necessarily mean the pet will have the same power of the healer as together they will still need to equal 100 power.
A summoner primary archetype on it's own may not have cleric heals but when combined with secondary archetype cleric it would essentially have access to heals and cleric-like abilities shared through its summoned pet of choice to some extent. As far as I know, we don't know how many active pets they can have either. I'm assuming 1 specifically from the power split. Maybe temporarily ones through augments and abilities as means to potentially buff host, pet and indirectly party? Maybe we'll see some holy circles of power where if the host and pet stay in proximity there could be benefits
Well, 3 x 30 = 90 so they might be 10 off a Cleric. Of course, you'd prefer a full Cleric to be in the group (at least I would) for various reasons, but, a summoner at 90 cleric power plus a Bard at 100% Bard power (can heal based on procs and also buff the heals of the summons) means you won't have the overheal equivalent of a buffed cleric but you would have more than a full Cleric. Add to that a healing combat pet and you have 4 pets that are healing, which should surpass a full cleric in terms of raw power but not necessarily in terms of skill. I'm not stating these as facts but I've used your calculations.
That's all part of the versatility you can bring to the table with summons and archetype manipulation via augments. If the minimum you can sacrifice to the pet is 30%, that 30% is gone from you, that may also include your HP and Resource. If the player just has to sacrifice literal attack power then that is quite detrimental to design lol.
Again, this is assuming you're allowed to have multiple pets summoned at once by your comment, if you summon 3 pets at 30%, you're only left with 10% which means if you take a big hit, you pretty much failed at your role lol as if you die, your pets would die too and eventually your party.
If you're over healing a lot outside of things like Heal Over Time abilities, this would imply you're not doing a great job in higher end content because of resource management and group play. Healing isn't supposed to a spam fest as you would see in wow where the combat is wet sponges and the healer is a water hydrant lol
bear in mind, the summons boost the summoners power unlike the combat pet. SO without the summons the summoner would be at 10% power with your calculations, but, with the summons the summoner would be at 100%. With the combat pet at your calculations the summoner would be at 70%.
If the summons essentially mitigate some of the power loss to boost the summoner that significantly as you imply then that's just not good at all in terms of design. The point of sacrifice is to play around the loss not cancel it out for abuse. As mentioned, we don't know how many summons a summoner is allowed to have with or without universal combat pets added into the mix. For all we know, the summons of a summoner work the same way through sacrifice or upkeep management.
No, the devs explicitly state that the summons increase the summoners power. Also, not all summoners will have a minion. I merely used the maximum calculations provided in both instances. I'm not an advocate either way, I simply make my theory crafting and let steven or the devs make the decisions. A lot of the time my ideas aren't used but a lot of the time my ideas make changes happen which I don't request. I often find either way that the changes are beneficial in the end. Thus, I am not privy to all facts and facets, I only give what I can whilst i'm here.
No offense but dev's say a lot things during development (not specifically just intrepid). The wiki changes with updates.
That doesn't mean how it's going to be for final product. The wiki does "currently" state that the summoners summons do not have a sacrifice like how combat pet do but if combat pets are going to be that meta then it's bad design to implement as summoner archetype get a significant boost across the board in theory. There will have to be some sort of trade off to make it relatively fair. But again, we dont know the full exent of summoners summons in terms of duration, strength etc. The summoner usually is the target to kill and not the summons.
We haven't even seen the summoner. I have no real retort. All I can state is the summons boost the summoner's power. What that power entails, what the skills are and how strong the summons are remains to be seen. Furthermore, every class type will be covered by the summoner class. To state Combat Pets are OP on some classes negates the fact that hard counters exist, limitations on use exist and the Combat Pets are horizontal progression and not vertical progression like summoner's summons.
If the player has to sacrifice their own power to split their power so to speak it creates an interesting dynamic. The more powerful the pet, the weaker the player is on scale.
I also like the idea of upkeep to maintain pet output and/or pet numbers to encourage more diverse playstyles with augments. Different pet classes or builds so to speak could have unique ways to upkeep pet through debuffs such as maintaining a bleed as the pet survives off of blood or even enemy corpses/souls for resource upkeep etc.
Necromantic and nature could have entirely different upkeep methods for pets.
I dont really think pets should be able to hold threat stronger than tanks or even be close to competing with them especially for PvE. Just game breaking and encourages solo play.
So, you're happy for a healing pet to outpace a bard at healing or match a bard at healing and a dps pet to assist an actual tank (tank doesn't need much power just defence) and yet you won't let dps have a tanking pet?
Honestly, I've seen a lot of broken pets in mmorpg's where the pet just tanks a group and the player sits back with their thumb in their a** while they melt the mob(s) lol. What an amazing skillset for such an immersive experience
Then you got pets that can pull threat and aggro from the tank and hold it quite easily. It's awful in my opinion. I'd rather a tug-o-war of power shifting between the player and the pet. Bring some more risk to the players side to prevent such detrimental design to the game.
I never mentioned anything about a healing pet outpacing a bard. To be honest, I feel there shouldn't be a healing pet especially to the degree you're imagining. Leave the healing to the players. Kind of reminds me of SWTOR where you could solo the first group dungeon with just a healer companion if you kited the boss around a pillar lol. That game definitely had its faults.
A tank sacrificing their power for a dps pet seems like a weird take but I suppose in some ways the primary and secondary archetypes do cross at some point if that's how it is for the tank/summoner. I do like the idea of the players sacrificing X% of power for pet 1, Y% power for pet 2, Z% power for pet 3 etc. How that directly translates to the pet should be an interesting dev discussion when they get to summoner archetype. Who knows, maybe a tank/summoner just uses summons as the spell shape? maybe soak effigy? we'll have to see
Yeah, I mean when I imagine a Tank Pet I think of the Dev Discussion on Tanks in general and how we all wanted Tanks to lose aggro sometimes to keep tanks on their toes. I envision the tank pets to use the same systems and not act like glue. Same applies to the tanks in general.
Summoner with Cleric Secondary can match or surpass Bard Heals with Summons already. I see no reason not to have a healing pet that is actually capable of healing better than not. Would i advise these healing pets are able to heal anyone but the master? I'm not so sure.
That's a fair point. A lot of tanking and threat management is very glue-like as you mentioned. This is why I mentioned the pet could be a spell shape or effigy. Maybe you summon an object that blocks for you or an animated "being", they're all shapes to me lol.
Say you sacrifice 30% of your power to summon, you only have 70% left. Ideally it's the same thing, you're just creating two entities for the power split. The pet in most situations isn't going to be able to do more than the 30% power output you gave it. Just a different way to do the same thing essentially. Pet's can come in all different shapes and forms ranging from animals, beasts, inanimate objects like totems/effigies. etc.
Add upkeep through output management and you got yourself an interesting dynamic in my opinion.
Well, I like that we can equip and level the pets. I prefer if the 30% power loss is not a direct charge of power to the pet. Thus, the pet is kind of in isolation but would die without support from the player. I want to be able to level pets and then sell pets at max level etc. I want to be able to build the pets up and watch the pets grow. I want the pets to be useful but not more powerful than my toon.
I'm not entirely sure what the direct transfer of power will be from player sacrifice to pet power but I don't see the pets being more powerful than the players. It's just a sacrifice X% to boost X%. Just more of an extension of the players versatility of class and design. Certain pets may have genetically exclusive traits/abilities if I am to go off your information about raising them. The player/host is ideally the primary.
Yeah I agree. I think we won't know the full scope until the live game. I think A2 will thrash out the actual details and a lot of changes will be made. Its pointless discussing the actual sums right now. Especially if the pet can be geared or bred differently by a breeder etc.
I will make an interesting point though going back to your cleric + summoner point.
Hypothetically, a cleric + summoner would be primarily a cleric first, with summoner like abilities while being able to potentially use cleric/summoner pets. We could see abilities come off as holy with spirit-like vfx such as a wave of holy spirits as an examples.
Similarly yet quite different,
a summoner + cleric would primarily be summoner first with the summons being more cleric-like with the allowance of similar pet types BUT they could also be allowed to use a larger range of pet types because primarily they are a summoner archetype. Hypothetically, we could see summons ranging drastically different while engaging with cleric-like VFX.
Of course then we get into augments, religion etc. I do believe we will see summoner primary have some sort of advantage with obviously summons. The players that split their power could have a drawback if the pet dies with cool down from returning lost power. That's why the tug-o-war could be interesting in temporarily shifting a little extra power back and forth while not undermining the initial power loss of different summon strengths vs sacrifice.
Also I will say with how players can group summon in sieges, I hope we see higher penalties for great battle summons like siege ogres or siege beasts brought into the battle field.
Well, a summoner+cleric can have dps minions (Death) or healing minions (Life) but, there are also two other augment schools hidden for Cleric. As you say, augments can come from elsewhere too. So its a difficult one to call but Summoner can replace any other class in a group - including support classes. Summons and pets can't buff others or the master so that means these creatures must only heal. So, its difficult to know until we see summoner in action.
Obviously we wont know until they let us know more. This is exactly why summoner classes are usually the last in development to be worked on and revealed. But this doesn't mean that the summoner + cleric wont be able to primarily heal/support while the pet theoretically does other actions around status effects going off what we previously discussed with power splitting to two entities.
Well, the summoner page on the wiki explains there are three types of summons (the same types as combat pets). I'm not certain a summoner can heal with active abilities except predominantly self heals through the 'life' augmented school. I imagine the 'life' augmented school would change the summons to healing pets which can heal others.
It's possible, but if the power split exists it would in theory be less powerful than if the class casted it.
100 power - 30 power to the pet would imply the players allowances are 70%.
This does not necessarily mean the pet will have the same power of the healer as together they will still need to equal 100 power.
A summoner primary archetype on it's own may not have cleric heals but when combined with secondary archetype cleric it would essentially have access to heals and cleric-like abilities shared through its summoned pet of choice to some extent. As far as I know, we don't know how many active pets they can have either. I'm assuming 1 specifically from the power split. Maybe temporarily ones through augments and abilities as means to potentially buff host, pet and indirectly party? Maybe we'll see some holy circles of power where if the host and pet stay in proximity there could be benefits
Well, 3 x 30 = 90 so they might be 10 off a Cleric. Of course, you'd prefer a full Cleric to be in the group (at least I would) for various reasons, but, a summoner at 90 cleric power plus a Bard at 100% Bard power (can heal based on procs and also buff the heals of the summons) means you won't have the overheal equivalent of a buffed cleric but you would have more than a full Cleric. Add to that a healing combat pet and you have 4 pets that are healing, which should surpass a full cleric in terms of raw power but not necessarily in terms of skill. I'm not stating these as facts but I've used your calculations.
That's all part of the versatility you can bring to the table with summons and archetype manipulation via augments. If the minimum you can sacrifice to the pet is 30%, that 30% is gone from you, that may also include your HP and Resource. If the player just has to sacrifice literal attack power then that is quite detrimental to design lol.
Again, this is assuming you're allowed to have multiple pets summoned at once by your comment, if you summon 3 pets at 30%, you're only left with 10% which means if you take a big hit, you pretty much failed at your role lol as if you die, your pets would die too and eventually your party.
If you're over healing a lot outside of things like Heal Over Time abilities, this would imply you're not doing a great job in higher end content because of resource management and group play. Healing isn't supposed to a spam fest as you would see in wow where the combat is wet sponges and the healer is a water hydrant lol
bear in mind, the summons boost the summoners power unlike the combat pet. SO without the summons the summoner would be at 10% power with your calculations, but, with the summons the summoner would be at 100%. With the combat pet at your calculations the summoner would be at 70%.
If the summons essentially mitigate some of the power loss to boost the summoner that significantly as you imply then that's just not good at all in terms of design. The point of sacrifice is to play around the loss not cancel it out for abuse. As mentioned, we don't know how many summons a summoner is allowed to have with or without universal combat pets added into the mix. For all we know, the summons of a summoner work the same way through sacrifice or upkeep management.
No, the devs explicitly state that the summons increase the summoners power. Also, not all summoners will have a minion. I merely used the maximum calculations provided in both instances. I'm not an advocate either way, I simply make my theory crafting and let steven or the devs make the decisions. A lot of the time my ideas aren't used but a lot of the time my ideas make changes happen which I don't request. I often find either way that the changes are beneficial in the end. Thus, I am not privy to all facts and facets, I only give what I can whilst i'm here.
No offense but dev's say a lot things during development (not specifically just intrepid). The wiki changes with updates.
That doesn't mean how it's going to be for final product. The wiki does "currently" state that the summoners summons do not have a sacrifice like how combat pet do but if combat pets are going to be that meta then it's bad design to implement as summoner archetype get a significant boost across the board in theory. There will have to be some sort of trade off to make it relatively fair. But again, we dont know the full exent of summoners summons in terms of duration, strength etc. The summoner usually is the target to kill and not the summons.
We haven't even seen the summoner. I have no real retort. All I can state is the summons boost the summoner's power. What that power entails, what the skills are and how strong the summons are remains to be seen. Furthermore, every class type will be covered by the summoner class. To state Combat Pets are OP on some classes negates the fact that hard counters exist, limitations on use exist and the Combat Pets are horizontal progression and not vertical progression like summoner's summons.
I know, I stated we haven't seen them yet earlier and said it's usually why the summoner is last to be unveiled and worked on for such reasons. I never said they are OP but considering how loosely that word is thrown around these days I can see why one may use it liberally. I said META as in Most Effective Tactic Available. If a majority of summoners end up using combat pets with summons to counter it, it's essentially a boost in theory as it's another entity to play around in the summon pool that mitigates the sacrifice.
If the player has to sacrifice their own power to split their power so to speak it creates an interesting dynamic. The more powerful the pet, the weaker the player is on scale.
I also like the idea of upkeep to maintain pet output and/or pet numbers to encourage more diverse playstyles with augments. Different pet classes or builds so to speak could have unique ways to upkeep pet through debuffs such as maintaining a bleed as the pet survives off of blood or even enemy corpses/souls for resource upkeep etc.
Necromantic and nature could have entirely different upkeep methods for pets.
I dont really think pets should be able to hold threat stronger than tanks or even be close to competing with them especially for PvE. Just game breaking and encourages solo play.
So, you're happy for a healing pet to outpace a bard at healing or match a bard at healing and a dps pet to assist an actual tank (tank doesn't need much power just defence) and yet you won't let dps have a tanking pet?
Honestly, I've seen a lot of broken pets in mmorpg's where the pet just tanks a group and the player sits back with their thumb in their a** while they melt the mob(s) lol. What an amazing skillset for such an immersive experience
Then you got pets that can pull threat and aggro from the tank and hold it quite easily. It's awful in my opinion. I'd rather a tug-o-war of power shifting between the player and the pet. Bring some more risk to the players side to prevent such detrimental design to the game.
I never mentioned anything about a healing pet outpacing a bard. To be honest, I feel there shouldn't be a healing pet especially to the degree you're imagining. Leave the healing to the players. Kind of reminds me of SWTOR where you could solo the first group dungeon with just a healer companion if you kited the boss around a pillar lol. That game definitely had its faults.
A tank sacrificing their power for a dps pet seems like a weird take but I suppose in some ways the primary and secondary archetypes do cross at some point if that's how it is for the tank/summoner. I do like the idea of the players sacrificing X% of power for pet 1, Y% power for pet 2, Z% power for pet 3 etc. How that directly translates to the pet should be an interesting dev discussion when they get to summoner archetype. Who knows, maybe a tank/summoner just uses summons as the spell shape? maybe soak effigy? we'll have to see
Yeah, I mean when I imagine a Tank Pet I think of the Dev Discussion on Tanks in general and how we all wanted Tanks to lose aggro sometimes to keep tanks on their toes. I envision the tank pets to use the same systems and not act like glue. Same applies to the tanks in general.
Summoner with Cleric Secondary can match or surpass Bard Heals with Summons already. I see no reason not to have a healing pet that is actually capable of healing better than not. Would i advise these healing pets are able to heal anyone but the master? I'm not so sure.
That's a fair point. A lot of tanking and threat management is very glue-like as you mentioned. This is why I mentioned the pet could be a spell shape or effigy. Maybe you summon an object that blocks for you or an animated "being", they're all shapes to me lol.
