When are we going to be able to tame more then one pet?

/signed

with the amount of charmable pets in game i dont see why anet didnt implement something like this alot earlier... surely they would have forseen this?

/signed

/sighed

/signed

I'd even like to see this go one step further with a new "Beast Master" style title that increments for every five pets you have that are level 20.

Each pet that hits level 20 could be "stored" in a Stable Master (or something) NPC like the hats and he could 'designate' the active pet when Charm Animal is equipped. I'd say make it a requirement that a pet has to be level 20 to be stored.

/signed with calligraphy.

... What are the odds on Gaile or someone popping into this thread to at least discuss the idea or shoot it down? Sigh...

I agree wholeheartedly. And there's nothing else for me to say.

/signed

It is really funny how people sacrifice their usefullness only so they stand out in the crowd. I mean, wtf? Why on earth would elementalist or assassin ever need a pet, apart from using it so they get those comments, like: ZOMG WTF THAT PET ROXX U R TEH PWNZOR!!!1
If Fish isn't using it on his ele, then I'm sorry for my mistake, but I am not talking about you guys here anyway, I just took you as an example. There are others like you, like that monk in FoW armor who was playing Aspenwood with me, and the same giant Phoenix bird followed him....
And don't even try to explain yourself by telling me how that pet actually fits your build... If that is the case, you would allready got any pet for that role. And no, I am not jelaous about your uber pets/titles, I have several R1 and 2 KoaBD friends and I am happy for them, because they are very nice people. It's just pathetic when someone screams for attention in this way. Even more pathetic when it comes from good players like Soti.

I know this thread has like 4-5 pages, and it's lame to reply to posts from 1st page, but I just had to. Anyway, as for the OP, yes, I would /sigh to that. Nice idea.

My nec has a spider it looks cool lol I even play beastmaster sometimes with my nec...it's called "fun" and messing around...remember this:

GW isn't for life, it's just for fun.

Quote:

Originally Posted by freekedoutfish I cant see it being that hard to add!

Are you offering to program it for them?

Quote:

Originally Posted by SotiCoto Like using a dictionary perhaps?

More like keeping up with current Internet memes, I'd say.

Yep, me too!

/signed

as for other profs having a pet... its ok as long as it wont hinder the team... might sometimes be useless but it sure looks damn good ^^

i use my black widow with my sin as a companion just because it matches my armor... i have all the dmg and healing i need ^^
i would like to switch to a black moa bird or to a RAVEN once in a while though

Party of 8 + 8 pets vs aoe boss + Pain Inverter = instant death

So only ranger are allowed to us pets? only rangers are allowed to mess about with the game and play how they want to?

TBH I dont really care whether you think its a good idea for an ele to use a pet or not. I play this gam mostly solo and I play how I want to, and how I enjoy it. If I want to drag a pheonix or wolf, or some other pet around I will. If I want to take on into FA I will. There are far worse player in this game, and in FA who are using pets.

And for the record, a pet can help in FA while your being linched by everyone because your nuking. It gets them off your back.

So yes I, as an ele, want to be able to tame more then one pet and choose which on to use. Is that going to impact you at all? is that going to make your gameplay awfull? is it going to make GWs unplayable?

No!!

I would never take a pet into a mission if I was serious about doing it because I dont want my skills reset everytime it dies. But if im just messing about and having fun and experimenting (the entire point of the game), then I might use one and enjoy it.

You cant dictate this idea is bad just because you dont like the idea of non-rangers or certain profesions using pets. We're allowed to play this game how ever we like and I would like to be able to store pets after I volve them, so I dont have to spend days making new ones everytime.

None of that was meant to be personal against you, but there is a mentality ingame which dictates people are not allowed to experiement and play different to anyone else.

I may use pets n FA occassionally as an ele, but after 2 years I feel I have enough experience for it to work. So to have somone stand there and instantly go "OMG Im leaving, that ele has a pet" is just childish.

So I'm immature sometimes. I like having fancy pets, even if I'm primary Assassin.... and as it happens, giant Gojirabird requiring level 2 maxed titles = Bigger E-P33n than Dire Black Widow (and also harder to train to Dire).
And if I feel like doing the kiddy thing and E-P33n-Slapping... then so help me I will, whether you think it pathetic or not!

Unlike some people I'm not afraid to admit that I'm downright immature sometimes... and that is something I'm proud of.


CURRENT Internet memes?
Screw that.
All your retro are belong to us.

I think they could implement it as the Festival hat guy.
Some conditions though. Only lvl 20 Pets can be added. And you can add them from any type. So you could chose between hearty, elder or dire. (Though only the one you had will be added).

