My Ideas for the Implementation of New Pet Changes

[Harvoc]

CrystalKitten. Also, just because Ferocity has a higher base damage than Cunning (it doesn't because they all have the same base stats and scale exactly the same, only dps difference comes from talents) doesn't mean that in the end, with talents, they'll still have the same dps. You're assuming that Ferocity and Cunning talents provide the exact same amount of dps in the end, which they obviously do not.

As for the mount pets, I guess that's your opinion. As I said before, many people would like those pets to be tamable. Guess it's just a matter of who's bigger in terms of numbers and determination when we talk about if Blizzard will implement them if they use our input when deciding.

[CrystalKitten]

I think the big issue here is you are saying a lot of stuff like blizzard is going to HAVE to make drastic changes if they give us anything else. But that's not true. And they've infact shown the opposite. When they gave us a bunch of new families in Cata, they didn't rework EVERYONE, so I doubt they'd do so the next time. Honestly, I just really don't see the point in a lot of your changes. Yes, arguments can be made for them. However, I just don't really see the benefit being high enough over the loss to justify such dramatic changes. If you're going to encourage/force people to abandon pets they've had for a LONG time (sometimes years)(and you can argue there's no forcing anything, but I have a nice variety in buffs/debuffs right now. If you changed them, I might be "forced" to change my pets in order to keep my desired buffs/debuffs), there better be a REALLY good reason to do so. Splitting up abilities between the families just... doesn't seem like a good one. And I don't think there's ANY argument that can be made to change my mind, so I'm just going to say I'm done with this thread, as there's no reason to keep going in circles with explanations, and counter explanations.

Those numbers were with a cat, and windserpent specced with talents. They all had the "increases attack speed" and "increases damage" talents. But believe what you want. As I said, I have no "in action" examples, as I don't use any meter mods. But whereas the cunning has "increases damage below 35% health" or "does __ dmg after a crit" the cat has outright crit boosters, and other damage talents that cunning doesn't.

Either way, opinions are opinions. If these changes WERE put in, I would probably stop playing. You can't convince me that these changes are good, no matter what you say, right now, so I'm leaving this thread to the rest of you now.

[Harvoc]

I'm not saying that they have to rework everything the next time they make changes. I'm saying that if they do make changes, this is what I'd like to see. Plus, just because Ferocity pets have easier to understand talents that increase damage doesn't mean that they do more damage than Cunning pets with supposed "indirect" damage talents. What you're saying is that later in WoW, should Blizzard add in more buffs/debuffs/abilities that are available from other sources, they'll just add in ones to family types that already have a family that can provide it. Doesn't suit my taste as I HATE redundancy. And you didn't have to leave just because you couldn't convince me that my proposed changes didn't suit you/everyone else. I knew that you didn't like them, I just wanted to elaborate/explain to you so you get more info about why I'm doing this. But seeing as I can't change your mind to staying, it was nice arguing (kidding), I mean discussing with you.

[Harvoc]

As for the mount pets, it seems that the only family/pets that the commenters here like would be:

New families to be added:

Armadillos
Diemetradons/Incendosaurs=?
Hydras
Pterrordaxes

I didn't include Wyverns even though no one mentioned them because they can be mounts as well. As for Spore/Marsh Walkers, contrary to CrystalKitten's statement, I don't think that they look mount-like to me because since they're so huge (picture comparing a human to a Spore Walker: http://www.wowpedia.org/images/4/44/Spo ... er_Art.jpg). A player on a Spore Walker would tower over most bosses!

Pets to join current families:

Basilisks=Crocolisks
Gyreworms/Mana Wyrms/Arcane Wyrms=Worms
Sandreavers=Silithids
Hawkstriders=Tallstriders

Also, CrystalKitten, did you run those tests with no talents, glyphs, or gear on besides a ranged weapon? They might affect the end results. I know that you left, but if you decide to return, I'd like to know how you ran your tests.

[Thwip]

Oook, here is my thing. I can completely understand your hate for redundancy in the classes, but that should not apply to Beast Mastery pets. Why? I am one and I barely change over to SV. I have one cat and one wolf should I need to. I know a lot of people like this. I also have met people who aren't even spec'd for BM at ALL. There is actually one here on the forums.