Say you sacrifice 30% of your power to summon, you only have 70% left. Ideally it's the same thing, you're just creating two entities for the power split. The pet in most situations isn't going to be able to do more than the 30% power output you gave it. Just a different way to do the same thing essentially. Pet's can come in all different shapes and forms ranging from animals, beasts, inanimate objects like totems/effigies. etc.
Add upkeep through output management and you got yourself an interesting dynamic in my opinion.
Well, I like that we can equip and level the pets. I prefer if the 30% power loss is not a direct charge of power to the pet. Thus, the pet is kind of in isolation but would die without support from the player. I want to be able to level pets and then sell pets at max level etc. I want to be able to build the pets up and watch the pets grow. I want the pets to be useful but not more powerful than my toon.
I'm not entirely sure what the direct transfer of power will be from player sacrifice to pet power but I don't see the pets being more powerful than the players. It's just a sacrifice X% to boost X%. Just more of an extension of the players versatility of class and design. Certain pets may have genetically exclusive traits/abilities if I am to go off your information about raising them. The player/host is ideally the primary.
Yeah I agree. I think we won't know the full scope until the live game. I think A2 will thrash out the actual details and a lot of changes will be made. Its pointless discussing the actual sums right now. Especially if the pet can be geared or bred differently by a breeder etc.
I will make an interesting point though going back to your cleric + summoner point.
Hypothetically, a cleric + summoner would be primarily a cleric first, with summoner like abilities while being able to potentially use cleric/summoner pets. We could see abilities come off as holy with spirit-like vfx such as a wave of holy spirits as an examples.
Similarly yet quite different,
a summoner + cleric would primarily be summoner first with the summons being more cleric-like with the allowance of similar pet types BUT they could also be allowed to use a larger range of pet types because primarily they are a summoner archetype. Hypothetically, we could see summons ranging drastically different while engaging with cleric-like VFX.
Of course then we get into augments, religion etc. I do believe we will see summoner primary have some sort of advantage with obviously summons. The players that split their power could have a drawback if the pet dies with cool down from returning lost power. That's why the tug-o-war could be interesting in temporarily shifting a little extra power back and forth while not undermining the initial power loss of different summon strengths vs sacrifice.
Also I will say with how players can group summon in sieges, I hope we see higher penalties for great battle summons like siege ogres or siege beasts brought into the battle field.
Well, a summoner+cleric can have dps minions (Death) or healing minions (Life) but, there are also two other augment schools hidden for Cleric. As you say, augments can come from elsewhere too. So its a difficult one to call but Summoner can replace any other class in a group - including support classes. Summons and pets can't buff others or the master so that means these creatures must only heal. So, its difficult to know until we see summoner in action.
Obviously we wont know until they let us know more. This is exactly why summoner classes are usually the last in development to be worked on and revealed. But this doesn't mean that the summoner + cleric wont be able to primarily heal/support while the pet theoretically does other actions around status effects going off what we previously discussed with power splitting to two entities.
Well, the summoner page on the wiki explains there are three types of summons (the same types as combat pets). I'm not certain a summoner can heal with active abilities except predominantly self heals through the 'life' augmented school. I imagine the 'life' augmented school would change the summons to healing pets which can heal others.
It's possible, but if the power split exists it would in theory be less powerful than if the class casted it.
100 power - 30 power to the pet would imply the players allowances are 70%.
This does not necessarily mean the pet will have the same power of the healer as together they will still need to equal 100 power.
A summoner primary archetype on it's own may not have cleric heals but when combined with secondary archetype cleric it would essentially have access to heals and cleric-like abilities shared through its summoned pet of choice to some extent. As far as I know, we don't know how many active pets they can have either. I'm assuming 1 specifically from the power split. Maybe temporarily ones through augments and abilities as means to potentially buff host, pet and indirectly party? Maybe we'll see some holy circles of power where if the host and pet stay in proximity there could be benefits
Well, 3 x 30 = 90 so they might be 10 off a Cleric. Of course, you'd prefer a full Cleric to be in the group (at least I would) for various reasons, but, a summoner at 90 cleric power plus a Bard at 100% Bard power (can heal based on procs and also buff the heals of the summons) means you won't have the overheal equivalent of a buffed cleric but you would have more than a full Cleric. Add to that a healing combat pet and you have 4 pets that are healing, which should surpass a full cleric in terms of raw power but not necessarily in terms of skill. I'm not stating these as facts but I've used your calculations.
That's all part of the versatility you can bring to the table with summons and archetype manipulation via augments. If the minimum you can sacrifice to the pet is 30%, that 30% is gone from you, that may also include your HP and Resource. If the player just has to sacrifice literal attack power then that is quite detrimental to design lol.
Again, this is assuming you're allowed to have multiple pets summoned at once by your comment, if you summon 3 pets at 30%, you're only left with 10% which means if you take a big hit, you pretty much failed at your role lol as if you die, your pets would die too and eventually your party.
If you're over healing a lot outside of things like Heal Over Time abilities, this would imply you're not doing a great job in higher end content because of resource management and group play. Healing isn't supposed to a spam fest as you would see in wow where the combat is wet sponges and the healer is a water hydrant lol
bear in mind, the summons boost the summoners power unlike the combat pet. SO without the summons the summoner would be at 10% power with your calculations, but, with the summons the summoner would be at 100%. With the combat pet at your calculations the summoner would be at 70%.
If the summons essentially mitigate some of the power loss to boost the summoner that significantly as you imply then that's just not good at all in terms of design. The point of sacrifice is to play around the loss not cancel it out for abuse. As mentioned, we don't know how many summons a summoner is allowed to have with or without universal combat pets added into the mix. For all we know, the summons of a summoner work the same way through sacrifice or upkeep management.
No, the devs explicitly state that the summons increase the summoners power. Also, not all summoners will have a minion. I merely used the maximum calculations provided in both instances. I'm not an advocate either way, I simply make my theory crafting and let steven or the devs make the decisions. A lot of the time my ideas aren't used but a lot of the time my ideas make changes happen which I don't request. I often find either way that the changes are beneficial in the end. Thus, I am not privy to all facts and facets, I only give what I can whilst i'm here.
No offense but dev's say a lot things during development (not specifically just intrepid). The wiki changes with updates.
That doesn't mean how it's going to be for final product. The wiki does "currently" state that the summoners summons do not have a sacrifice like how combat pet do but if combat pets are going to be that meta then it's bad design to implement as summoner archetype get a significant boost across the board in theory. There will have to be some sort of trade off to make it relatively fair. But again, we dont know the full exent of summoners summons in terms of duration, strength etc. The summoner usually is the target to kill and not the summons.
We haven't even seen the summoner. I have no real retort. All I can state is the summons boost the summoner's power. What that power entails, what the skills are and how strong the summons are remains to be seen. Furthermore, every class type will be covered by the summoner class. To state Combat Pets are OP on some classes negates the fact that hard counters exist, limitations on use exist and the Combat Pets are horizontal progression and not vertical progression like summoner's summons.
I know, I stated we haven't seen them yet earlier and said it's usually why the summoner is last to be unveiled and worked on for such reasons. I never said they are OP but considering how loosely that word is thrown around these days I can see why one may use it liberally. I said META as in Most Effective Tactic Available. If a majority of summoners end up using combat pets with summons to counter it, it's essentially a boost in theory as it's another entity to play around in the summon pool that mitigates the sacrifice.
Yeah, I paraphrased with OP because of Depraved's comment before. Couldn't be bothered to multi quote. I'm not sure what horizontal progression means in terms of combat pets. Until i see combat pets in action I don't want to state what will happen. Its perfectly valid for summoners to use combat pets if they want to, the same with all other classes. Though, some summoners will have a lot of fire power. If you think 4 x Healing Minions will be meta try 4 x DPS Minions plus the Summoner at 70% power according to your calculations. That would be 190% power at 30% power for each minion and 70% power for the summoner.
If the player has to sacrifice their own power to split their power so to speak it creates an interesting dynamic. The more powerful the pet, the weaker the player is on scale.
I also like the idea of upkeep to maintain pet output and/or pet numbers to encourage more diverse playstyles with augments. Different pet classes or builds so to speak could have unique ways to upkeep pet through debuffs such as maintaining a bleed as the pet survives off of blood or even enemy corpses/souls for resource upkeep etc.
Necromantic and nature could have entirely different upkeep methods for pets.
I dont really think pets should be able to hold threat stronger than tanks or even be close to competing with them especially for PvE. Just game breaking and encourages solo play.
So, you're happy for a healing pet to outpace a bard at healing or match a bard at healing and a dps pet to assist an actual tank (tank doesn't need much power just defence) and yet you won't let dps have a tanking pet?
Honestly, I've seen a lot of broken pets in mmorpg's where the pet just tanks a group and the player sits back with their thumb in their a** while they melt the mob(s) lol. What an amazing skillset for such an immersive experience
Then you got pets that can pull threat and aggro from the tank and hold it quite easily. It's awful in my opinion. I'd rather a tug-o-war of power shifting between the player and the pet. Bring some more risk to the players side to prevent such detrimental design to the game.
I never mentioned anything about a healing pet outpacing a bard. To be honest, I feel there shouldn't be a healing pet especially to the degree you're imagining. Leave the healing to the players. Kind of reminds me of SWTOR where you could solo the first group dungeon with just a healer companion if you kited the boss around a pillar lol. That game definitely had its faults.
A tank sacrificing their power for a dps pet seems like a weird take but I suppose in some ways the primary and secondary archetypes do cross at some point if that's how it is for the tank/summoner. I do like the idea of the players sacrificing X% of power for pet 1, Y% power for pet 2, Z% power for pet 3 etc. How that directly translates to the pet should be an interesting dev discussion when they get to summoner archetype. Who knows, maybe a tank/summoner just uses summons as the spell shape? maybe soak effigy? we'll have to see
Yeah, I mean when I imagine a Tank Pet I think of the Dev Discussion on Tanks in general and how we all wanted Tanks to lose aggro sometimes to keep tanks on their toes. I envision the tank pets to use the same systems and not act like glue. Same applies to the tanks in general.
Summoner with Cleric Secondary can match or surpass Bard Heals with Summons already. I see no reason not to have a healing pet that is actually capable of healing better than not. Would i advise these healing pets are able to heal anyone but the master? I'm not so sure.
That's a fair point. A lot of tanking and threat management is very glue-like as you mentioned. This is why I mentioned the pet could be a spell shape or effigy. Maybe you summon an object that blocks for you or an animated "being", they're all shapes to me lol.
Say you sacrifice 30% of your power to summon, you only have 70% left. Ideally it's the same thing, you're just creating two entities for the power split. The pet in most situations isn't going to be able to do more than the 30% power output you gave it. Just a different way to do the same thing essentially. Pet's can come in all different shapes and forms ranging from animals, beasts, inanimate objects like totems/effigies. etc.
Add upkeep through output management and you got yourself an interesting dynamic in my opinion.
Well, I like that we can equip and level the pets. I prefer if the 30% power loss is not a direct charge of power to the pet. Thus, the pet is kind of in isolation but would die without support from the player. I want to be able to level pets and then sell pets at max level etc. I want to be able to build the pets up and watch the pets grow. I want the pets to be useful but not more powerful than my toon.
I'm not entirely sure what the direct transfer of power will be from player sacrifice to pet power but I don't see the pets being more powerful than the players. It's just a sacrifice X% to boost X%. Just more of an extension of the players versatility of class and design. Certain pets may have genetically exclusive traits/abilities if I am to go off your information about raising them. The player/host is ideally the primary.
Yeah I agree. I think we won't know the full scope until the live game. I think A2 will thrash out the actual details and a lot of changes will be made. Its pointless discussing the actual sums right now. Especially if the pet can be geared or bred differently by a breeder etc.
I will make an interesting point though going back to your cleric + summoner point.
Hypothetically, a cleric + summoner would be primarily a cleric first, with summoner like abilities while being able to potentially use cleric/summoner pets. We could see abilities come off as holy with spirit-like vfx such as a wave of holy spirits as an examples.
Similarly yet quite different,
a summoner + cleric would primarily be summoner first with the summons being more cleric-like with the allowance of similar pet types BUT they could also be allowed to use a larger range of pet types because primarily they are a summoner archetype. Hypothetically, we could see summons ranging drastically different while engaging with cleric-like VFX.
Of course then we get into augments, religion etc. I do believe we will see summoner primary have some sort of advantage with obviously summons. The players that split their power could have a drawback if the pet dies with cool down from returning lost power. That's why the tug-o-war could be interesting in temporarily shifting a little extra power back and forth while not undermining the initial power loss of different summon strengths vs sacrifice.
Also I will say with how players can group summon in sieges, I hope we see higher penalties for great battle summons like siege ogres or siege beasts brought into the battle field.
Well, a summoner+cleric can have dps minions (Death) or healing minions (Life) but, there are also two other augment schools hidden for Cleric. As you say, augments can come from elsewhere too. So its a difficult one to call but Summoner can replace any other class in a group - including support classes. Summons and pets can't buff others or the master so that means these creatures must only heal. So, its difficult to know until we see summoner in action.
Obviously we wont know until they let us know more. This is exactly why summoner classes are usually the last in development to be worked on and revealed. But this doesn't mean that the summoner + cleric wont be able to primarily heal/support while the pet theoretically does other actions around status effects going off what we previously discussed with power splitting to two entities.
Well, the summoner page on the wiki explains there are three types of summons (the same types as combat pets). I'm not certain a summoner can heal with active abilities except predominantly self heals through the 'life' augmented school. I imagine the 'life' augmented school would change the summons to healing pets which can heal others.
It's possible, but if the power split exists it would in theory be less powerful than if the class casted it.
100 power - 30 power to the pet would imply the players allowances are 70%.
This does not necessarily mean the pet will have the same power of the healer as together they will still need to equal 100 power.
A summoner primary archetype on it's own may not have cleric heals but when combined with secondary archetype cleric it would essentially have access to heals and cleric-like abilities shared through its summoned pet of choice to some extent. As far as I know, we don't know how many active pets they can have either. I'm assuming 1 specifically from the power split. Maybe temporarily ones through augments and abilities as means to potentially buff host, pet and indirectly party? Maybe we'll see some holy circles of power where if the host and pet stay in proximity there could be benefits
Well, 3 x 30 = 90 so they might be 10 off a Cleric. Of course, you'd prefer a full Cleric to be in the group (at least I would) for various reasons, but, a summoner at 90 cleric power plus a Bard at 100% Bard power (can heal based on procs and also buff the heals of the summons) means you won't have the overheal equivalent of a buffed cleric but you would have more than a full Cleric. Add to that a healing combat pet and you have 4 pets that are healing, which should surpass a full cleric in terms of raw power but not necessarily in terms of skill. I'm not stating these as facts but I've used your calculations.
That's all part of the versatility you can bring to the table with summons and archetype manipulation via augments. If the minimum you can sacrifice to the pet is 30%, that 30% is gone from you, that may also include your HP and Resource. If the player just has to sacrifice literal attack power then that is quite detrimental to design lol.
Again, this is assuming you're allowed to have multiple pets summoned at once by your comment, if you summon 3 pets at 30%, you're only left with 10% which means if you take a big hit, you pretty much failed at your role lol as if you die, your pets would die too and eventually your party.
If you're over healing a lot outside of things like Heal Over Time abilities, this would imply you're not doing a great job in higher end content because of resource management and group play. Healing isn't supposed to a spam fest as you would see in wow where the combat is wet sponges and the healer is a water hydrant lol
bear in mind, the summons boost the summoners power unlike the combat pet. SO without the summons the summoner would be at 10% power with your calculations, but, with the summons the summoner would be at 100%. With the combat pet at your calculations the summoner would be at 70%.
If the summons essentially mitigate some of the power loss to boost the summoner that significantly as you imply then that's just not good at all in terms of design. The point of sacrifice is to play around the loss not cancel it out for abuse. As mentioned, we don't know how many summons a summoner is allowed to have with or without universal combat pets added into the mix. For all we know, the summons of a summoner work the same way through sacrifice or upkeep management.
