Bio Engineer Archive
Thread: Word of Advice for those Making the Uber CL10 Pets
HAM, resists and damage are 3 good factors that need to be considered for a creature level. A non BE'd (wild) CL10 creature isn't going to have 10K HAM I can tell you that. Yes I think BE creatures should have the *potential* to be better than the wild counterparts, but not blow them out of the water.
Non CH pets are not intended to be tanks for nonCH players. If you want a Tank pickup CH, that was one of the purposes of lowering the max non CH level from 15 to 10, to avoid non CH from using pets that could tank too much.
Is this funny that these monsters come out? Sure is. The point is, if every non CH had one of these CL2 pets the game's combat system would suffer badly and you would find people moving away from CH for those who want *Tanks*. A BE rancor has a min CL of 35, even if it has 100 HAM and 50 dmg. Just because it's a rancor does not mean it's a tank, its the stats what makes the animal not the type of creature it is.
Right now it's not destroying the game's balance, but if it continues on and enough non CH have these pets, you will find alot of classes who take the combat serious complaining that some novice artisan with no combat skills can pull out this insanely tough to kill pet.
So definately enjoy it while it lasts, but I really don't see this being a "feature" that will stay very long.
My posts are not directed to anybody in particular, just saying that for those who think having a "super pet" with low CL is a game feature are somewhat mistaken.
Banning is obserd. Any BE recipe I have heard of is simply using the system as designed. **edit** near every combo I can come up with is superior to wild and does not fit creature rebalancing. How can we not make "exploited" pets? Are we suppose to sit tight for an indefinite amount of time and do nothing. I would be surprised if they ban anybody over this. It would be unfair of them to ban a player who made thousands of the obvious "bugged" pets. Afterall, he/she is just playing the game as intended. How could that be their fault. Somebody made a real good point in this thread - What about the players who do not come to the forums and have no idea of the controversy surrounding the issue -
Anyways, if I read it right, the smugglers were using a client side file hack. That is outright cheating and should require a banning as a result.
BTW - I have only made a few noc kam pets and only have sold very few to people who begged me and fully understood the possible nerf on them. I only support the "this is not cheating" side because, well, it simply is'nt.
You have to remember one thing though:
Game Developers s a whole inMMORPG's do not comment on exploitsuntil they have corrected them for fear of the "exploit" becoming widely known and taken advantage of so if this is deemed an exploit, don't expect a response until the fix is in. If I'm wrong, please let me know but can anyone point to an occurence in this game were the warning was given before the axe had been dropped? The ones that used the Smuggler exploit received none (so they claim) so I would highly doubt that we would see one.
Any of the maxxed out non-ch PVPers with these pets at their side could seriously impact the GCW giving them an unfair advantage against those who do not have, plus it seriuosly devalues the creature handler profession.
Do I know for 100% uncertainty that this is an exploit or even a bug? No, but I do know that when something's too good to be true, it usually is. We may trivialize the fact that these pets are only slightly imbalancing and that they will most likely just adjust their HAM and/or CL and all will be "rosey" but what if we're wrong? I'm not trying to use scare tactics. If you feel that this system is perfectly legit then more power to youbut if reading this puts an uneasy feeling in the pit of your stomach, doesn't that tell you something?
-Bochuu
WWJD wrote:
plus it seriuosly devalues the creature handler profession.
/agree
I feel sorry for CH now. Evertime time I see a CH peddeling wid pets, I feel bad. They can't give away what they used to get a kings ransom for. CH took a HUGE hit. CH were told what was going to happen with the execption of never being able to sell a pet due to the BE changes. I am a MCH too but it does not affect me because, hmmn, you know why 
I sometimes by their wild pets and release them just to help out a bit. If I weas not BE, I would be VERY upset and living on my savings.
BindyBalaroo wrote:
WHY should CH's be able to tame animals that are better then BE pets?? WHY! THEN WHAT IS THE POINT OF BE!!!!!!!!! What makes BE special?? Pet stims?? might as well put those into the Doc line, Clothing enhances>?> Those could go into tailor. WHAT MAKES BE SPECIAL?? freakin cool creatures they can make, this also works towards the whole social aspect of the game, needing another player to get what you need. You can't LOOT uber pets, the same way you can't LOOT uber guns. If this was the way it was, then ALL tamed pets would have different stats kinda like guns do. Not all vibro nucks are created equal. THINK ABOUT IT!
My understanding of how crafting in this game works is that everyone has access (more or less) to the same resources and same schematics. What makes a crafter better is our ability to use that and customize a product to fit the customer's needs, desires, preferences.
You are totally missing the point Bindy, it's not about who makes the best uberest pet, or who has access to the best pets (ch or non ch, BE or CH), it's about balance and recent changes. What makes a BE pet great is that the person using the pet can now have a choice in specials, compromise certain aspects in order to gain in another part of the pet (damage/resists). I find all of these "best pet" topics totally stupid because what is best is what works for you in the job you need it to do, while working within your skill level as a CH or a non ch.