The fact that we have a double up in the pets like that IS mainly due to BMs and Non-BMs. But that only applies, in that case, to four family under ferocity. The others where they are doubled up, I could possibly see them getting shifted around, but at the same time, why? If you are so bent on saying that a Cunning can put out just as much DPS as a Ferocity, they why would you need to move these other the a little OCD irk going ahaha. No offense, no offense, I mean that in jest. You state that a Cunning can be just as good as Ferocity in the right hands, yet you say that we need to move these buffs around so more families could use them? That's hard to grasp on my end. Because in the end it kinda sounds like you are saying it doesn't matter what family you roll with, but yet.....it...does? Again I will state, I my opinion, that most of the cunning debuffs are more PvP geared while your major debuffs/buffs in ferocity are PvE centered. Although, any hunter could rock either tree in either setting based on circumstances like you have stated, glyphs, spec, ect.

I like that we kinda have to make hard choices in what we bring. It's either bust out major dps or actually take a small drop and bring something very useful. In a 25 man setting it's easy to already have all buffs/debuffs available, so you are free to use your best pet to bust out your top end dps. While on the other hand, in a 10 man group, you might lose just a hair of dps and not be busting the meters, but in the end you could provide something that is very useful to your group. I think that in essence is what Blizzard intended. You say spreading out buffs/debuffs equally among the families isn't homogenizing, but in a way it still is. Someone else pointed out that several of these are actually, most likely, more for a hunter's preference on looks vs their dps capability and I will have to agree. Some people like Tallstriders, where other's prefer foxes, but neither are penalized for their preference by having a pet with a different base functionality. Just like the exotics ferocity vs non-exotic.

Also, every player plays differently. Where you might be spec'd for AoEing, I am spec'd for higher end single target and that's the way I roll. :3 If people can rock those cunning pets, more power to them and they really don't need to worry so much between their cunning and ferocity pets in general, because in the end...they can use their pets just as well regardless of family. I understand that while change can be good, it can also be bad. Such a drastic overhaul would leave a lot of people devastated in the end. Now, adding more families and filling in the missing gaps would be highly ideal to me. I already know what most of the current pet families do, changing them THIS much would leave a lot of players, myself included, scrambling to figure out where everything went.

[Harvoc]

Well actually say you would like to bring a buff/debuff that only a ferocity family can bring. If there was a cunning family that you liked that could provide it, then you could bring it instead. Maybe it does about 200 dps less than the ferocity family but you like it's utility or survivability or aesthetics. As for the amount of buffs/debuffs/abilities for PvE ferocity has compared to cunning, cunning pets can provide 6 buffs/debuffs, two of which are the same. Ferocity can provide 12 buffs/debuffs with 3 pairs of 2 identical buffs/debuffs. So in essence cunning provides 5 while Ferocity provides 9. If you subtract the attack speed slow debuff and the physical damage reduction debuff, both of which can be provided by tanks, then Ferocity has 7. Cunning can provide 6 PvP abilities, 2 of which are identical but that's because it's from a Silithid and a Spider. Ferocity can provide 3 PvP abilities. I'm saying that a cunning pet can be almost as good, as good, or better depending on the circumstances, but you'd still lose dps if your cunning pet can't provide the same buff/debuff as your cunning pet's ferocity counterpart. I am stating that it doesn't matter which family you use. For PvE, ferocity and cunning are only a couple of hundred dps apart so normal hunters could choose the one they like more based on my aforementioned reasons. Hardcore hunters could choose the one that does more damage but that choice could vary based on changes Blizzard makes or your specific circumstances. Heck, I'd even go so far as to say that if hunters would prefer a tenacity pet that can provide the same buff/debuff as it's ferocity and cunning family counterparts because of its survivability/utility/aesthetics, then yes, I'd advocate that too. But I'd prefer to not cause as much uproar with this topic (too late apparently seeing as almost everyone disagrees with me except for Cerele) and stick with how most hunters use a cunning or ferocity pet in dungeons/raids.As for PvP, all 3 family types are in use, so I don't see a reason to change that.