No, the devs explicitly state that the summons increase the summoners power. Also, not all summoners will have a minion. I merely used the maximum calculations provided in both instances. I'm not an advocate either way, I simply make my theory crafting and let steven or the devs make the decisions. A lot of the time my ideas aren't used but a lot of the time my ideas make changes happen which I don't request. I often find either way that the changes are beneficial in the end. Thus, I am not privy to all facts and facets, I only give what I can whilst i'm here.
No offense but dev's say a lot things during development (not specifically just intrepid). The wiki changes with updates.
That doesn't mean how it's going to be for final product. The wiki does "currently" state that the summoners summons do not have a sacrifice like how combat pet do but if combat pets are going to be that meta then it's bad design to implement as summoner archetype get a significant boost across the board in theory. There will have to be some sort of trade off to make it relatively fair. But again, we dont know the full exent of summoners summons in terms of duration, strength etc. The summoner usually is the target to kill and not the summons.
We haven't even seen the summoner. I have no real retort. All I can state is the summons boost the summoner's power. What that power entails, what the skills are and how strong the summons are remains to be seen. Furthermore, every class type will be covered by the summoner class. To state Combat Pets are OP on some classes negates the fact that hard counters exist, limitations on use exist and the Combat Pets are horizontal progression and not vertical progression like summoner's summons.
I know, I stated we haven't seen them yet earlier and said it's usually why the summoner is last to be unveiled and worked on for such reasons. I never said they are OP but considering how loosely that word is thrown around these days I can see why one may use it liberally. I said META as in Most Effective Tactic Available. If a majority of summoners end up using combat pets with summons to counter it, it's essentially a boost in theory as it's another entity to play around in the summon pool that mitigates the sacrifice.
Yeah, I paraphrased with OP because of Depraved's comment before. Couldn't be bothered to multi quote. I'm not sure what horizontal progression means in terms of combat pets. Until i see combat pets in action I don't want to state what will happen. Its perfectly valid for summoners to use combat pets if they want to, the same with all other classes. Though, some summoners will have a lot of fire power. If you think 4 x Healing Minions will be meta try 4 x DPS Minions plus the Summoner at 70% power according to your calculations. That would be 190% power at 30% power for each minion and 70% power for the summoner.
META is META lol
Universal combat pets sound interesting but at the same time they sound quite bad in my opinion. It does essentially just turn every class into a temporary pet class regardless of CD and power loss upon death.
I would rather combat pets be more significant in class design solely for summoner archetypes as summons and have them work more like combat pets where each summon is a sacrificial split in power with varying degree's of utility options to protect the summoner. Then based on the augments is how they benefit the summoner. This would still open up the door for combat pets (summons) to be raised and bred as summoners would want to claim various versions of them.
If the player has to sacrifice their own power to split their power so to speak it creates an interesting dynamic. The more powerful the pet, the weaker the player is on scale.
I also like the idea of upkeep to maintain pet output and/or pet numbers to encourage more diverse playstyles with augments. Different pet classes or builds so to speak could have unique ways to upkeep pet through debuffs such as maintaining a bleed as the pet survives off of blood or even enemy corpses/souls for resource upkeep etc.
Necromantic and nature could have entirely different upkeep methods for pets.
I dont really think pets should be able to hold threat stronger than tanks or even be close to competing with them especially for PvE. Just game breaking and encourages solo play.
So, you're happy for a healing pet to outpace a bard at healing or match a bard at healing and a dps pet to assist an actual tank (tank doesn't need much power just defence) and yet you won't let dps have a tanking pet?
Honestly, I've seen a lot of broken pets in mmorpg's where the pet just tanks a group and the player sits back with their thumb in their a** while they melt the mob(s) lol. What an amazing skillset for such an immersive experience
Then you got pets that can pull threat and aggro from the tank and hold it quite easily. It's awful in my opinion. I'd rather a tug-o-war of power shifting between the player and the pet. Bring some more risk to the players side to prevent such detrimental design to the game.
I never mentioned anything about a healing pet outpacing a bard. To be honest, I feel there shouldn't be a healing pet especially to the degree you're imagining. Leave the healing to the players. Kind of reminds me of SWTOR where you could solo the first group dungeon with just a healer companion if you kited the boss around a pillar lol. That game definitely had its faults.
A tank sacrificing their power for a dps pet seems like a weird take but I suppose in some ways the primary and secondary archetypes do cross at some point if that's how it is for the tank/summoner. I do like the idea of the players sacrificing X% of power for pet 1, Y% power for pet 2, Z% power for pet 3 etc. How that directly translates to the pet should be an interesting dev discussion when they get to summoner archetype. Who knows, maybe a tank/summoner just uses summons as the spell shape? maybe soak effigy? we'll have to see
Yeah, I mean when I imagine a Tank Pet I think of the Dev Discussion on Tanks in general and how we all wanted Tanks to lose aggro sometimes to keep tanks on their toes. I envision the tank pets to use the same systems and not act like glue. Same applies to the tanks in general.
Summoner with Cleric Secondary can match or surpass Bard Heals with Summons already. I see no reason not to have a healing pet that is actually capable of healing better than not. Would i advise these healing pets are able to heal anyone but the master? I'm not so sure.
That's a fair point. A lot of tanking and threat management is very glue-like as you mentioned. This is why I mentioned the pet could be a spell shape or effigy. Maybe you summon an object that blocks for you or an animated "being", they're all shapes to me lol.
Say you sacrifice 30% of your power to summon, you only have 70% left. Ideally it's the same thing, you're just creating two entities for the power split. The pet in most situations isn't going to be able to do more than the 30% power output you gave it. Just a different way to do the same thing essentially. Pet's can come in all different shapes and forms ranging from animals, beasts, inanimate objects like totems/effigies. etc.
Add upkeep through output management and you got yourself an interesting dynamic in my opinion.
Well, I like that we can equip and level the pets. I prefer if the 30% power loss is not a direct charge of power to the pet. Thus, the pet is kind of in isolation but would die without support from the player. I want to be able to level pets and then sell pets at max level etc. I want to be able to build the pets up and watch the pets grow. I want the pets to be useful but not more powerful than my toon.
I'm not entirely sure what the direct transfer of power will be from player sacrifice to pet power but I don't see the pets being more powerful than the players. It's just a sacrifice X% to boost X%. Just more of an extension of the players versatility of class and design. Certain pets may have genetically exclusive traits/abilities if I am to go off your information about raising them. The player/host is ideally the primary.
Yeah I agree. I think we won't know the full scope until the live game. I think A2 will thrash out the actual details and a lot of changes will be made. Its pointless discussing the actual sums right now. Especially if the pet can be geared or bred differently by a breeder etc.
I will make an interesting point though going back to your cleric + summoner point.
Hypothetically, a cleric + summoner would be primarily a cleric first, with summoner like abilities while being able to potentially use cleric/summoner pets. We could see abilities come off as holy with spirit-like vfx such as a wave of holy spirits as an examples.
Similarly yet quite different,
a summoner + cleric would primarily be summoner first with the summons being more cleric-like with the allowance of similar pet types BUT they could also be allowed to use a larger range of pet types because primarily they are a summoner archetype. Hypothetically, we could see summons ranging drastically different while engaging with cleric-like VFX.
Of course then we get into augments, religion etc. I do believe we will see summoner primary have some sort of advantage with obviously summons. The players that split their power could have a drawback if the pet dies with cool down from returning lost power. That's why the tug-o-war could be interesting in temporarily shifting a little extra power back and forth while not undermining the initial power loss of different summon strengths vs sacrifice.
Also I will say with how players can group summon in sieges, I hope we see higher penalties for great battle summons like siege ogres or siege beasts brought into the battle field.
Well, a summoner+cleric can have dps minions (Death) or healing minions (Life) but, there are also two other augment schools hidden for Cleric. As you say, augments can come from elsewhere too. So its a difficult one to call but Summoner can replace any other class in a group - including support classes. Summons and pets can't buff others or the master so that means these creatures must only heal. So, its difficult to know until we see summoner in action.
Obviously we wont know until they let us know more. This is exactly why summoner classes are usually the last in development to be worked on and revealed. But this doesn't mean that the summoner + cleric wont be able to primarily heal/support while the pet theoretically does other actions around status effects going off what we previously discussed with power splitting to two entities.
Well, the summoner page on the wiki explains there are three types of summons (the same types as combat pets). I'm not certain a summoner can heal with active abilities except predominantly self heals through the 'life' augmented school. I imagine the 'life' augmented school would change the summons to healing pets which can heal others.
It's possible, but if the power split exists it would in theory be less powerful than if the class casted it.
100 power - 30 power to the pet would imply the players allowances are 70%.
This does not necessarily mean the pet will have the same power of the healer as together they will still need to equal 100 power.
A summoner primary archetype on it's own may not have cleric heals but when combined with secondary archetype cleric it would essentially have access to heals and cleric-like abilities shared through its summoned pet of choice to some extent. As far as I know, we don't know how many active pets they can have either. I'm assuming 1 specifically from the power split. Maybe temporarily ones through augments and abilities as means to potentially buff host, pet and indirectly party? Maybe we'll see some holy circles of power where if the host and pet stay in proximity there could be benefits
Well, 3 x 30 = 90 so they might be 10 off a Cleric. Of course, you'd prefer a full Cleric to be in the group (at least I would) for various reasons, but, a summoner at 90 cleric power plus a Bard at 100% Bard power (can heal based on procs and also buff the heals of the summons) means you won't have the overheal equivalent of a buffed cleric but you would have more than a full Cleric. Add to that a healing combat pet and you have 4 pets that are healing, which should surpass a full cleric in terms of raw power but not necessarily in terms of skill. I'm not stating these as facts but I've used your calculations.
That's all part of the versatility you can bring to the table with summons and archetype manipulation via augments. If the minimum you can sacrifice to the pet is 30%, that 30% is gone from you, that may also include your HP and Resource. If the player just has to sacrifice literal attack power then that is quite detrimental to design lol.
Again, this is assuming you're allowed to have multiple pets summoned at once by your comment, if you summon 3 pets at 30%, you're only left with 10% which means if you take a big hit, you pretty much failed at your role lol as if you die, your pets would die too and eventually your party.
If you're over healing a lot outside of things like Heal Over Time abilities, this would imply you're not doing a great job in higher end content because of resource management and group play. Healing isn't supposed to a spam fest as you would see in wow where the combat is wet sponges and the healer is a water hydrant lol
bear in mind, the summons boost the summoners power unlike the combat pet. SO without the summons the summoner would be at 10% power with your calculations, but, with the summons the summoner would be at 100%. With the combat pet at your calculations the summoner would be at 70%.
If the summons essentially mitigate some of the power loss to boost the summoner that significantly as you imply then that's just not good at all in terms of design. The point of sacrifice is to play around the loss not cancel it out for abuse. As mentioned, we don't know how many summons a summoner is allowed to have with or without universal combat pets added into the mix. For all we know, the summons of a summoner work the same way through sacrifice or upkeep management.
No, the devs explicitly state that the summons increase the summoners power. Also, not all summoners will have a minion. I merely used the maximum calculations provided in both instances. I'm not an advocate either way, I simply make my theory crafting and let steven or the devs make the decisions. A lot of the time my ideas aren't used but a lot of the time my ideas make changes happen which I don't request. I often find either way that the changes are beneficial in the end. Thus, I am not privy to all facts and facets, I only give what I can whilst i'm here.
No offense but dev's say a lot things during development (not specifically just intrepid). The wiki changes with updates.
That doesn't mean how it's going to be for final product. The wiki does "currently" state that the summoners summons do not have a sacrifice like how combat pet do but if combat pets are going to be that meta then it's bad design to implement as summoner archetype get a significant boost across the board in theory. There will have to be some sort of trade off to make it relatively fair. But again, we dont know the full exent of summoners summons in terms of duration, strength etc. The summoner usually is the target to kill and not the summons.
core mechanics / systems arent likely to change, what will change is the numbers. summoner's pet will boost the master's power. how much? we dont know. it could be 1%, 5%, 10% 50% thats what will change, not the fact that they boost the master.
combat pets will take power from the master. how much? 1%, 5%, 10%, 50%? we dont know, that will be balanced when people can play. but the fact that they take power from the master wont likely change.
As of right now, I currently don't like the idea of universal combat pets. Sounds like a weird design goal especially with summoner archetypes. Summoner pets should work how combat pets are currently supposed to work in relation to archetype and class allowances.
If the player has to sacrifice their own power to split their power so to speak it creates an interesting dynamic. The more powerful the pet, the weaker the player is on scale.
I also like the idea of upkeep to maintain pet output and/or pet numbers to encourage more diverse playstyles with augments. Different pet classes or builds so to speak could have unique ways to upkeep pet through debuffs such as maintaining a bleed as the pet survives off of blood or even enemy corpses/souls for resource upkeep etc.
Necromantic and nature could have entirely different upkeep methods for pets.
I dont really think pets should be able to hold threat stronger than tanks or even be close to competing with them especially for PvE. Just game breaking and encourages solo play.
So, you're happy for a healing pet to outpace a bard at healing or match a bard at healing and a dps pet to assist an actual tank (tank doesn't need much power just defence) and yet you won't let dps have a tanking pet?
Honestly, I've seen a lot of broken pets in mmorpg's where the pet just tanks a group and the player sits back with their thumb in their a** while they melt the mob(s) lol. What an amazing skillset for such an immersive experience
Then you got pets that can pull threat and aggro from the tank and hold it quite easily. It's awful in my opinion. I'd rather a tug-o-war of power shifting between the player and the pet. Bring some more risk to the players side to prevent such detrimental design to the game.
I never mentioned anything about a healing pet outpacing a bard. To be honest, I feel there shouldn't be a healing pet especially to the degree you're imagining. Leave the healing to the players. Kind of reminds me of SWTOR where you could solo the first group dungeon with just a healer companion if you kited the boss around a pillar lol. That game definitely had its faults.
A tank sacrificing their power for a dps pet seems like a weird take but I suppose in some ways the primary and secondary archetypes do cross at some point if that's how it is for the tank/summoner. I do like the idea of the players sacrificing X% of power for pet 1, Y% power for pet 2, Z% power for pet 3 etc. How that directly translates to the pet should be an interesting dev discussion when they get to summoner archetype. Who knows, maybe a tank/summoner just uses summons as the spell shape? maybe soak effigy? we'll have to see
Yeah, I mean when I imagine a Tank Pet I think of the Dev Discussion on Tanks in general and how we all wanted Tanks to lose aggro sometimes to keep tanks on their toes. I envision the tank pets to use the same systems and not act like glue. Same applies to the tanks in general.
Summoner with Cleric Secondary can match or surpass Bard Heals with Summons already. I see no reason not to have a healing pet that is actually capable of healing better than not. Would i advise these healing pets are able to heal anyone but the master? I'm not so sure.
That's a fair point. A lot of tanking and threat management is very glue-like as you mentioned. This is why I mentioned the pet could be a spell shape or effigy. Maybe you summon an object that blocks for you or an animated "being", they're all shapes to me lol.
Say you sacrifice 30% of your power to summon, you only have 70% left. Ideally it's the same thing, you're just creating two entities for the power split. The pet in most situations isn't going to be able to do more than the 30% power output you gave it. Just a different way to do the same thing essentially. Pet's can come in all different shapes and forms ranging from animals, beasts, inanimate objects like totems/effigies. etc.
Add upkeep through output management and you got yourself an interesting dynamic in my opinion.
Well, I like that we can equip and level the pets. I prefer if the 30% power loss is not a direct charge of power to the pet. Thus, the pet is kind of in isolation but would die without support from the player. I want to be able to level pets and then sell pets at max level etc. I want to be able to build the pets up and watch the pets grow. I want the pets to be useful but not more powerful than my toon.
I'm not entirely sure what the direct transfer of power will be from player sacrifice to pet power but I don't see the pets being more powerful than the players. It's just a sacrifice X% to boost X%. Just more of an extension of the players versatility of class and design. Certain pets may have genetically exclusive traits/abilities if I am to go off your information about raising them. The player/host is ideally the primary.
Yeah I agree. I think we won't know the full scope until the live game. I think A2 will thrash out the actual details and a lot of changes will be made. Its pointless discussing the actual sums right now. Especially if the pet can be geared or bred differently by a breeder etc.
I will make an interesting point though going back to your cleric + summoner point.