I think this would be a real nice solution. Offcourse these pets are Char bound and not account bound. The char charmed it, not your pvp / lucky title .

Edit* Wow the new guru server is rocks, instant edits ftw.

I guess you could say that, but that's only based off they idea that they take your deleted pets. They hold no information on what animal it was, what evolution, or even what level (they just recognize 20) storing that data is not the same as having, say, a hat. the hat is 1/0 for your account. The pet requires type, level(you could make it only apply to 20s, would be easier)& evolution to be stored per character. might as well mark your "charm animal" skill in your skill list to the animal you have currently, then buy another "charm animal" skill and start again. Red's example is great.

GW2?

I'm convinced that this feature WILL NEVER be added to GW1, and quite frankly, I think that this is a good idea. Pets have never enjoyed much popularity except from overpowered bunny thumper builds, so it would be a better use of developer time to pursue some other feature.

I do feel for you though... I know many people that would like to tame multiple pets just for the fun of it.

Regardless of whether the NPC is storing your pet, or this new "charm animal" skill is holding your pet. It still needs to hold the pet type, evolution and name.

That wont change either way!

I just feel that we already have an NPC pet trainer, who contains the ability to take your pet, so why not just expand upon that.

Maybe even combine the NPC with the "charm animal" skills. You buy a new "charm animal" skill, and then give that signet to the NPC to hold.

But those NPCs exist and they dont do a huge amount at the minute. We could move them inside outposts and then you dont need to walk into instances to find them.

Have the pet trainer NPC sell those skills too. Just to keep it all combined into one area.

hm. i like the idea. i'm attached to my lizard and i like the eagle. can't bear to leave the lizard though.

unfortunately, i don't think that it'll be implemented at all. there's probably some unknown technical limitation that prohibits this (the PLAYER_CHAR table could have one attribute called PET and that's it ). also, benefits to this will be considered 'superficial' by most (i don't think the type of pets makes that big a difference in pve...). it will most definitely incur the wrath of people who've been pushing for some other changes. i can almost hear it. "omfg... no meaningful skill balance but a pet stable... /ragequit!!".

plus, pets are optional. magic word there. heh.

All very true, how ever it cant be denied that Anet has been pushing GWs into being a collectors game. We collect mini-pets, greens, armors , hats, prestige armor, titles, skills and alike.

A large aspect of the game is collecting stuff, and a fun part! So to limit us to just one pet at a time is rather unfair. In that respect it should be a priority.

Atleast if we're to continue Anets trend of adding collecterables to the game. And yes pets are optional... I dont remember saying otherwise or implying people should use them.

Its should also be optional to collect more then one, if you choose to and not be limited to just one type.

defensive aren't u o.O.. i'm agreeing with u. what i meant by 'optional' was that it probably wouldn't be a huge priority for anet, if it even becomes a priority. you could give each hero 1 pet though, which was pretty much what i did. makes quite a sight even though it's not entirely the same thing as owning all of 'em.

actually the HOM would have been a perfect place to hold collectors items (pets, whatever). however, i have a feeling that it's really hardcoded to collect fixed stuff (based on the debate on tormented and destroyer weapons). would have been cool if it was designed to be more extensible to become a more in depth collector hall.

if they hardcoded a place like the HOM, i think the 1 pet-1 char limitation would be far far worse since it was there at the very beginning.

Wow, for a change i find myself actually supporting one of your posts (as we usually have differing opinions of the game in most threads).

/signed for a good idea.

This is the arguement I dont understand from alot of people. GWEN was the last major update to GWs we are likely to get. So all we will get in the next 2 years are small changes.

I realise their busy with GW2, but Anet still has to keep us interested and playing. What more priority could there be (aside from GW2) then finally finishing GW1 off and adding all these options players have asked for, for ages.

because they could keep people playing by making mini mission paks and selling them via the in game store. they've already shown signs of moving this way. your suggested feature won't help bring in revenue mate.

this goes for all the hairdressing suggestions (the good to have, but not critical types) as well. given limited resources on anet's end, i'd rather implement stuff that people will pay for. but then again, i'm $-minded.

2 years till GW2..damn they will have to keep players interested still in GW1 till then..if they dont do anything new then players will stray away to newer games being released and GW will be a passing memory to current players..

dont think we will get many more mission paks..but who knows..

no revenue was made with Festival Hat NPC...but they made it happen for players...probably request made in place like this thread. so it doesnt hurt making suggestions..

never. now move on

My only issue with tha is it would make it so inconvenient. Might as well just link them to the skills npcs. there are way more of them & they are in town.

/signed

Why are they taking so long...?