[Harvoc]

Also, I'm not totally against having a Exotic pet that shares the same buff/debuff/ability with another family. I even advocate it, but I'd like them in 2 different families in order to diversify things. Also, the way you said how you've met people that aren't even specced BM at all and how there's even one on these forums makes me feel as if someone doesn't spec into BM, they're somehow less than a hunter. I don't spec into BM. I've been SV ever since I started playing. My dungeon spec is SV. My unrated battleground spec is SV. The only time I wasn't SV was when Cataclysm started and Frostheim recommended that hunters leveling 80-85 go MM. Since I only got Cataclysm about 2 weeks after it went out for Christmas, I wanted to catch up with everyone. So I went MM and after a few minutes of questing in Vash'jir, I immediately switched over to my SV PvP spec that I'd still kept. Do I feel as if I'm less of a hunter because I've never been BM or MM? No. Will I ever switch over to BM or MM? If I decide to raid, do rated battlegrounds, or arena then yes, I will. But right now, I don't see the need to. SV is the best spec for dungeons because of its AoE capabilities and even though SV is the worst spec for high-end PvP, it's perfectly acceptable for unrated battlegrounds.

[GormanGhaste]

I remember how sad I was when my Krikey lost his Bad Attitude. I could have kept him in my stables, pulling him out at random intervals, but it just wasn't going to be the same anymore. I ultimately released him back into the wild, even though I still love the look and sound of crocs, even though I still miss him.

The problem with making rational changes is that we players are often anything but rational about our pets.

[Harvoc]

Not only pets, Gorman. We humans aren't completely rational about anything because of our emotions causing us to form some bias toward a choice. But because pets are considered lifelong companions, being on the level of a close family member lots of the time, we're especially attached to them. Maybe even more so in WoW than real life because in real life, pets pass away and people move on. In WoW, they're always there so you can never lose them unless you choose to. In real life, any changes the pet exhibits in behavior are either directly or indirectly correlated to ourselves. In WoW, changes are made often times because of the developers, changes that we have very little influence on.

[Thwip]

Also, I'm not totally against having a Exotic pet that shares the same buff/debuff/ability with another family. I even advocate it, but I'd like them in 2 different families in order to diversify things. Also, the way you said how you've met people that aren't even specced BM at all and how there's even one on these forums makes me feel as if someone doesn't spec into BM, they're somehow less than a hunter. I don't spec into BM. I've been SV ever since I started playing. My dungeon spec is SV. My unrated battleground spec is SV. The only time I wasn't SV was when Cataclysm started and Frostheim recommended that hunters leveling 80-85 go MM. Since I only got Cataclysm about 2 weeks after it went out for Christmas, I wanted to catch up with everyone. So I went MM and after a few minutes of questing in Vash'jir, I immediately switched over to my SV PvP spec that I'd still kept. Do I feel as if I'm less of a hunter because I've never been BM or MM? No. Will I ever switch over to BM or MM? If I decide to raid, do rated battlegrounds, or arena then yes, I will. But right now, I don't see the need to. SV is the best spec for dungeons because of its AoE capabilities and even though SV is the worst spec for high-end PvP, it's perfectly acceptable for unrated battlegrounds.

As words and attitudes are hard to understand over the internet. I will ask nicely that you don't put words in my mouth for me and don't take me the wrong way. I was actually implying quite the opposite then you seemed to have taken up on. If you were to move cats or wolves to cunning it would be like taking a jab at none BM players. If you were to move Spirit Beast/Devils to cunning, it would be like you were taking a jab at BMs. Moving the pets around like they weren't as important as pets for another spec. It would feel more like the developers were favoring one/two specs over the other. People would challenge it as something instead of diversity as "Why did they change my pet and not theirs?" kinda deal.