Hypothetically, a cleric + summoner would be primarily a cleric first, with summoner like abilities while being able to potentially use cleric/summoner pets. We could see abilities come off as holy with spirit-like vfx such as a wave of holy spirits as an examples.
Similarly yet quite different,
a summoner + cleric would primarily be summoner first with the summons being more cleric-like with the allowance of similar pet types BUT they could also be allowed to use a larger range of pet types because primarily they are a summoner archetype. Hypothetically, we could see summons ranging drastically different while engaging with cleric-like VFX.
Of course then we get into augments, religion etc. I do believe we will see summoner primary have some sort of advantage with obviously summons. The players that split their power could have a drawback if the pet dies with cool down from returning lost power. That's why the tug-o-war could be interesting in temporarily shifting a little extra power back and forth while not undermining the initial power loss of different summon strengths vs sacrifice.
Also I will say with how players can group summon in sieges, I hope we see higher penalties for great battle summons like siege ogres or siege beasts brought into the battle field.
Well, a summoner+cleric can have dps minions (Death) or healing minions (Life) but, there are also two other augment schools hidden for Cleric. As you say, augments can come from elsewhere too. So its a difficult one to call but Summoner can replace any other class in a group - including support classes. Summons and pets can't buff others or the master so that means these creatures must only heal. So, its difficult to know until we see summoner in action.
Obviously we wont know until they let us know more. This is exactly why summoner classes are usually the last in development to be worked on and revealed. But this doesn't mean that the summoner + cleric wont be able to primarily heal/support while the pet theoretically does other actions around status effects going off what we previously discussed with power splitting to two entities.
Well, the summoner page on the wiki explains there are three types of summons (the same types as combat pets). I'm not certain a summoner can heal with active abilities except predominantly self heals through the 'life' augmented school. I imagine the 'life' augmented school would change the summons to healing pets which can heal others.
It's possible, but if the power split exists it would in theory be less powerful than if the class casted it.
100 power - 30 power to the pet would imply the players allowances are 70%.
This does not necessarily mean the pet will have the same power of the healer as together they will still need to equal 100 power.
A summoner primary archetype on it's own may not have cleric heals but when combined with secondary archetype cleric it would essentially have access to heals and cleric-like abilities shared through its summoned pet of choice to some extent. As far as I know, we don't know how many active pets they can have either. I'm assuming 1 specifically from the power split. Maybe temporarily ones through augments and abilities as means to potentially buff host, pet and indirectly party? Maybe we'll see some holy circles of power where if the host and pet stay in proximity there could be benefits
Well, 3 x 30 = 90 so they might be 10 off a Cleric. Of course, you'd prefer a full Cleric to be in the group (at least I would) for various reasons, but, a summoner at 90 cleric power plus a Bard at 100% Bard power (can heal based on procs and also buff the heals of the summons) means you won't have the overheal equivalent of a buffed cleric but you would have more than a full Cleric. Add to that a healing combat pet and you have 4 pets that are healing, which should surpass a full cleric in terms of raw power but not necessarily in terms of skill. I'm not stating these as facts but I've used your calculations.
That's all part of the versatility you can bring to the table with summons and archetype manipulation via augments. If the minimum you can sacrifice to the pet is 30%, that 30% is gone from you, that may also include your HP and Resource. If the player just has to sacrifice literal attack power then that is quite detrimental to design lol.
Again, this is assuming you're allowed to have multiple pets summoned at once by your comment, if you summon 3 pets at 30%, you're only left with 10% which means if you take a big hit, you pretty much failed at your role lol as if you die, your pets would die too and eventually your party.
If you're over healing a lot outside of things like Heal Over Time abilities, this would imply you're not doing a great job in higher end content because of resource management and group play. Healing isn't supposed to a spam fest as you would see in wow where the combat is wet sponges and the healer is a water hydrant lol
bear in mind, the summons boost the summoners power unlike the combat pet. SO without the summons the summoner would be at 10% power with your calculations, but, with the summons the summoner would be at 100%. With the combat pet at your calculations the summoner would be at 70%.
If the summons essentially mitigate some of the power loss to boost the summoner that significantly as you imply then that's just not good at all in terms of design. The point of sacrifice is to play around the loss not cancel it out for abuse. As mentioned, we don't know how many summons a summoner is allowed to have with or without universal combat pets added into the mix. For all we know, the summons of a summoner work the same way through sacrifice or upkeep management.
No, the devs explicitly state that the summons increase the summoners power. Also, not all summoners will have a minion. I merely used the maximum calculations provided in both instances. I'm not an advocate either way, I simply make my theory crafting and let steven or the devs make the decisions. A lot of the time my ideas aren't used but a lot of the time my ideas make changes happen which I don't request. I often find either way that the changes are beneficial in the end. Thus, I am not privy to all facts and facets, I only give what I can whilst i'm here.
No offense but dev's say a lot things during development (not specifically just intrepid). The wiki changes with updates.
That doesn't mean how it's going to be for final product. The wiki does "currently" state that the summoners summons do not have a sacrifice like how combat pet do but if combat pets are going to be that meta then it's bad design to implement as summoner archetype get a significant boost across the board in theory. There will have to be some sort of trade off to make it relatively fair. But again, we dont know the full exent of summoners summons in terms of duration, strength etc. The summoner usually is the target to kill and not the summons.
We haven't even seen the summoner. I have no real retort. All I can state is the summons boost the summoner's power. What that power entails, what the skills are and how strong the summons are remains to be seen. Furthermore, every class type will be covered by the summoner class. To state Combat Pets are OP on some classes negates the fact that hard counters exist, limitations on use exist and the Combat Pets are horizontal progression and not vertical progression like summoner's summons.
I know, I stated we haven't seen them yet earlier and said it's usually why the summoner is last to be unveiled and worked on for such reasons. I never said they are OP but considering how loosely that word is thrown around these days I can see why one may use it liberally. I said META as in Most Effective Tactic Available. If a majority of summoners end up using combat pets with summons to counter it, it's essentially a boost in theory as it's another entity to play around in the summon pool that mitigates the sacrifice.
Yeah, I paraphrased with OP because of Depraved's comment before. Couldn't be bothered to multi quote. I'm not sure what horizontal progression means in terms of combat pets. Until i see combat pets in action I don't want to state what will happen. Its perfectly valid for summoners to use combat pets if they want to, the same with all other classes. Though, some summoners will have a lot of fire power. If you think 4 x Healing Minions will be meta try 4 x DPS Minions plus the Summoner at 70% power according to your calculations. That would be 190% power at 30% power for each minion and 70% power for the summoner.
META is META lol
Universal combat pets sound interesting but at the same time they sound quite bad in my opinion. It does essentially just turn every class into a temporary pet class regardless of CD and power loss upon death.
I would rather combat pets be more significant in class design solely for summoner archetypes as summons and have them work more like combat pets where each summon is a sacrificial split in power with varying degree's of utility options to protect the summoner. Then based on the augments is how they benefit the summoner. This would still open up the door for combat pets (summons) to be raised and bred as summoners would want to claim various versions of them.
Combat Pets are a way to mitigate against the summoners. Each hard counter has a counter measure to narrow the field. You can't completely negate the power gaps between hard counters but you can narrow the gap slightly. Also, combat pets can't be used everywhere unlike minions so a summoner would be gimped in those locations if they only had combat pets.
If the player has to sacrifice their own power to split their power so to speak it creates an interesting dynamic. The more powerful the pet, the weaker the player is on scale.
I also like the idea of upkeep to maintain pet output and/or pet numbers to encourage more diverse playstyles with augments. Different pet classes or builds so to speak could have unique ways to upkeep pet through debuffs such as maintaining a bleed as the pet survives off of blood or even enemy corpses/souls for resource upkeep etc.
Necromantic and nature could have entirely different upkeep methods for pets.
I dont really think pets should be able to hold threat stronger than tanks or even be close to competing with them especially for PvE. Just game breaking and encourages solo play.
So, you're happy for a healing pet to outpace a bard at healing or match a bard at healing and a dps pet to assist an actual tank (tank doesn't need much power just defence) and yet you won't let dps have a tanking pet?
Honestly, I've seen a lot of broken pets in mmorpg's where the pet just tanks a group and the player sits back with their thumb in their a** while they melt the mob(s) lol. What an amazing skillset for such an immersive experience
Then you got pets that can pull threat and aggro from the tank and hold it quite easily. It's awful in my opinion. I'd rather a tug-o-war of power shifting between the player and the pet. Bring some more risk to the players side to prevent such detrimental design to the game.
I never mentioned anything about a healing pet outpacing a bard. To be honest, I feel there shouldn't be a healing pet especially to the degree you're imagining. Leave the healing to the players. Kind of reminds me of SWTOR where you could solo the first group dungeon with just a healer companion if you kited the boss around a pillar lol. That game definitely had its faults.
A tank sacrificing their power for a dps pet seems like a weird take but I suppose in some ways the primary and secondary archetypes do cross at some point if that's how it is for the tank/summoner. I do like the idea of the players sacrificing X% of power for pet 1, Y% power for pet 2, Z% power for pet 3 etc. How that directly translates to the pet should be an interesting dev discussion when they get to summoner archetype. Who knows, maybe a tank/summoner just uses summons as the spell shape? maybe soak effigy? we'll have to see
Yeah, I mean when I imagine a Tank Pet I think of the Dev Discussion on Tanks in general and how we all wanted Tanks to lose aggro sometimes to keep tanks on their toes. I envision the tank pets to use the same systems and not act like glue. Same applies to the tanks in general.
Summoner with Cleric Secondary can match or surpass Bard Heals with Summons already. I see no reason not to have a healing pet that is actually capable of healing better than not. Would i advise these healing pets are able to heal anyone but the master? I'm not so sure.
That's a fair point. A lot of tanking and threat management is very glue-like as you mentioned. This is why I mentioned the pet could be a spell shape or effigy. Maybe you summon an object that blocks for you or an animated "being", they're all shapes to me lol.
Say you sacrifice 30% of your power to summon, you only have 70% left. Ideally it's the same thing, you're just creating two entities for the power split. The pet in most situations isn't going to be able to do more than the 30% power output you gave it. Just a different way to do the same thing essentially. Pet's can come in all different shapes and forms ranging from animals, beasts, inanimate objects like totems/effigies. etc.
Add upkeep through output management and you got yourself an interesting dynamic in my opinion.
Well, I like that we can equip and level the pets. I prefer if the 30% power loss is not a direct charge of power to the pet. Thus, the pet is kind of in isolation but would die without support from the player. I want to be able to level pets and then sell pets at max level etc. I want to be able to build the pets up and watch the pets grow. I want the pets to be useful but not more powerful than my toon.
I'm not entirely sure what the direct transfer of power will be from player sacrifice to pet power but I don't see the pets being more powerful than the players. It's just a sacrifice X% to boost X%. Just more of an extension of the players versatility of class and design. Certain pets may have genetically exclusive traits/abilities if I am to go off your information about raising them. The player/host is ideally the primary.
Yeah I agree. I think we won't know the full scope until the live game. I think A2 will thrash out the actual details and a lot of changes will be made. Its pointless discussing the actual sums right now. Especially if the pet can be geared or bred differently by a breeder etc.
I will make an interesting point though going back to your cleric + summoner point.
Hypothetically, a cleric + summoner would be primarily a cleric first, with summoner like abilities while being able to potentially use cleric/summoner pets. We could see abilities come off as holy with spirit-like vfx such as a wave of holy spirits as an examples.
Similarly yet quite different,
a summoner + cleric would primarily be summoner first with the summons being more cleric-like with the allowance of similar pet types BUT they could also be allowed to use a larger range of pet types because primarily they are a summoner archetype. Hypothetically, we could see summons ranging drastically different while engaging with cleric-like VFX.
Of course then we get into augments, religion etc. I do believe we will see summoner primary have some sort of advantage with obviously summons. The players that split their power could have a drawback if the pet dies with cool down from returning lost power. That's why the tug-o-war could be interesting in temporarily shifting a little extra power back and forth while not undermining the initial power loss of different summon strengths vs sacrifice.
Also I will say with how players can group summon in sieges, I hope we see higher penalties for great battle summons like siege ogres or siege beasts brought into the battle field.
Well, a summoner+cleric can have dps minions (Death) or healing minions (Life) but, there are also two other augment schools hidden for Cleric. As you say, augments can come from elsewhere too. So its a difficult one to call but Summoner can replace any other class in a group - including support classes. Summons and pets can't buff others or the master so that means these creatures must only heal. So, its difficult to know until we see summoner in action.
Obviously we wont know until they let us know more. This is exactly why summoner classes are usually the last in development to be worked on and revealed. But this doesn't mean that the summoner + cleric wont be able to primarily heal/support while the pet theoretically does other actions around status effects going off what we previously discussed with power splitting to two entities.
Well, the summoner page on the wiki explains there are three types of summons (the same types as combat pets). I'm not certain a summoner can heal with active abilities except predominantly self heals through the 'life' augmented school. I imagine the 'life' augmented school would change the summons to healing pets which can heal others.
It's possible, but if the power split exists it would in theory be less powerful than if the class casted it.
100 power - 30 power to the pet would imply the players allowances are 70%.
This does not necessarily mean the pet will have the same power of the healer as together they will still need to equal 100 power.
A summoner primary archetype on it's own may not have cleric heals but when combined with secondary archetype cleric it would essentially have access to heals and cleric-like abilities shared through its summoned pet of choice to some extent. As far as I know, we don't know how many active pets they can have either. I'm assuming 1 specifically from the power split. Maybe temporarily ones through augments and abilities as means to potentially buff host, pet and indirectly party? Maybe we'll see some holy circles of power where if the host and pet stay in proximity there could be benefits
Well, 3 x 30 = 90 so they might be 10 off a Cleric. Of course, you'd prefer a full Cleric to be in the group (at least I would) for various reasons, but, a summoner at 90 cleric power plus a Bard at 100% Bard power (can heal based on procs and also buff the heals of the summons) means you won't have the overheal equivalent of a buffed cleric but you would have more than a full Cleric. Add to that a healing combat pet and you have 4 pets that are healing, which should surpass a full cleric in terms of raw power but not necessarily in terms of skill. I'm not stating these as facts but I've used your calculations.
That's all part of the versatility you can bring to the table with summons and archetype manipulation via augments. If the minimum you can sacrifice to the pet is 30%, that 30% is gone from you, that may also include your HP and Resource. If the player just has to sacrifice literal attack power then that is quite detrimental to design lol.
Again, this is assuming you're allowed to have multiple pets summoned at once by your comment, if you summon 3 pets at 30%, you're only left with 10% which means if you take a big hit, you pretty much failed at your role lol as if you die, your pets would die too and eventually your party.
If you're over healing a lot outside of things like Heal Over Time abilities, this would imply you're not doing a great job in higher end content because of resource management and group play. Healing isn't supposed to a spam fest as you would see in wow where the combat is wet sponges and the healer is a water hydrant lol
bear in mind, the summons boost the summoners power unlike the combat pet. SO without the summons the summoner would be at 10% power with your calculations, but, with the summons the summoner would be at 100%. With the combat pet at your calculations the summoner would be at 70%.
If the summons essentially mitigate some of the power loss to boost the summoner that significantly as you imply then that's just not good at all in terms of design. The point of sacrifice is to play around the loss not cancel it out for abuse. As mentioned, we don't know how many summons a summoner is allowed to have with or without universal combat pets added into the mix. For all we know, the summons of a summoner work the same way through sacrifice or upkeep management.
No, the devs explicitly state that the summons increase the summoners power. Also, not all summoners will have a minion. I merely used the maximum calculations provided in both instances. I'm not an advocate either way, I simply make my theory crafting and let steven or the devs make the decisions. A lot of the time my ideas aren't used but a lot of the time my ideas make changes happen which I don't request. I often find either way that the changes are beneficial in the end. Thus, I am not privy to all facts and facets, I only give what I can whilst i'm here.
No offense but dev's say a lot things during development (not specifically just intrepid). The wiki changes with updates.