Stop using the "what is the point of BE" as an excuse to make yourself feel better about using an exploit, if this is what your intention is. If you choose to use an exploit, please don't come here and tell us that the only way we are going to make better pets than what the CH can tame is by using an exploit is pretty insulting. As a master CH and master BE, I use a combo of tamed in the wild pets and BE pets to get the right combo for the hunting situation I'm in. I suggest you become a master BE and a master CH, maybe then you will have some understanding as to what is involved in being those professions. I'm not a fan of flaming, but I read your posts in the CH forum too, and they are pretty much the same.
Another thing that is neat and a purpose to BE - my favorite pet is one I made out of Rancor youth and Singing Mt. Clan Rancor DNA, it's very well rounded as far as HAM and damage goes, and has really nice resists, the best part - I was able to put that DNA in the package of my choosing (skin), to get a pet that is designed for ME.
WWJD wrote:
You have to remember one thing though:
Game Developers s a whole inMMORPG's do not comment on exploitsuntil they have corrected them for fear of the "exploit" becoming widely known and taken advantage of so if this is deemed an exploit, don't expect a response until the fix is in. If I'm wrong, please let me know but can anyone point to an occurence in this game were the warning was given before the axe had been dropped? The ones that used the Smuggler exploit received none (so they claim) so I would highly doubt that we would see one.
Any of the maxxed out non-ch PVPers with these pets at their side could seriously impact the GCW giving them an unfair advantage against those who do not have, plus it seriuosly devalues the creature handler profession.
Do I know for 100% uncertainty that this is an exploit or even a bug? No, but I do know that when something's too good to be true, it usually is. We may trivialize the fact that these pets are only slightly imbalancing and that they will most likely just adjust their HAM and/or CL and all will be "rosey" but what if we're wrong? I'm not trying to use scare tactics. If you feel that this system is perfectly legit then more power to youbut if reading this puts an uneasy feeling in the pit of your stomach, doesn't that tell you something?
-Bochuu
While I would normally agree about the idea that the devs never advertize an exploit, as much as this has been discussed on this forum, it isn't like they would be letting the cat out of the bag on a "super seekrit exploit." Hence, that arguement does not hold any water, in my opinion
I'm glad to see that those posting (no matter which side of the issue you weghed in on) have been very civil in this debate. I see this as definitely affecting game balance (especially with the GCW).
I'm a Master BE/CH with very minimal combat ability because of the skill investment needed (yes I know my skill point placement was my choice). I'm also a wookiee places me at the time being at a further disadvantage (inability to wear armor). Basically, my pets are the only thing that keep me from taking a dirt nap. Now I'm covert but plan to soon go overt to assist in taking down bases (I imagine you must be overt to do this). taking out a perfectly balanced PVP killing machine would be hard enough but now add in the tank cl10 pet with strong poison/disease and it now becomes an impossibility.
Now I am a firm advocate for playing the game as intended. The last patch "intended" to take the tanks out of the hands of non-ch's and give them a pet/companion and end the so called pet wars. It "intended" to require people to group in order to tackle the high level content. It "intended" for us as BE's to be the Weaponsmiths for CH's.
Now you can not convince me that the aforementioned patch "intended" to do all that then turned back around and gave BE's the ability to put even better pets back in to the hands of the non-ch.
Should a BE's pet be better than it's equivalent in the wild? Of course but to what degree? Since we are engineering creatures, shouldn't our main goal be to make the best ones for those who were intended to handle them in the first place, the creature handlers?
-Bochuu
DialUp wrote:
WWJD wrote:
plus it seriuosly devalues the creature handler profession.
/agree
I feel sorry for CH now. Evertime time I see a CH peddeling wid pets, I feel bad. They can't give away what they used to get a kings ransom for. CH took a HUGE hit. CH were told what was going to happen with the execption of never being able to sell a pet due to the BE changes. I am a MCH too but it does not affect me because, hmmn, you know why
I sometimes by their wild pets and release them just to help out a bit. If I weas not BE, I would be VERY upset and living on my savings.
Well, to be honest, CHs selling pets made about as much sense to me as Marksment selling blasters. CH is a combat profession. They are rightly the customers, not the suppliers.Our clones may be royally messed up, but at least the economic models is finally on the right track.
CHs should be making their money doing missions or selling holos and other rare drops, like every other combat profession.
Benechi
Anubi wrote:
While I would normally agree about the idea that the devs never advertize an exploit, as much as this has been discussed on this forum, it isn't like they would be letting the cat out of the bag on a "super seekrit exploit." Hence, that arguement does not hold any water, in my opinion
Forums posters and even readers are still a minority amongst the players based,I believe.
Benechi