No, I applaud anyone who isn't BM and quite honestly. That's the way you roll, right on. Even Blizzard as taken up on that not every player is BM and they even added pets that you don't need it for in these last couple of patches. In a way saying, we look at you all equally and we want all of you to have something epicly nice. Each player plays differently and that is their right to do so. You have to keep in mind ALL players when you set to tinkering with major changes. Honestly, the way that was phrased made me feel yet again, like I am in some kind of crap spec. I get it ALL the time. I have been BM since I started, even when it was the 'bad' spec to be in. I didn't care, I played the way I wanted to. [Because...Dinosaurs.] Same as you are doing. You can say any spec is the best spec for dungeons, it's all in the opinion of the player and how well they play their spec. I play for fun, not to break meters. This place has been the first place that has not had the attitudes of 'Lol y u BM?', but everyone here is so diverse in their specs that it's awesome to see for me. It's refreshing that everyone here is like 'PLAY WHAT YOU LIKE!" instead of "YOU NEED THIS SPEC OR YOU SUCK!", but I digress.

The four families in question don't really have any problems being the same tree. For non-BMs there is wolves and cats and for BMs there are Devils and SBs. I don't use those normal pets when I am under BM which is 90% of the time. [I'm not even sure when the last time I switched was. To be honest.] I want my Devil to be able to do what a wolf can do. I want my spirit beast to do what a cat can do. I'm sure a lot of players who aren't BM feel the same way about their wolves and cats. That's their design. You change one side out of the two and there will be players out there saying "WHY US?" and I'm fairly certain that out of all this time that this is the whole reason they haven't been changed to different trees. And I believe Gorman just summed up everything I was trying to get across....with less words. xD [I am very long winded and I do apologize.]

I don't want you feeling overwhelmed. You wanted input. Here it is. Don't think we're on the attack out of some kind of 'emotionally irrational' argument. You're putting forth the pros of this and I'm just helping point out the cons. This is why Blizzard has such a hard time with each set of minor patches. The player base doesn't always agree with changes, we just have more room to discuss this with someone like you rather then having it shoved at us and learning to deal. There are always compromises that will end up being made to keep the player base happy along with the rational way things can go. Sit and talk with me some more. I'm sure there is room for a little give and take that would make a lot more people happy. We just have to figure out that middle ground. :3 If you are willing.

[GormanGhaste]

I am very long winded and I do apologize.

Nothing to apologize for. I tend to measure out words like a miser handing out gold coins. Concise, but cryptic more often than not. That's why I have a tendency to jump into the middle of threads that have long posts, anxious that tempers must be flaring, as I couldn't imagine writing that many words in a row otherwise!

[Monica Gems]

Some non-BM hunters are begging for BM only pets to be made away with, and instead give ALL pets when in BM spec exotic abilities rather than have them being exotic pet tamers, while some BM hunters say it's THEIR Pokemons and if you want one, play their way. That is another very extreme change that would divide the hunter community the same way your changes would; half would like it and the other half would turn into rabid vampires and assault Blizz HQ.

And that's why massive overhauls like this wouldn't work.

Also, we don't need anymore tameable pets; it's not even possible as it is to have 1 of each family.

[Harvoc]

Seeing as everyone disagrees with me on the changes I've proposed, how about instead new families would be added with my new proposed abilities added to them? Also, since the BM hunters seem so heavily opposed to separating Exotic and non-exotic pets with the same ability and same family type, then I guess that can stay. As for me being overwhelmed, that's not even close to being true! Quite frankly I enjoy this because I have a minor stutter in real life so this discussion allows me to say things that would be much harder for me to express how I would want to in real life for fear of embarrassment. Plus, it allows me to practice for essays and speeches in high school! As for Monica Gems comment, I haven't ever heard of anyone discussing this topic that you mentioned. Also, I never said that this had to be done in one swift overhaul. This could be spread out over all of WoW for all I care. As for your last statement, then how else would Blizzard advance the hunter pet system. You always hear of how every hunter wants a new family. If Blizzard just came out and said no more pet changes EVER, don't you think hunters would take things worse than they would a few changes made over time? And lastly, just because you can't get every single family doesn't mean that no more should be added. Some people don't want all the families. I only have 15 of my pet slots filled. It's like saying because you can't get every ice cream flavor in your ice cream cone at once, no more should ever be added.