That doesn't mean how it's going to be for final product. The wiki does "currently" state that the summoners summons do not have a sacrifice like how combat pet do but if combat pets are going to be that meta then it's bad design to implement as summoner archetype get a significant boost across the board in theory. There will have to be some sort of trade off to make it relatively fair. But again, we dont know the full exent of summoners summons in terms of duration, strength etc. The summoner usually is the target to kill and not the summons.
core mechanics / systems arent likely to change, what will change is the numbers. summoner's pet will boost the master's power. how much? we dont know. it could be 1%, 5%, 10% 50% thats what will change, not the fact that they boost the master.
combat pets will take power from the master. how much? 1%, 5%, 10%, 50%? we dont know, that will be balanced when people can play. but the fact that they take power from the master wont likely change.
That's what tuning is in terms of "balance" and we previously discussed that. If they tune it so the combat pets sacrifice is essentially mitigated then that's just weird
If the player has to sacrifice their own power to split their power so to speak it creates an interesting dynamic. The more powerful the pet, the weaker the player is on scale.
I also like the idea of upkeep to maintain pet output and/or pet numbers to encourage more diverse playstyles with augments. Different pet classes or builds so to speak could have unique ways to upkeep pet through debuffs such as maintaining a bleed as the pet survives off of blood or even enemy corpses/souls for resource upkeep etc.
Necromantic and nature could have entirely different upkeep methods for pets.
I dont really think pets should be able to hold threat stronger than tanks or even be close to competing with them especially for PvE. Just game breaking and encourages solo play.
So, you're happy for a healing pet to outpace a bard at healing or match a bard at healing and a dps pet to assist an actual tank (tank doesn't need much power just defence) and yet you won't let dps have a tanking pet?
Honestly, I've seen a lot of broken pets in mmorpg's where the pet just tanks a group and the player sits back with their thumb in their a** while they melt the mob(s) lol. What an amazing skillset for such an immersive experience
Then you got pets that can pull threat and aggro from the tank and hold it quite easily. It's awful in my opinion. I'd rather a tug-o-war of power shifting between the player and the pet. Bring some more risk to the players side to prevent such detrimental design to the game.
I never mentioned anything about a healing pet outpacing a bard. To be honest, I feel there shouldn't be a healing pet especially to the degree you're imagining. Leave the healing to the players. Kind of reminds me of SWTOR where you could solo the first group dungeon with just a healer companion if you kited the boss around a pillar lol. That game definitely had its faults.
A tank sacrificing their power for a dps pet seems like a weird take but I suppose in some ways the primary and secondary archetypes do cross at some point if that's how it is for the tank/summoner. I do like the idea of the players sacrificing X% of power for pet 1, Y% power for pet 2, Z% power for pet 3 etc. How that directly translates to the pet should be an interesting dev discussion when they get to summoner archetype. Who knows, maybe a tank/summoner just uses summons as the spell shape? maybe soak effigy? we'll have to see
Yeah, I mean when I imagine a Tank Pet I think of the Dev Discussion on Tanks in general and how we all wanted Tanks to lose aggro sometimes to keep tanks on their toes. I envision the tank pets to use the same systems and not act like glue. Same applies to the tanks in general.
Summoner with Cleric Secondary can match or surpass Bard Heals with Summons already. I see no reason not to have a healing pet that is actually capable of healing better than not. Would i advise these healing pets are able to heal anyone but the master? I'm not so sure.
That's a fair point. A lot of tanking and threat management is very glue-like as you mentioned. This is why I mentioned the pet could be a spell shape or effigy. Maybe you summon an object that blocks for you or an animated "being", they're all shapes to me lol.
Say you sacrifice 30% of your power to summon, you only have 70% left. Ideally it's the same thing, you're just creating two entities for the power split. The pet in most situations isn't going to be able to do more than the 30% power output you gave it. Just a different way to do the same thing essentially. Pet's can come in all different shapes and forms ranging from animals, beasts, inanimate objects like totems/effigies. etc.
Add upkeep through output management and you got yourself an interesting dynamic in my opinion.
Well, I like that we can equip and level the pets. I prefer if the 30% power loss is not a direct charge of power to the pet. Thus, the pet is kind of in isolation but would die without support from the player. I want to be able to level pets and then sell pets at max level etc. I want to be able to build the pets up and watch the pets grow. I want the pets to be useful but not more powerful than my toon.
I'm not entirely sure what the direct transfer of power will be from player sacrifice to pet power but I don't see the pets being more powerful than the players. It's just a sacrifice X% to boost X%. Just more of an extension of the players versatility of class and design. Certain pets may have genetically exclusive traits/abilities if I am to go off your information about raising them. The player/host is ideally the primary.
Yeah I agree. I think we won't know the full scope until the live game. I think A2 will thrash out the actual details and a lot of changes will be made. Its pointless discussing the actual sums right now. Especially if the pet can be geared or bred differently by a breeder etc.
I will make an interesting point though going back to your cleric + summoner point.
Hypothetically, a cleric + summoner would be primarily a cleric first, with summoner like abilities while being able to potentially use cleric/summoner pets. We could see abilities come off as holy with spirit-like vfx such as a wave of holy spirits as an examples.
Similarly yet quite different,
a summoner + cleric would primarily be summoner first with the summons being more cleric-like with the allowance of similar pet types BUT they could also be allowed to use a larger range of pet types because primarily they are a summoner archetype. Hypothetically, we could see summons ranging drastically different while engaging with cleric-like VFX.
Of course then we get into augments, religion etc. I do believe we will see summoner primary have some sort of advantage with obviously summons. The players that split their power could have a drawback if the pet dies with cool down from returning lost power. That's why the tug-o-war could be interesting in temporarily shifting a little extra power back and forth while not undermining the initial power loss of different summon strengths vs sacrifice.
Also I will say with how players can group summon in sieges, I hope we see higher penalties for great battle summons like siege ogres or siege beasts brought into the battle field.
Well, a summoner+cleric can have dps minions (Death) or healing minions (Life) but, there are also two other augment schools hidden for Cleric. As you say, augments can come from elsewhere too. So its a difficult one to call but Summoner can replace any other class in a group - including support classes. Summons and pets can't buff others or the master so that means these creatures must only heal. So, its difficult to know until we see summoner in action.
Obviously we wont know until they let us know more. This is exactly why summoner classes are usually the last in development to be worked on and revealed. But this doesn't mean that the summoner + cleric wont be able to primarily heal/support while the pet theoretically does other actions around status effects going off what we previously discussed with power splitting to two entities.
Well, the summoner page on the wiki explains there are three types of summons (the same types as combat pets). I'm not certain a summoner can heal with active abilities except predominantly self heals through the 'life' augmented school. I imagine the 'life' augmented school would change the summons to healing pets which can heal others.
It's possible, but if the power split exists it would in theory be less powerful than if the class casted it.
100 power - 30 power to the pet would imply the players allowances are 70%.
This does not necessarily mean the pet will have the same power of the healer as together they will still need to equal 100 power.
A summoner primary archetype on it's own may not have cleric heals but when combined with secondary archetype cleric it would essentially have access to heals and cleric-like abilities shared through its summoned pet of choice to some extent. As far as I know, we don't know how many active pets they can have either. I'm assuming 1 specifically from the power split. Maybe temporarily ones through augments and abilities as means to potentially buff host, pet and indirectly party? Maybe we'll see some holy circles of power where if the host and pet stay in proximity there could be benefits
Well, 3 x 30 = 90 so they might be 10 off a Cleric. Of course, you'd prefer a full Cleric to be in the group (at least I would) for various reasons, but, a summoner at 90 cleric power plus a Bard at 100% Bard power (can heal based on procs and also buff the heals of the summons) means you won't have the overheal equivalent of a buffed cleric but you would have more than a full Cleric. Add to that a healing combat pet and you have 4 pets that are healing, which should surpass a full cleric in terms of raw power but not necessarily in terms of skill. I'm not stating these as facts but I've used your calculations.
That's all part of the versatility you can bring to the table with summons and archetype manipulation via augments. If the minimum you can sacrifice to the pet is 30%, that 30% is gone from you, that may also include your HP and Resource. If the player just has to sacrifice literal attack power then that is quite detrimental to design lol.
Again, this is assuming you're allowed to have multiple pets summoned at once by your comment, if you summon 3 pets at 30%, you're only left with 10% which means if you take a big hit, you pretty much failed at your role lol as if you die, your pets would die too and eventually your party.
If you're over healing a lot outside of things like Heal Over Time abilities, this would imply you're not doing a great job in higher end content because of resource management and group play. Healing isn't supposed to a spam fest as you would see in wow where the combat is wet sponges and the healer is a water hydrant lol
bear in mind, the summons boost the summoners power unlike the combat pet. SO without the summons the summoner would be at 10% power with your calculations, but, with the summons the summoner would be at 100%. With the combat pet at your calculations the summoner would be at 70%.
If the summons essentially mitigate some of the power loss to boost the summoner that significantly as you imply then that's just not good at all in terms of design. The point of sacrifice is to play around the loss not cancel it out for abuse. As mentioned, we don't know how many summons a summoner is allowed to have with or without universal combat pets added into the mix. For all we know, the summons of a summoner work the same way through sacrifice or upkeep management.
No, the devs explicitly state that the summons increase the summoners power. Also, not all summoners will have a minion. I merely used the maximum calculations provided in both instances. I'm not an advocate either way, I simply make my theory crafting and let steven or the devs make the decisions. A lot of the time my ideas aren't used but a lot of the time my ideas make changes happen which I don't request. I often find either way that the changes are beneficial in the end. Thus, I am not privy to all facts and facets, I only give what I can whilst i'm here.
No offense but dev's say a lot things during development (not specifically just intrepid). The wiki changes with updates.
That doesn't mean how it's going to be for final product. The wiki does "currently" state that the summoners summons do not have a sacrifice like how combat pet do but if combat pets are going to be that meta then it's bad design to implement as summoner archetype get a significant boost across the board in theory. There will have to be some sort of trade off to make it relatively fair. But again, we dont know the full exent of summoners summons in terms of duration, strength etc. The summoner usually is the target to kill and not the summons.
We haven't even seen the summoner. I have no real retort. All I can state is the summons boost the summoner's power. What that power entails, what the skills are and how strong the summons are remains to be seen. Furthermore, every class type will be covered by the summoner class. To state Combat Pets are OP on some classes negates the fact that hard counters exist, limitations on use exist and the Combat Pets are horizontal progression and not vertical progression like summoner's summons.
I know, I stated we haven't seen them yet earlier and said it's usually why the summoner is last to be unveiled and worked on for such reasons. I never said they are OP but considering how loosely that word is thrown around these days I can see why one may use it liberally. I said META as in Most Effective Tactic Available. If a majority of summoners end up using combat pets with summons to counter it, it's essentially a boost in theory as it's another entity to play around in the summon pool that mitigates the sacrifice.
Yeah, I paraphrased with OP because of Depraved's comment before. Couldn't be bothered to multi quote. I'm not sure what horizontal progression means in terms of combat pets. Until i see combat pets in action I don't want to state what will happen. Its perfectly valid for summoners to use combat pets if they want to, the same with all other classes. Though, some summoners will have a lot of fire power. If you think 4 x Healing Minions will be meta try 4 x DPS Minions plus the Summoner at 70% power according to your calculations. That would be 190% power at 30% power for each minion and 70% power for the summoner.
META is META lol
Universal combat pets sound interesting but at the same time they sound quite bad in my opinion. It does essentially just turn every class into a temporary pet class regardless of CD and power loss upon death.
I would rather combat pets be more significant in class design solely for summoner archetypes as summons and have them work more like combat pets where each summon is a sacrificial split in power with varying degree's of utility options to protect the summoner. Then based on the augments is how they benefit the summoner. This would still open up the door for combat pets (summons) to be raised and bred as summoners would want to claim various versions of them.
Combat Pets are a way to mitigate against the summoners. Each hard counter has a counter measure to narrow the field. You can't completely negate the power gaps between hard counters but you can narrow the gap slightly. Also, combat pets can't be used everywhere unlike minions so a summoner would be gimped in those locations if they only had combat pets.
Yeah I don't like the design goal for universal combat pets. Takes away from archetype/class identity by allowing everyone to be a summoner/pet class.
There is no class identity. It's against the spirit of the game.
lol? The whole point of classes and archetypes is to have identity. Giving everyone pets removes that as the term universal implies.
The devs call the constructs 'Archetypes' with Primary and Secondary 'Archetypes' not classes per say. They can be built however you want, with whatever weapons you want and with whatever augments you want. Thus, there is no actual 'class identity'.
If the player has to sacrifice their own power to split their power so to speak it creates an interesting dynamic. The more powerful the pet, the weaker the player is on scale.
I also like the idea of upkeep to maintain pet output and/or pet numbers to encourage more diverse playstyles with augments. Different pet classes or builds so to speak could have unique ways to upkeep pet through debuffs such as maintaining a bleed as the pet survives off of blood or even enemy corpses/souls for resource upkeep etc.
Necromantic and nature could have entirely different upkeep methods for pets.
I dont really think pets should be able to hold threat stronger than tanks or even be close to competing with them especially for PvE. Just game breaking and encourages solo play.
So, you're happy for a healing pet to outpace a bard at healing or match a bard at healing and a dps pet to assist an actual tank (tank doesn't need much power just defence) and yet you won't let dps have a tanking pet?
Honestly, I've seen a lot of broken pets in mmorpg's where the pet just tanks a group and the player sits back with their thumb in their a** while they melt the mob(s) lol. What an amazing skillset for such an immersive experience
Then you got pets that can pull threat and aggro from the tank and hold it quite easily. It's awful in my opinion. I'd rather a tug-o-war of power shifting between the player and the pet. Bring some more risk to the players side to prevent such detrimental design to the game.
I never mentioned anything about a healing pet outpacing a bard. To be honest, I feel there shouldn't be a healing pet especially to the degree you're imagining. Leave the healing to the players. Kind of reminds me of SWTOR where you could solo the first group dungeon with just a healer companion if you kited the boss around a pillar lol. That game definitely had its faults.
A tank sacrificing their power for a dps pet seems like a weird take but I suppose in some ways the primary and secondary archetypes do cross at some point if that's how it is for the tank/summoner. I do like the idea of the players sacrificing X% of power for pet 1, Y% power for pet 2, Z% power for pet 3 etc. How that directly translates to the pet should be an interesting dev discussion when they get to summoner archetype. Who knows, maybe a tank/summoner just uses summons as the spell shape? maybe soak effigy? we'll have to see
Yeah, I mean when I imagine a Tank Pet I think of the Dev Discussion on Tanks in general and how we all wanted Tanks to lose aggro sometimes to keep tanks on their toes. I envision the tank pets to use the same systems and not act like glue. Same applies to the tanks in general.
Summoner with Cleric Secondary can match or surpass Bard Heals with Summons already. I see no reason not to have a healing pet that is actually capable of healing better than not. Would i advise these healing pets are able to heal anyone but the master? I'm not so sure.
That's a fair point. A lot of tanking and threat management is very glue-like as you mentioned. This is why I mentioned the pet could be a spell shape or effigy. Maybe you summon an object that blocks for you or an animated "being", they're all shapes to me lol.
Say you sacrifice 30% of your power to summon, you only have 70% left. Ideally it's the same thing, you're just creating two entities for the power split. The pet in most situations isn't going to be able to do more than the 30% power output you gave it. Just a different way to do the same thing essentially. Pet's can come in all different shapes and forms ranging from animals, beasts, inanimate objects like totems/effigies. etc.
Add upkeep through output management and you got yourself an interesting dynamic in my opinion.
Well, I like that we can equip and level the pets. I prefer if the 30% power loss is not a direct charge of power to the pet. Thus, the pet is kind of in isolation but would die without support from the player. I want to be able to level pets and then sell pets at max level etc. I want to be able to build the pets up and watch the pets grow. I want the pets to be useful but not more powerful than my toon.
I'm not entirely sure what the direct transfer of power will be from player sacrifice to pet power but I don't see the pets being more powerful than the players. It's just a sacrifice X% to boost X%. Just more of an extension of the players versatility of class and design. Certain pets may have genetically exclusive traits/abilities if I am to go off your information about raising them. The player/host is ideally the primary.
Yeah I agree. I think we won't know the full scope until the live game. I think A2 will thrash out the actual details and a lot of changes will be made. Its pointless discussing the actual sums right now. Especially if the pet can be geared or bred differently by a breeder etc.
