Creature Handler Archive
Thread: Solution to the pet CL problem
Page 1 of 1
Joker9125
Thu Oct 06, 2005 5:30 pm
#1
Why notmake the pet automatically take the effective CL of its master? This way even if they raised the CL cap for pets to 80 a CL54 player wouldnt be too powerfull because his pet would give and take damage as if it were CL54, heck this would probably weaken those with MCH as their only combat profession and it would actually help those of us MCH/Combat profession people because we would no longer "have" to group our pets for them to do any damage plus the added benifit of having more in the way of stats. It may not make sense from a RP POV, but in this level based system its the most balanced thing I can think of.
A-Slave
Thu Oct 06, 2005 7:12 pm
#2
Heres one even better! Have the game "group" pets and masters always... so if the pets bigger then your CL, you go up...if your bigger then pets CL ...pet goes up.
So you dont have a CH with 3 pets being someone that takes up half the group...pet will NEVER need to be invited to a group (unless they want things like squad leader buffs)
Joker9125
Thu Oct 06, 2005 7:41 pm
#3
A-Slave wrote:
Heres one even better! Have the game "group" pets and masters always... so if the pets bigger then your CL, you go up...if your bigger then pets CL ...pet goes up.
So you dont have a CH with 3 pets being someone that takes up half the group...pet will NEVER need to be invited to a group (unless they want things like squad leader buffs)
FYI is you CL30 and you group a CL60 pet the pet will have an effective CL30. That is how it works in game now.
jopenack
Fri Oct 07, 2005 7:46 am
#4
Interesting, One question or maybe two :-)
What about multiple pets?
Would you be able to call 3 pets and have them retain the cl of its master?
This is a bit of a problem in this scenerio that i can see. If being able to call 3 pets and keeping cl of its master could bring back an uberness we may not want, but not being able to call 3 pets is imo losing something. If a shared cl of its master for multi pets happens then the idea of using one higher lvl to tank and one lower pet to hit with ranged for added dam would also be lost. Seems we lose something either way. Unless of coarse given the ability to spread our cl points among the pets as we wish. hmmm
Joker9125
Fri Oct 07, 2005 9:43 am
#5
jopenack wrote:
Interesting, One question or maybe two :-)
What about multiple pets?
Would you be able to call 3 pets and have them retain the cl of its master?
This is a bit of a problem in this scenerio that i can see. If being able to call 3 pets and keeping cl of its master could bring back an uberness we may not want, but not being able to call 3 pets is imo losing something. If a shared cl of its master for multi pets happens then the idea of using one higher lvl to tank and one lower pet to hit with ranged for added dam would also be lost. Seems we lose something either way. Unless of coarse given the ability to spread our cl points among the pets as we wish. hmmm
I think you misunderstood my post. This would be exactly like grouping your pets except their wouldn't nessicarily be a GUI that showed the healh of said pet.
So I'll answer your question with another one. Is it uber for a CH to group multiple pets now?
jopenack
Fri Oct 07, 2005 10:03 am
#6
Ah I see
I did misunderstand
TY
And I do think then it would be exactly what we could use.
Mailo
Fri Oct 07, 2005 12:35 pm
#7
This would be the same as grouping the pets without them requiring a group space ... nice, I like it.
I hate having to either run around with an 8 person group, but vulnerable pets, or CL80 pets, but less players ... what kind of choice is that?
I hate having to either run around with an 8 person group, but vulnerable pets, or CL80 pets, but less players ... what kind of choice is that?
Joker9125
Fri Oct 07, 2005 9:06 pm
#8
The more I think about this the more viable an option it becomes. If this game is coded anything like I think it is and provided the devs are using some form of coding standard then all it should take is baically swapping out a few variables. Granted I havent seen the source code, but I dont think this would be all that difficult to impliment.
Page 1 of 1