Reverse psychology... gogogo.
People addmiting something they are expected to deny only so it would lead to "Oh, but I do addmit it, now what?" situation is getting kinda old. And it doesn't make it right, if you addmit it.

Oh and, I think Fish said that taking his pet with him in Aspenwood doesn't effect anyone. Actually, it does. It effects those people you play with, because you wasted a skill slot by taking that bird, instead of putting something usefull (Or 2 skill slots, if you decide to bring Comfort Animal). But nevermind, with all the Mending Wammos still around, it doesn't make any diffrence.

TBH this post wins the thread.

Definately signed. I'm an animal lover and I'd love to have each pet available for my character. I have two rangers (12 character slots, 10 professions, 2 rangers which is my fave profession) so each one could have a different assortment of pets. And I could always go assassin/ranger too. Woot!

I wasnt aware that fort asbenwood was that challenging a fight, that sacrificing one or two skills/spells will result in the entire team loosing.

Fort asbenwood isnt won or lost by a non-ranger having a pet and sacrificing one or two slots. Imagine all 8 team members brought a pet, you would be doubling your team size. Would you complain then?

Fort Asbenwood is won or lost depending on the tactics you use when fighting.

For example on the Luxon side... how many times has a match been lost because people get bogged down and distracted with protecting the mines. How many times has a match been lost because people insist on attacking the overly protected gate, while the other side gate is completely empty and vulnarable to attack.

For example on the kuzack side... how many times have they had monks healing behind gates so you cant get through. How many times have they camped the switches to instantly close them again. How many times have they had a spirit spammer creating spirits inside gates.

Ive seen Fort Asbenwood be won with a wide range of team combinations. Whether it be mostly elementals, or mostly rangers, or mostly warriors. Its do-able.

Having an elemental with a pet isnt going to suddenly make it impossible to win! Not to mention that any team with an MM or two on their side, nearly always wins.

I occassionally take the necro skill to steal minions, and piss MM's off! Its funny!

The point being that you can play this game how ever you want. Just because one player believes that ele's or Sin's shouldnt use pets, is no reason to /notsign this thread.

Any and all professions are welcome to use pets and they should all have the choice to collect different ones.

Great argument there.

Well, first of all, I did /sign this thread, I like the idea of having more pets available to us. That's not my point. I was just saying how it's lame that you use your pet as an ele. Let's face it, you only use it because it's a "elite" pet. That's the whole point. You responded to my post saying how everyone has a right to play with a pet. True. Maybe it can even fit well on a build that isn't really designed around using a pet. Yeah, could be. But have you played with a pet before, on your ele? I highly doubt it. If so, then I'm sorry for my mistake, but I'm 99% sure that you are only using your pet as a show-off.
And as for that part of your post where you say how Aspenwood isn't "hard", and it can be won even if you "waste" few skill slots...Well, that's no excuse. It is equal as saying that it's ok for warriors to bring Mending and Healing Hands, and put only 8-9 on swordsmanship. It's not just "one player saying that ele's or Sin's shouldnt use pets", it's common sense. We both know it. You only try to deny it, and convince me how your pet is actually serving some purpose, apart from standing there as a show off. I'm sorry, I know this is just a game and people have right to play the way they want, but this kind of behavior just pisses me off. Just like those 55hp monks in RA, for example.

Yep I have during quests, missions and bounty hunting. Also during fort asbenwood to keep people away from me.

I use a heavy nuking build and when Im being agro'd by a warrior or a Sin at close range, it helps to have a pet peck their eyes out and annoy them.

Maybe it doesnt do alot, but it helps lay damage on them while I nuke the monk or the other ele. Im not going to declare im an expert player who knows how to handle a pet, because im not, but IMO it helps.

And im sorry, I know you did /sign the thread and I didnt mean to sound like I was having a go. But you cant deny that FA isnt relatively easy to do with any team?

Provided you have a monk or two and an MM, your sorted! Provided people know how to play it tacticfully, then your sorted.

I'm sure the other builds to help aside from MM and monks, but im not an expert on warriors or rangers, or anything other then ele TBH. I just go from what I see.

FA is only hard when the other side does one of two things...

1) Either they place monks behind doors to heal the eles at the gates.
2) Either they take on the mines in large numbers and the Luxons follow them like idiots.

I cant speak for the kuzack side as Im luxon!

But this is detracting from the post. One main reason for this is to allow a player to collect pets and NOT have to retrain them each time. As an ele, I like having a pet, but I dont want to re-evolve one everytime because im not a ranger.

I dont really like evolving them, because im rubbish at it, but I do like using them. Collecting them will help remove that tedious side to pets. While those who like to evolve them can still do so.

Again I know you signed the idea, so ill stop if it sounds like im having a go.