I will make an interesting point though going back to your cleric + summoner point.
Hypothetically, a cleric + summoner would be primarily a cleric first, with summoner like abilities while being able to potentially use cleric/summoner pets. We could see abilities come off as holy with spirit-like vfx such as a wave of holy spirits as an examples.
Similarly yet quite different,
a summoner + cleric would primarily be summoner first with the summons being more cleric-like with the allowance of similar pet types BUT they could also be allowed to use a larger range of pet types because primarily they are a summoner archetype. Hypothetically, we could see summons ranging drastically different while engaging with cleric-like VFX.
Of course then we get into augments, religion etc. I do believe we will see summoner primary have some sort of advantage with obviously summons. The players that split their power could have a drawback if the pet dies with cool down from returning lost power. That's why the tug-o-war could be interesting in temporarily shifting a little extra power back and forth while not undermining the initial power loss of different summon strengths vs sacrifice.
Also I will say with how players can group summon in sieges, I hope we see higher penalties for great battle summons like siege ogres or siege beasts brought into the battle field.
Well, a summoner+cleric can have dps minions (Death) or healing minions (Life) but, there are also two other augment schools hidden for Cleric. As you say, augments can come from elsewhere too. So its a difficult one to call but Summoner can replace any other class in a group - including support classes. Summons and pets can't buff others or the master so that means these creatures must only heal. So, its difficult to know until we see summoner in action.
Obviously we wont know until they let us know more. This is exactly why summoner classes are usually the last in development to be worked on and revealed. But this doesn't mean that the summoner + cleric wont be able to primarily heal/support while the pet theoretically does other actions around status effects going off what we previously discussed with power splitting to two entities.
Well, the summoner page on the wiki explains there are three types of summons (the same types as combat pets). I'm not certain a summoner can heal with active abilities except predominantly self heals through the 'life' augmented school. I imagine the 'life' augmented school would change the summons to healing pets which can heal others.
It's possible, but if the power split exists it would in theory be less powerful than if the class casted it.
100 power - 30 power to the pet would imply the players allowances are 70%.
This does not necessarily mean the pet will have the same power of the healer as together they will still need to equal 100 power.
A summoner primary archetype on it's own may not have cleric heals but when combined with secondary archetype cleric it would essentially have access to heals and cleric-like abilities shared through its summoned pet of choice to some extent. As far as I know, we don't know how many active pets they can have either. I'm assuming 1 specifically from the power split. Maybe temporarily ones through augments and abilities as means to potentially buff host, pet and indirectly party? Maybe we'll see some holy circles of power where if the host and pet stay in proximity there could be benefits
Well, 3 x 30 = 90 so they might be 10 off a Cleric. Of course, you'd prefer a full Cleric to be in the group (at least I would) for various reasons, but, a summoner at 90 cleric power plus a Bard at 100% Bard power (can heal based on procs and also buff the heals of the summons) means you won't have the overheal equivalent of a buffed cleric but you would have more than a full Cleric. Add to that a healing combat pet and you have 4 pets that are healing, which should surpass a full cleric in terms of raw power but not necessarily in terms of skill. I'm not stating these as facts but I've used your calculations.
That's all part of the versatility you can bring to the table with summons and archetype manipulation via augments. If the minimum you can sacrifice to the pet is 30%, that 30% is gone from you, that may also include your HP and Resource. If the player just has to sacrifice literal attack power then that is quite detrimental to design lol.
Again, this is assuming you're allowed to have multiple pets summoned at once by your comment, if you summon 3 pets at 30%, you're only left with 10% which means if you take a big hit, you pretty much failed at your role lol as if you die, your pets would die too and eventually your party.
If you're over healing a lot outside of things like Heal Over Time abilities, this would imply you're not doing a great job in higher end content because of resource management and group play. Healing isn't supposed to a spam fest as you would see in wow where the combat is wet sponges and the healer is a water hydrant lol
bear in mind, the summons boost the summoners power unlike the combat pet. SO without the summons the summoner would be at 10% power with your calculations, but, with the summons the summoner would be at 100%. With the combat pet at your calculations the summoner would be at 70%.
If the summons essentially mitigate some of the power loss to boost the summoner that significantly as you imply then that's just not good at all in terms of design. The point of sacrifice is to play around the loss not cancel it out for abuse. As mentioned, we don't know how many summons a summoner is allowed to have with or without universal combat pets added into the mix. For all we know, the summons of a summoner work the same way through sacrifice or upkeep management.
No, the devs explicitly state that the summons increase the summoners power. Also, not all summoners will have a minion. I merely used the maximum calculations provided in both instances. I'm not an advocate either way, I simply make my theory crafting and let steven or the devs make the decisions. A lot of the time my ideas aren't used but a lot of the time my ideas make changes happen which I don't request. I often find either way that the changes are beneficial in the end. Thus, I am not privy to all facts and facets, I only give what I can whilst i'm here.
No offense but dev's say a lot things during development (not specifically just intrepid). The wiki changes with updates.
That doesn't mean how it's going to be for final product. The wiki does "currently" state that the summoners summons do not have a sacrifice like how combat pet do but if combat pets are going to be that meta then it's bad design to implement as summoner archetype get a significant boost across the board in theory. There will have to be some sort of trade off to make it relatively fair. But again, we dont know the full exent of summoners summons in terms of duration, strength etc. The summoner usually is the target to kill and not the summons.
core mechanics / systems arent likely to change, what will change is the numbers. summoner's pet will boost the master's power. how much? we dont know. it could be 1%, 5%, 10% 50% thats what will change, not the fact that they boost the master.
combat pets will take power from the master. how much? 1%, 5%, 10%, 50%? we dont know, that will be balanced when people can play. but the fact that they take power from the master wont likely change.
That's what tuning is in terms of "balance" and we previously discussed that. If they tune it so the combat pets sacrifice is essentially mitigated then that's just weird
you didnt get it. you said the devs say a lot of things, the wiki can change, the game can change, etc. my point is that core system and mechanics are less likely to change, only the balancing numbers. so when IS says that summoner's pets will boost them, and combat pets will take away from your character, you can expect that not to change. what will change is how much.
There is no class identity. It's against the spirit of the game.
lol? The whole point of classes and archetypes is to have identity. Giving everyone pets removes that as the term universal implies.
The devs call the constructs 'Archetypes' with Primary and Secondary 'Archetypes' not classes per say. They can be built however you want, with whatever weapons you want and with whatever augments you want. Thus, there is no actual 'class identity'.
If the player has to sacrifice their own power to split their power so to speak it creates an interesting dynamic. The more powerful the pet, the weaker the player is on scale.
I also like the idea of upkeep to maintain pet output and/or pet numbers to encourage more diverse playstyles with augments. Different pet classes or builds so to speak could have unique ways to upkeep pet through debuffs such as maintaining a bleed as the pet survives off of blood or even enemy corpses/souls for resource upkeep etc.
Necromantic and nature could have entirely different upkeep methods for pets.
I dont really think pets should be able to hold threat stronger than tanks or even be close to competing with them especially for PvE. Just game breaking and encourages solo play.
So, you're happy for a healing pet to outpace a bard at healing or match a bard at healing and a dps pet to assist an actual tank (tank doesn't need much power just defence) and yet you won't let dps have a tanking pet?
Honestly, I've seen a lot of broken pets in mmorpg's where the pet just tanks a group and the player sits back with their thumb in their a** while they melt the mob(s) lol. What an amazing skillset for such an immersive experience
Then you got pets that can pull threat and aggro from the tank and hold it quite easily. It's awful in my opinion. I'd rather a tug-o-war of power shifting between the player and the pet. Bring some more risk to the players side to prevent such detrimental design to the game.
I never mentioned anything about a healing pet outpacing a bard. To be honest, I feel there shouldn't be a healing pet especially to the degree you're imagining. Leave the healing to the players. Kind of reminds me of SWTOR where you could solo the first group dungeon with just a healer companion if you kited the boss around a pillar lol. That game definitely had its faults.
A tank sacrificing their power for a dps pet seems like a weird take but I suppose in some ways the primary and secondary archetypes do cross at some point if that's how it is for the tank/summoner. I do like the idea of the players sacrificing X% of power for pet 1, Y% power for pet 2, Z% power for pet 3 etc. How that directly translates to the pet should be an interesting dev discussion when they get to summoner archetype. Who knows, maybe a tank/summoner just uses summons as the spell shape? maybe soak effigy? we'll have to see
Yeah, I mean when I imagine a Tank Pet I think of the Dev Discussion on Tanks in general and how we all wanted Tanks to lose aggro sometimes to keep tanks on their toes. I envision the tank pets to use the same systems and not act like glue. Same applies to the tanks in general.
Summoner with Cleric Secondary can match or surpass Bard Heals with Summons already. I see no reason not to have a healing pet that is actually capable of healing better than not. Would i advise these healing pets are able to heal anyone but the master? I'm not so sure.
That's a fair point. A lot of tanking and threat management is very glue-like as you mentioned. This is why I mentioned the pet could be a spell shape or effigy. Maybe you summon an object that blocks for you or an animated "being", they're all shapes to me lol.
Say you sacrifice 30% of your power to summon, you only have 70% left. Ideally it's the same thing, you're just creating two entities for the power split. The pet in most situations isn't going to be able to do more than the 30% power output you gave it. Just a different way to do the same thing essentially. Pet's can come in all different shapes and forms ranging from animals, beasts, inanimate objects like totems/effigies. etc.
Add upkeep through output management and you got yourself an interesting dynamic in my opinion.
Well, I like that we can equip and level the pets. I prefer if the 30% power loss is not a direct charge of power to the pet. Thus, the pet is kind of in isolation but would die without support from the player. I want to be able to level pets and then sell pets at max level etc. I want to be able to build the pets up and watch the pets grow. I want the pets to be useful but not more powerful than my toon.
I'm not entirely sure what the direct transfer of power will be from player sacrifice to pet power but I don't see the pets being more powerful than the players. It's just a sacrifice X% to boost X%. Just more of an extension of the players versatility of class and design. Certain pets may have genetically exclusive traits/abilities if I am to go off your information about raising them. The player/host is ideally the primary.
Yeah I agree. I think we won't know the full scope until the live game. I think A2 will thrash out the actual details and a lot of changes will be made. Its pointless discussing the actual sums right now. Especially if the pet can be geared or bred differently by a breeder etc.
I will make an interesting point though going back to your cleric + summoner point.
Hypothetically, a cleric + summoner would be primarily a cleric first, with summoner like abilities while being able to potentially use cleric/summoner pets. We could see abilities come off as holy with spirit-like vfx such as a wave of holy spirits as an examples.
Similarly yet quite different,
a summoner + cleric would primarily be summoner first with the summons being more cleric-like with the allowance of similar pet types BUT they could also be allowed to use a larger range of pet types because primarily they are a summoner archetype. Hypothetically, we could see summons ranging drastically different while engaging with cleric-like VFX.
Of course then we get into augments, religion etc. I do believe we will see summoner primary have some sort of advantage with obviously summons. The players that split their power could have a drawback if the pet dies with cool down from returning lost power. That's why the tug-o-war could be interesting in temporarily shifting a little extra power back and forth while not undermining the initial power loss of different summon strengths vs sacrifice.
Also I will say with how players can group summon in sieges, I hope we see higher penalties for great battle summons like siege ogres or siege beasts brought into the battle field.
Well, a summoner+cleric can have dps minions (Death) or healing minions (Life) but, there are also two other augment schools hidden for Cleric. As you say, augments can come from elsewhere too. So its a difficult one to call but Summoner can replace any other class in a group - including support classes. Summons and pets can't buff others or the master so that means these creatures must only heal. So, its difficult to know until we see summoner in action.
Obviously we wont know until they let us know more. This is exactly why summoner classes are usually the last in development to be worked on and revealed. But this doesn't mean that the summoner + cleric wont be able to primarily heal/support while the pet theoretically does other actions around status effects going off what we previously discussed with power splitting to two entities.
Well, the summoner page on the wiki explains there are three types of summons (the same types as combat pets). I'm not certain a summoner can heal with active abilities except predominantly self heals through the 'life' augmented school. I imagine the 'life' augmented school would change the summons to healing pets which can heal others.
It's possible, but if the power split exists it would in theory be less powerful than if the class casted it.
100 power - 30 power to the pet would imply the players allowances are 70%.
This does not necessarily mean the pet will have the same power of the healer as together they will still need to equal 100 power.
A summoner primary archetype on it's own may not have cleric heals but when combined with secondary archetype cleric it would essentially have access to heals and cleric-like abilities shared through its summoned pet of choice to some extent. As far as I know, we don't know how many active pets they can have either. I'm assuming 1 specifically from the power split. Maybe temporarily ones through augments and abilities as means to potentially buff host, pet and indirectly party? Maybe we'll see some holy circles of power where if the host and pet stay in proximity there could be benefits
Well, 3 x 30 = 90 so they might be 10 off a Cleric. Of course, you'd prefer a full Cleric to be in the group (at least I would) for various reasons, but, a summoner at 90 cleric power plus a Bard at 100% Bard power (can heal based on procs and also buff the heals of the summons) means you won't have the overheal equivalent of a buffed cleric but you would have more than a full Cleric. Add to that a healing combat pet and you have 4 pets that are healing, which should surpass a full cleric in terms of raw power but not necessarily in terms of skill. I'm not stating these as facts but I've used your calculations.
That's all part of the versatility you can bring to the table with summons and archetype manipulation via augments. If the minimum you can sacrifice to the pet is 30%, that 30% is gone from you, that may also include your HP and Resource. If the player just has to sacrifice literal attack power then that is quite detrimental to design lol.
Again, this is assuming you're allowed to have multiple pets summoned at once by your comment, if you summon 3 pets at 30%, you're only left with 10% which means if you take a big hit, you pretty much failed at your role lol as if you die, your pets would die too and eventually your party.
If you're over healing a lot outside of things like Heal Over Time abilities, this would imply you're not doing a great job in higher end content because of resource management and group play. Healing isn't supposed to a spam fest as you would see in wow where the combat is wet sponges and the healer is a water hydrant lol
bear in mind, the summons boost the summoners power unlike the combat pet. SO without the summons the summoner would be at 10% power with your calculations, but, with the summons the summoner would be at 100%. With the combat pet at your calculations the summoner would be at 70%.
If the summons essentially mitigate some of the power loss to boost the summoner that significantly as you imply then that's just not good at all in terms of design. The point of sacrifice is to play around the loss not cancel it out for abuse. As mentioned, we don't know how many summons a summoner is allowed to have with or without universal combat pets added into the mix. For all we know, the summons of a summoner work the same way through sacrifice or upkeep management.
No, the devs explicitly state that the summons increase the summoners power. Also, not all summoners will have a minion. I merely used the maximum calculations provided in both instances. I'm not an advocate either way, I simply make my theory crafting and let steven or the devs make the decisions. A lot of the time my ideas aren't used but a lot of the time my ideas make changes happen which I don't request. I often find either way that the changes are beneficial in the end. Thus, I am not privy to all facts and facets, I only give what I can whilst i'm here.
No offense but dev's say a lot things during development (not specifically just intrepid). The wiki changes with updates.
That doesn't mean how it's going to be for final product. The wiki does "currently" state that the summoners summons do not have a sacrifice like how combat pet do but if combat pets are going to be that meta then it's bad design to implement as summoner archetype get a significant boost across the board in theory. There will have to be some sort of trade off to make it relatively fair. But again, we dont know the full exent of summoners summons in terms of duration, strength etc. The summoner usually is the target to kill and not the summons.
core mechanics / systems arent likely to change, what will change is the numbers. summoner's pet will boost the master's power. how much? we dont know. it could be 1%, 5%, 10% 50% thats what will change, not the fact that they boost the master.
combat pets will take power from the master. how much? 1%, 5%, 10%, 50%? we dont know, that will be balanced when people can play. but the fact that they take power from the master wont likely change.
That's what tuning is in terms of "balance" and we previously discussed that. If they tune it so the combat pets sacrifice is essentially mitigated then that's just weird
you didnt get it. you said the devs say a lot of things, the wiki can change, the game can change, etc. my point is that core system and mechanics are less likely to change, only the balancing numbers. so when IS says that summoner's pets will boost them, and combat pets will take away from your character, you can expect that not to change. what will change is how much.
If the player has to sacrifice their own power to split their power so to speak it creates an interesting dynamic. The more powerful the pet, the weaker the player is on scale.
I also like the idea of upkeep to maintain pet output and/or pet numbers to encourage more diverse playstyles with augments. Different pet classes or builds so to speak could have unique ways to upkeep pet through debuffs such as maintaining a bleed as the pet survives off of blood or even enemy corpses/souls for resource upkeep etc.
Necromantic and nature could have entirely different upkeep methods for pets.
I dont really think pets should be able to hold threat stronger than tanks or even be close to competing with them especially for PvE. Just game breaking and encourages solo play.
So, you're happy for a healing pet to outpace a bard at healing or match a bard at healing and a dps pet to assist an actual tank (tank doesn't need much power just defence) and yet you won't let dps have a tanking pet?
Honestly, I've seen a lot of broken pets in mmorpg's where the pet just tanks a group and the player sits back with their thumb in their a** while they melt the mob(s) lol. What an amazing skillset for such an immersive experience
Then you got pets that can pull threat and aggro from the tank and hold it quite easily. It's awful in my opinion. I'd rather a tug-o-war of power shifting between the player and the pet. Bring some more risk to the players side to prevent such detrimental design to the game.
I never mentioned anything about a healing pet outpacing a bard. To be honest, I feel there shouldn't be a healing pet especially to the degree you're imagining. Leave the healing to the players. Kind of reminds me of SWTOR where you could solo the first group dungeon with just a healer companion if you kited the boss around a pillar lol. That game definitely had its faults.
A tank sacrificing their power for a dps pet seems like a weird take but I suppose in some ways the primary and secondary archetypes do cross at some point if that's how it is for the tank/summoner. I do like the idea of the players sacrificing X% of power for pet 1, Y% power for pet 2, Z% power for pet 3 etc. How that directly translates to the pet should be an interesting dev discussion when they get to summoner archetype. Who knows, maybe a tank/summoner just uses summons as the spell shape? maybe soak effigy? we'll have to see
Yeah, I mean when I imagine a Tank Pet I think of the Dev Discussion on Tanks in general and how we all wanted Tanks to lose aggro sometimes to keep tanks on their toes. I envision the tank pets to use the same systems and not act like glue. Same applies to the tanks in general.
Summoner with Cleric Secondary can match or surpass Bard Heals with Summons already. I see no reason not to have a healing pet that is actually capable of healing better than not. Would i advise these healing pets are able to heal anyone but the master? I'm not so sure.
That's a fair point. A lot of tanking and threat management is very glue-like as you mentioned. This is why I mentioned the pet could be a spell shape or effigy. Maybe you summon an object that blocks for you or an animated "being", they're all shapes to me lol.
Say you sacrifice 30% of your power to summon, you only have 70% left. Ideally it's the same thing, you're just creating two entities for the power split. The pet in most situations isn't going to be able to do more than the 30% power output you gave it. Just a different way to do the same thing essentially. Pet's can come in all different shapes and forms ranging from animals, beasts, inanimate objects like totems/effigies. etc.
Add upkeep through output management and you got yourself an interesting dynamic in my opinion.
Well, I like that we can equip and level the pets. I prefer if the 30% power loss is not a direct charge of power to the pet. Thus, the pet is kind of in isolation but would die without support from the player. I want to be able to level pets and then sell pets at max level etc. I want to be able to build the pets up and watch the pets grow. I want the pets to be useful but not more powerful than my toon.
I'm not entirely sure what the direct transfer of power will be from player sacrifice to pet power but I don't see the pets being more powerful than the players. It's just a sacrifice X% to boost X%. Just more of an extension of the players versatility of class and design. Certain pets may have genetically exclusive traits/abilities if I am to go off your information about raising them. The player/host is ideally the primary.
Yeah I agree. I think we won't know the full scope until the live game. I think A2 will thrash out the actual details and a lot of changes will be made. Its pointless discussing the actual sums right now. Especially if the pet can be geared or bred differently by a breeder etc.
I will make an interesting point though going back to your cleric + summoner point.
Hypothetically, a cleric + summoner would be primarily a cleric first, with summoner like abilities while being able to potentially use cleric/summoner pets. We could see abilities come off as holy with spirit-like vfx such as a wave of holy spirits as an examples.
Similarly yet quite different,
a summoner + cleric would primarily be summoner first with the summons being more cleric-like with the allowance of similar pet types BUT they could also be allowed to use a larger range of pet types because primarily they are a summoner archetype. Hypothetically, we could see summons ranging drastically different while engaging with cleric-like VFX.
Of course then we get into augments, religion etc. I do believe we will see summoner primary have some sort of advantage with obviously summons. The players that split their power could have a drawback if the pet dies with cool down from returning lost power. That's why the tug-o-war could be interesting in temporarily shifting a little extra power back and forth while not undermining the initial power loss of different summon strengths vs sacrifice.
Also I will say with how players can group summon in sieges, I hope we see higher penalties for great battle summons like siege ogres or siege beasts brought into the battle field.
Well, a summoner+cleric can have dps minions (Death) or healing minions (Life) but, there are also two other augment schools hidden for Cleric. As you say, augments can come from elsewhere too. So its a difficult one to call but Summoner can replace any other class in a group - including support classes. Summons and pets can't buff others or the master so that means these creatures must only heal. So, its difficult to know until we see summoner in action.
Obviously we wont know until they let us know more. This is exactly why summoner classes are usually the last in development to be worked on and revealed. But this doesn't mean that the summoner + cleric wont be able to primarily heal/support while the pet theoretically does other actions around status effects going off what we previously discussed with power splitting to two entities.
Well, the summoner page on the wiki explains there are three types of summons (the same types as combat pets). I'm not certain a summoner can heal with active abilities except predominantly self heals through the 'life' augmented school. I imagine the 'life' augmented school would change the summons to healing pets which can heal others.
It's possible, but if the power split exists it would in theory be less powerful than if the class casted it.
100 power - 30 power to the pet would imply the players allowances are 70%.
This does not necessarily mean the pet will have the same power of the healer as together they will still need to equal 100 power.
A summoner primary archetype on it's own may not have cleric heals but when combined with secondary archetype cleric it would essentially have access to heals and cleric-like abilities shared through its summoned pet of choice to some extent. As far as I know, we don't know how many active pets they can have either. I'm assuming 1 specifically from the power split. Maybe temporarily ones through augments and abilities as means to potentially buff host, pet and indirectly party? Maybe we'll see some holy circles of power where if the host and pet stay in proximity there could be benefits
Well, 3 x 30 = 90 so they might be 10 off a Cleric. Of course, you'd prefer a full Cleric to be in the group (at least I would) for various reasons, but, a summoner at 90 cleric power plus a Bard at 100% Bard power (can heal based on procs and also buff the heals of the summons) means you won't have the overheal equivalent of a buffed cleric but you would have more than a full Cleric. Add to that a healing combat pet and you have 4 pets that are healing, which should surpass a full cleric in terms of raw power but not necessarily in terms of skill. I'm not stating these as facts but I've used your calculations.
That's all part of the versatility you can bring to the table with summons and archetype manipulation via augments. If the minimum you can sacrifice to the pet is 30%, that 30% is gone from you, that may also include your HP and Resource. If the player just has to sacrifice literal attack power then that is quite detrimental to design lol.
Again, this is assuming you're allowed to have multiple pets summoned at once by your comment, if you summon 3 pets at 30%, you're only left with 10% which means if you take a big hit, you pretty much failed at your role lol as if you die, your pets would die too and eventually your party.
If you're over healing a lot outside of things like Heal Over Time abilities, this would imply you're not doing a great job in higher end content because of resource management and group play. Healing isn't supposed to a spam fest as you would see in wow where the combat is wet sponges and the healer is a water hydrant lol
bear in mind, the summons boost the summoners power unlike the combat pet. SO without the summons the summoner would be at 10% power with your calculations, but, with the summons the summoner would be at 100%. With the combat pet at your calculations the summoner would be at 70%.
If the summons essentially mitigate some of the power loss to boost the summoner that significantly as you imply then that's just not good at all in terms of design. The point of sacrifice is to play around the loss not cancel it out for abuse. As mentioned, we don't know how many summons a summoner is allowed to have with or without universal combat pets added into the mix. For all we know, the summons of a summoner work the same way through sacrifice or upkeep management.
No, the devs explicitly state that the summons increase the summoners power. Also, not all summoners will have a minion. I merely used the maximum calculations provided in both instances. I'm not an advocate either way, I simply make my theory crafting and let steven or the devs make the decisions. A lot of the time my ideas aren't used but a lot of the time my ideas make changes happen which I don't request. I often find either way that the changes are beneficial in the end. Thus, I am not privy to all facts and facets, I only give what I can whilst i'm here.
No offense but dev's say a lot things during development (not specifically just intrepid). The wiki changes with updates.
That doesn't mean how it's going to be for final product. The wiki does "currently" state that the summoners summons do not have a sacrifice like how combat pet do but if combat pets are going to be that meta then it's bad design to implement as summoner archetype get a significant boost across the board in theory. There will have to be some sort of trade off to make it relatively fair. But again, we dont know the full exent of summoners summons in terms of duration, strength etc. The summoner usually is the target to kill and not the summons.
We haven't even seen the summoner. I have no real retort. All I can state is the summons boost the summoner's power. What that power entails, what the skills are and how strong the summons are remains to be seen. Furthermore, every class type will be covered by the summoner class. To state Combat Pets are OP on some classes negates the fact that hard counters exist, limitations on use exist and the Combat Pets are horizontal progression and not vertical progression like summoner's summons.
I know, I stated we haven't seen them yet earlier and said it's usually why the summoner is last to be unveiled and worked on for such reasons. I never said they are OP but considering how loosely that word is thrown around these days I can see why one may use it liberally. I said META as in Most Effective Tactic Available. If a majority of summoners end up using combat pets with summons to counter it, it's essentially a boost in theory as it's another entity to play around in the summon pool that mitigates the sacrifice.
Yeah, I paraphrased with OP because of Depraved's comment before. Couldn't be bothered to multi quote. I'm not sure what horizontal progression means in terms of combat pets. Until i see combat pets in action I don't want to state what will happen. Its perfectly valid for summoners to use combat pets if they want to, the same with all other classes. Though, some summoners will have a lot of fire power. If you think 4 x Healing Minions will be meta try 4 x DPS Minions plus the Summoner at 70% power according to your calculations. That would be 190% power at 30% power for each minion and 70% power for the summoner.
META is META lol
Universal combat pets sound interesting but at the same time they sound quite bad in my opinion. It does essentially just turn every class into a temporary pet class regardless of CD and power loss upon death.
I would rather combat pets be more significant in class design solely for summoner archetypes as summons and have them work more like combat pets where each summon is a sacrificial split in power with varying degree's of utility options to protect the summoner. Then based on the augments is how they benefit the summoner. This would still open up the door for combat pets (summons) to be raised and bred as summoners would want to claim various versions of them.
Combat Pets are a way to mitigate against the summoners. Each hard counter has a counter measure to narrow the field. You can't completely negate the power gaps between hard counters but you can narrow the gap slightly. Also, combat pets can't be used everywhere unlike minions so a summoner would be gimped in those locations if they only had combat pets.
Yeah I don't like the design goal for universal combat pets. Takes away from archetype/class identity by allowing everyone to be a summoner/pet class.
No thanks
thats not true. just because you have a companion pet doesnt mean you are a summoner.
summoners have specific skills that synergize with their pets. for example, you might have a transfer pain skill (like in l2) where your pet absorbs some of your damage. a tank summoning a combat pet wont have that. summoners will have curses that they can use on their enemies while their pets fight them. summoners will have buffs and heals for their pets. a warrior cant buff his combat pet or heal it. a warrior cant use curses, he still has to use his warrior skills to fight. a bard will buff the pet, but thats what bards do, they buff. it doesnt take away from the class identity.
If the player has to sacrifice their own power to split their power so to speak it creates an interesting dynamic. The more powerful the pet, the weaker the player is on scale.
I also like the idea of upkeep to maintain pet output and/or pet numbers to encourage more diverse playstyles with augments. Different pet classes or builds so to speak could have unique ways to upkeep pet through debuffs such as maintaining a bleed as the pet survives off of blood or even enemy corpses/souls for resource upkeep etc.
Necromantic and nature could have entirely different upkeep methods for pets.
I dont really think pets should be able to hold threat stronger than tanks or even be close to competing with them especially for PvE. Just game breaking and encourages solo play.
So, you're happy for a healing pet to outpace a bard at healing or match a bard at healing and a dps pet to assist an actual tank (tank doesn't need much power just defence) and yet you won't let dps have a tanking pet?
Honestly, I've seen a lot of broken pets in mmorpg's where the pet just tanks a group and the player sits back with their thumb in their a** while they melt the mob(s) lol. What an amazing skillset for such an immersive experience
Then you got pets that can pull threat and aggro from the tank and hold it quite easily. It's awful in my opinion. I'd rather a tug-o-war of power shifting between the player and the pet. Bring some more risk to the players side to prevent such detrimental design to the game.
I never mentioned anything about a healing pet outpacing a bard. To be honest, I feel there shouldn't be a healing pet especially to the degree you're imagining. Leave the healing to the players. Kind of reminds me of SWTOR where you could solo the first group dungeon with just a healer companion if you kited the boss around a pillar lol. That game definitely had its faults.
A tank sacrificing their power for a dps pet seems like a weird take but I suppose in some ways the primary and secondary archetypes do cross at some point if that's how it is for the tank/summoner. I do like the idea of the players sacrificing X% of power for pet 1, Y% power for pet 2, Z% power for pet 3 etc. How that directly translates to the pet should be an interesting dev discussion when they get to summoner archetype. Who knows, maybe a tank/summoner just uses summons as the spell shape? maybe soak effigy? we'll have to see
Yeah, I mean when I imagine a Tank Pet I think of the Dev Discussion on Tanks in general and how we all wanted Tanks to lose aggro sometimes to keep tanks on their toes. I envision the tank pets to use the same systems and not act like glue. Same applies to the tanks in general.
Summoner with Cleric Secondary can match or surpass Bard Heals with Summons already. I see no reason not to have a healing pet that is actually capable of healing better than not. Would i advise these healing pets are able to heal anyone but the master? I'm not so sure.
That's a fair point. A lot of tanking and threat management is very glue-like as you mentioned. This is why I mentioned the pet could be a spell shape or effigy. Maybe you summon an object that blocks for you or an animated "being", they're all shapes to me lol.
Say you sacrifice 30% of your power to summon, you only have 70% left. Ideally it's the same thing, you're just creating two entities for the power split. The pet in most situations isn't going to be able to do more than the 30% power output you gave it. Just a different way to do the same thing essentially. Pet's can come in all different shapes and forms ranging from animals, beasts, inanimate objects like totems/effigies. etc.
Add upkeep through output management and you got yourself an interesting dynamic in my opinion.
Well, I like that we can equip and level the pets. I prefer if the 30% power loss is not a direct charge of power to the pet. Thus, the pet is kind of in isolation but would die without support from the player. I want to be able to level pets and then sell pets at max level etc. I want to be able to build the pets up and watch the pets grow. I want the pets to be useful but not more powerful than my toon.
I'm not entirely sure what the direct transfer of power will be from player sacrifice to pet power but I don't see the pets being more powerful than the players. It's just a sacrifice X% to boost X%. Just more of an extension of the players versatility of class and design. Certain pets may have genetically exclusive traits/abilities if I am to go off your information about raising them. The player/host is ideally the primary.
Yeah I agree. I think we won't know the full scope until the live game. I think A2 will thrash out the actual details and a lot of changes will be made. Its pointless discussing the actual sums right now. Especially if the pet can be geared or bred differently by a breeder etc.
I will make an interesting point though going back to your cleric + summoner point.
Hypothetically, a cleric + summoner would be primarily a cleric first, with summoner like abilities while being able to potentially use cleric/summoner pets. We could see abilities come off as holy with spirit-like vfx such as a wave of holy spirits as an examples.
Similarly yet quite different,
a summoner + cleric would primarily be summoner first with the summons being more cleric-like with the allowance of similar pet types BUT they could also be allowed to use a larger range of pet types because primarily they are a summoner archetype. Hypothetically, we could see summons ranging drastically different while engaging with cleric-like VFX.
Of course then we get into augments, religion etc. I do believe we will see summoner primary have some sort of advantage with obviously summons. The players that split their power could have a drawback if the pet dies with cool down from returning lost power. That's why the tug-o-war could be interesting in temporarily shifting a little extra power back and forth while not undermining the initial power loss of different summon strengths vs sacrifice.
Also I will say with how players can group summon in sieges, I hope we see higher penalties for great battle summons like siege ogres or siege beasts brought into the battle field.
Well, a summoner+cleric can have dps minions (Death) or healing minions (Life) but, there are also two other augment schools hidden for Cleric. As you say, augments can come from elsewhere too. So its a difficult one to call but Summoner can replace any other class in a group - including support classes. Summons and pets can't buff others or the master so that means these creatures must only heal. So, its difficult to know until we see summoner in action.
Obviously we wont know until they let us know more. This is exactly why summoner classes are usually the last in development to be worked on and revealed. But this doesn't mean that the summoner + cleric wont be able to primarily heal/support while the pet theoretically does other actions around status effects going off what we previously discussed with power splitting to two entities.
Well, the summoner page on the wiki explains there are three types of summons (the same types as combat pets). I'm not certain a summoner can heal with active abilities except predominantly self heals through the 'life' augmented school. I imagine the 'life' augmented school would change the summons to healing pets which can heal others.
It's possible, but if the power split exists it would in theory be less powerful than if the class casted it.
100 power - 30 power to the pet would imply the players allowances are 70%.
This does not necessarily mean the pet will have the same power of the healer as together they will still need to equal 100 power.
A summoner primary archetype on it's own may not have cleric heals but when combined with secondary archetype cleric it would essentially have access to heals and cleric-like abilities shared through its summoned pet of choice to some extent. As far as I know, we don't know how many active pets they can have either. I'm assuming 1 specifically from the power split. Maybe temporarily ones through augments and abilities as means to potentially buff host, pet and indirectly party? Maybe we'll see some holy circles of power where if the host and pet stay in proximity there could be benefits
Well, 3 x 30 = 90 so they might be 10 off a Cleric. Of course, you'd prefer a full Cleric to be in the group (at least I would) for various reasons, but, a summoner at 90 cleric power plus a Bard at 100% Bard power (can heal based on procs and also buff the heals of the summons) means you won't have the overheal equivalent of a buffed cleric but you would have more than a full Cleric. Add to that a healing combat pet and you have 4 pets that are healing, which should surpass a full cleric in terms of raw power but not necessarily in terms of skill. I'm not stating these as facts but I've used your calculations.
That's all part of the versatility you can bring to the table with summons and archetype manipulation via augments. If the minimum you can sacrifice to the pet is 30%, that 30% is gone from you, that may also include your HP and Resource. If the player just has to sacrifice literal attack power then that is quite detrimental to design lol.
Again, this is assuming you're allowed to have multiple pets summoned at once by your comment, if you summon 3 pets at 30%, you're only left with 10% which means if you take a big hit, you pretty much failed at your role lol as if you die, your pets would die too and eventually your party.
If you're over healing a lot outside of things like Heal Over Time abilities, this would imply you're not doing a great job in higher end content because of resource management and group play. Healing isn't supposed to a spam fest as you would see in wow where the combat is wet sponges and the healer is a water hydrant lol
bear in mind, the summons boost the summoners power unlike the combat pet. SO without the summons the summoner would be at 10% power with your calculations, but, with the summons the summoner would be at 100%. With the combat pet at your calculations the summoner would be at 70%.
If the summons essentially mitigate some of the power loss to boost the summoner that significantly as you imply then that's just not good at all in terms of design. The point of sacrifice is to play around the loss not cancel it out for abuse. As mentioned, we don't know how many summons a summoner is allowed to have with or without universal combat pets added into the mix. For all we know, the summons of a summoner work the same way through sacrifice or upkeep management.
No, the devs explicitly state that the summons increase the summoners power. Also, not all summoners will have a minion. I merely used the maximum calculations provided in both instances. I'm not an advocate either way, I simply make my theory crafting and let steven or the devs make the decisions. A lot of the time my ideas aren't used but a lot of the time my ideas make changes happen which I don't request. I often find either way that the changes are beneficial in the end. Thus, I am not privy to all facts and facets, I only give what I can whilst i'm here.
No offense but dev's say a lot things during development (not specifically just intrepid). The wiki changes with updates.
That doesn't mean how it's going to be for final product. The wiki does "currently" state that the summoners summons do not have a sacrifice like how combat pet do but if combat pets are going to be that meta then it's bad design to implement as summoner archetype get a significant boost across the board in theory. There will have to be some sort of trade off to make it relatively fair. But again, we dont know the full exent of summoners summons in terms of duration, strength etc. The summoner usually is the target to kill and not the summons.
We haven't even seen the summoner. I have no real retort. All I can state is the summons boost the summoner's power. What that power entails, what the skills are and how strong the summons are remains to be seen. Furthermore, every class type will be covered by the summoner class. To state Combat Pets are OP on some classes negates the fact that hard counters exist, limitations on use exist and the Combat Pets are horizontal progression and not vertical progression like summoner's summons.
I know, I stated we haven't seen them yet earlier and said it's usually why the summoner is last to be unveiled and worked on for such reasons. I never said they are OP but considering how loosely that word is thrown around these days I can see why one may use it liberally. I said META as in Most Effective Tactic Available. If a majority of summoners end up using combat pets with summons to counter it, it's essentially a boost in theory as it's another entity to play around in the summon pool that mitigates the sacrifice.
Yeah, I paraphrased with OP because of Depraved's comment before. Couldn't be bothered to multi quote. I'm not sure what horizontal progression means in terms of combat pets. Until i see combat pets in action I don't want to state what will happen. Its perfectly valid for summoners to use combat pets if they want to, the same with all other classes. Though, some summoners will have a lot of fire power. If you think 4 x Healing Minions will be meta try 4 x DPS Minions plus the Summoner at 70% power according to your calculations. That would be 190% power at 30% power for each minion and 70% power for the summoner.
META is META lol
Universal combat pets sound interesting but at the same time they sound quite bad in my opinion. It does essentially just turn every class into a temporary pet class regardless of CD and power loss upon death.
I would rather combat pets be more significant in class design solely for summoner archetypes as summons and have them work more like combat pets where each summon is a sacrificial split in power with varying degree's of utility options to protect the summoner. Then based on the augments is how they benefit the summoner. This would still open up the door for combat pets (summons) to be raised and bred as summoners would want to claim various versions of them.
Combat Pets are a way to mitigate against the summoners. Each hard counter has a counter measure to narrow the field. You can't completely negate the power gaps between hard counters but you can narrow the gap slightly. Also, combat pets can't be used everywhere unlike minions so a summoner would be gimped in those locations if they only had combat pets.
Yeah I don't like the design goal for universal combat pets. Takes away from archetype/class identity by allowing everyone to be a summoner/pet class.
No thanks
thats not true. just because you have a companion pet doesnt mean you are a summoner.
summoners have specific skills that synergize with their pets. for example, you might have a transfer pain skill (like in l2) where your pet absorbs some of your damage. a tank summoning a combat pet wont have that. summoners will have curses that they can use on their enemies while their pets fight them. summoners will have buffs and heals for their pets. a warrior cant buff his combat pet or heal it. a warrior cant use curses, he still has to use his warrior skills to fight. a bard will buff the pet, but thats what bards do, they buff. it doesnt take away from the class identity.
thats your opinion nd thats fine ;3 but it doesnt take away from class identity ;3
what is your chosen class?
90% chance i play cleric
5% chance i play bard
2.5% rogue
2.5% summoner
also elf. yes elf is a class, the master class. anything that isnt an elf doesnt matter;
yours?
I will either be Enchanter or Magician. I will be Magician first because Summoner isn't at the start of A2 thus, I will play Bard initially. Enchanter is Summoner/Bard, Magician is Bard/Mage. I will be Vaelune.
Comments
Well, the summoner page on the wiki explains there are three types of summons (the same types as combat pets). I'm not certain a summoner can heal with active abilities except predominantly self heals through the 'life' augmented school. I imagine the 'life' augmented school would change the summons to healing pets which can heal others.
It's possible, but if the power split exists it would in theory be less powerful than if the class casted it.
100 power - 30 power to the pet would imply the players allowances are 70%.
This does not necessarily mean the pet will have the same power of the healer as together they will still need to equal 100 power.
A summoner primary archetype on it's own may not have cleric heals but when combined with secondary archetype cleric it would essentially have access to heals and cleric-like abilities shared through its summoned pet of choice to some extent. As far as I know, we don't know how many active pets they can have either. I'm assuming 1 specifically from the power split. Maybe temporarily ones through augments and abilities as means to potentially buff host, pet and indirectly party? Maybe we'll see some holy circles of power where if the host and pet stay in proximity there could be benefits
Well, 3 x 30 = 90 so they might be 10 off a Cleric. Of course, you'd prefer a full Cleric to be in the group (at least I would) for various reasons, but, a summoner at 90 cleric power plus a Bard at 100% Bard power (can heal based on procs and also buff the heals of the summons) means you won't have the overheal equivalent of a buffed cleric but you would have more than a full Cleric. Add to that a healing combat pet and you have 4 pets that are healing, which should surpass a full cleric in terms of raw power but not necessarily in terms of skill. I'm not stating these as facts but I've used your calculations.
That's all part of the versatility you can bring to the table with summons and archetype manipulation via augments. If the minimum you can sacrifice to the pet is 30%, that 30% is gone from you, that may also include your HP and Resource. If the player just has to sacrifice literal attack power then that is quite detrimental to design lol.
Again, this is assuming you're allowed to have multiple pets summoned at once by your comment, if you summon 3 pets at 30%, you're only left with 10% which means if you take a big hit, you pretty much failed at your role lol as if you die, your pets would die too and eventually your party.
If you're over healing a lot outside of things like Heal Over Time abilities, this would imply you're not doing a great job in higher end content because of resource management and group play. Healing isn't supposed to a spam fest as you would see in wow where the combat is wet sponges and the healer is a water hydrant lol
bear in mind, the summons boost the summoners power unlike the combat pet. SO without the summons the summoner would be at 10% power with your calculations, but, with the summons the summoner would be at 100%. With the combat pet at your calculations the summoner would be at 70%.
If the summons essentially mitigate some of the power loss to boost the summoner that significantly as you imply then that's just not good at all in terms of design. The point of sacrifice is to play around the loss not cancel it out for abuse. As mentioned, we don't know how many summons a summoner is allowed to have with or without universal combat pets added into the mix. For all we know, the summons of a summoner work the same way through sacrifice or upkeep management.
No, the devs explicitly state that the summons increase the summoners power. Also, not all summoners will have a minion. I merely used the maximum calculations provided in both instances. I'm not an advocate either way, I simply make my theory crafting and let steven or the devs make the decisions. A lot of the time my ideas aren't used but a lot of the time my ideas make changes happen which I don't request. I often find either way that the changes are beneficial in the end. Thus, I am not privy to all facts and facets, I only give what I can whilst i'm here.
No offense but dev's say a lot things during development (not specifically just intrepid). The wiki changes with updates.
That doesn't mean how it's going to be for final product. The wiki does "currently" state that the summoners summons do not have a sacrifice like how combat pet do but if combat pets are going to be that meta then it's bad design to implement as summoner archetype get a significant boost across the board in theory. There will have to be some sort of trade off to make it relatively fair. But again, we dont know the full exent of summoners summons in terms of duration, strength etc. The summoner usually is the target to kill and not the summons.
We haven't even seen the summoner. I have no real retort. All I can state is the summons boost the summoner's power. What that power entails, what the skills are and how strong the summons are remains to be seen. Furthermore, every class type will be covered by the summoner class. To state Combat Pets are OP on some classes negates the fact that hard counters exist, limitations on use exist and the Combat Pets are horizontal progression and not vertical progression like summoner's summons.
I know, I stated we haven't seen them yet earlier and said it's usually why the summoner is last to be unveiled and worked on for such reasons. I never said they are OP but considering how loosely that word is thrown around these days I can see why one may use it liberally. I said META as in Most Effective Tactic Available. If a majority of summoners end up using combat pets with summons to counter it, it's essentially a boost in theory as it's another entity to play around in the summon pool that mitigates the sacrifice.
Yeah, I paraphrased with OP because of Depraved's comment before. Couldn't be bothered to multi quote. I'm not sure what horizontal progression means in terms of combat pets. Until i see combat pets in action I don't want to state what will happen. Its perfectly valid for summoners to use combat pets if they want to, the same with all other classes. Though, some summoners will have a lot of fire power. If you think 4 x Healing Minions will be meta try 4 x DPS Minions plus the Summoner at 70% power according to your calculations. That would be 190% power at 30% power for each minion and 70% power for the summoner.
META is META lol
Universal combat pets sound interesting but at the same time they sound quite bad in my opinion. It does essentially just turn every class into a temporary pet class regardless of CD and power loss upon death.
I would rather combat pets be more significant in class design solely for summoner archetypes as summons and have them work more like combat pets where each summon is a sacrificial split in power with varying degree's of utility options to protect the summoner. Then based on the augments is how they benefit the summoner. This would still open up the door for combat pets (summons) to be raised and bred as summoners would want to claim various versions of them.
core mechanics / systems arent likely to change, what will change is the numbers. summoner's pet will boost the master's power. how much? we dont know. it could be 1%, 5%, 10% 50% thats what will change, not the fact that they boost the master.
combat pets will take power from the master. how much? 1%, 5%, 10%, 50%? we dont know, that will be balanced when people can play. but the fact that they take power from the master wont likely change.
Going back to original post.
As of right now, I currently don't like the idea of universal combat pets. Sounds like a weird design goal especially with summoner archetypes. Summoner pets should work how combat pets are currently supposed to work in relation to archetype and class allowances.
Combat Pets are a way to mitigate against the summoners. Each hard counter has a counter measure to narrow the field. You can't completely negate the power gaps between hard counters but you can narrow the gap slightly. Also, combat pets can't be used everywhere unlike minions so a summoner would be gimped in those locations if they only had combat pets.
That's what tuning is in terms of "balance" and we previously discussed that. If they tune it so the combat pets sacrifice is essentially mitigated then that's just weird
Yeah I don't like the design goal for universal combat pets. Takes away from archetype/class identity by allowing everyone to be a summoner/pet class.
No thanks
lol? The whole point of classes and archetypes is to have identity. Giving everyone pets removes that as the term universal implies.
Universal Combat Pets = bad
Said my piece
The devs call the constructs 'Archetypes' with Primary and Secondary 'Archetypes' not classes per say. They can be built however you want, with whatever weapons you want and with whatever augments you want. Thus, there is no actual 'class identity'.
you didnt get it. you said the devs say a lot of things, the wiki can change, the game can change, etc. my point is that core system and mechanics are less likely to change, only the balancing numbers. so when IS says that summoner's pets will boost them, and combat pets will take away from your character, you can expect that not to change. what will change is how much.
Universal Combat Pets = bad
Said my piece
thats not true. just because you have a companion pet doesnt mean you are a summoner.
summoners have specific skills that synergize with their pets. for example, you might have a transfer pain skill (like in l2) where your pet absorbs some of your damage. a tank summoning a combat pet wont have that. summoners will have curses that they can use on their enemies while their pets fight them. summoners will have buffs and heals for their pets. a warrior cant buff his combat pet or heal it. a warrior cant use curses, he still has to use his warrior skills to fight. a bard will buff the pet, but thats what bards do, they buff. it doesnt take away from the class identity.
Universal Combat Pets = bad
Said my piece
what is your chosen class?
90% chance i play cleric
5% chance i play bard
2.5% rogue
2.5% summoner
also elf. yes elf is a class, the master class. anything that isnt an elf doesnt matter;
yours?
I will either be Enchanter or Magician. I will be Magician first because Summoner isn't at the start of A2 thus, I will play Bard initially. Enchanter is Summoner/Bard, Magician is Bard/Mage. I will be Vaelune.