[Kurasu]

Seeing as everyone disagrees with me on the changes I've proposed, how about instead new families would be added with my new proposed abilities added to them?

One of the main reasons that people disagree is because of how massive they are. Smaller ones over time would likely be more palatable to people. Plus, frankly, I would rather see the new families added with the abilities. But then, I already mentioned that.

In most cases, I don't see a new family needing to be added. The abilities are comfortably on the pets that they belong on, and flexibility would be a bit redundant. Plus, while I'd love some of the abilities that you proposed, they would be pretty powerful in only limited situations. Probably only a BM ability in some cases (Combat Res, Purges) which would split the hunters even more. Me? I'd *love* them. But then again, I also run as BM.

Also, since the BM hunters seem so heavily opposed to separating Exotic and non-exotic pets with the same ability

I think you'll find that it's more than just BM hunters who feel this way.

[Loki]

Why does everyone keep saying they don't want the "mount" type families as pets ? What could possibly be bad about more pet families, for one, and secondly, what about the people that really want some of them (me, for example) ? I would love stags, giraffes, talbuks, etc far far more than hydras or basilisks, so why is it any different ? Although hydras are cool, and I would tame one if they were added, I don't really see them as a pet-type creature, but I don't go round saying "Oh no, you can't make hydras tameable" because I know lots and lots of people would really like to see them. We have bear mounts, dragonhawk mounts, cat mounts, a rhino mount, mounts that are basically tallstriders (are they really any more pet-like than a stag ?), silithid mounts etc anyway.

[Harvoc]

Loki. Yea that's what I'm thinking. Personally, I don't care about about the "pets" that aren't even pets at all. Spirit Beasts are ghostly spirits that embody the natural world. Shale spiders are literally made out of rock and gem, only tamable because they have the word "spider" in their name. Hydras weren't even beasts to start with! Some of them were only made beasts to help out hunters that had quests to kill them so they could track them. The only tamable hydra was from a bug! I'd much rather have Blizzard allow us to tame every single beast in the world. It's very confusing for newcomers to the hunter class to read on the character creation screen that they can tame beasts to serve as their pets and then see a beast that they absolutely love and... they can't tame it. And they can't tame the next one that they like. And so on. They need to be told that only certain families of beasts can be tamed and even then, only certain pets in that family! I don't want elemental birds. I don't want hellhounds. I don't want gyreworms. I only listed those because Wain listed them and I wanted to get others' opinions. I'd even go so far as to say that if Blizzard took away spirit beasts, shale spiders, and specific pets of certain families that didn't even look like a beast (all the new 4.2 rares fit in this category) or even just stopped adding pets to those families, I wouldn't cause a big protest. Sure, I'd be angry that they took away pets that current hunters had, or maybe even I had, but if they just stopped adding new one to those families, I wouldn't rise up and ragequit. As for the mount like pets, I'd love them. I don't get the argument people give against mount like pets. "Well since they 'look' like they can be mounts, they can't be pets." "Well how about all the current families that can also be mounts?" "Those were there at the start of the game." "How about all the new pets that get added to those families that also share a skin with a mount?" "/silence" I mean I already posted my lore explanation previously in this thread but I'll restate it. Hunters are the only ones that can tame beasts to serve as mounts while every class can ride a beast as a mount. Maybe in ancient times, other classes, seeing as they're much more numerous than hunters, learned how to tame a giant cat as a mount. After years of domestication and training, the giant cats are more tame and common in civilization. Young children learn how to raise the cubs of the giant cat so that they grow up to be inseparable as mount and rider. Then one day a hunter decides to raise a giant cat cub to instead of becoming his mount like I assume many others would do, raises it as more as a friend, a companion. When both get older, the cat helps him on his hunts for food. That's how I see things.

[vanquished14]

Abilities to be removed and from which family type:

Agility and Strength=Ferocity
Critical Strike Chance=Ferocity

I'm assuming you don't mean Blizzard should remove the Critical Strike and Agility/Strength damage buff from the Ferocity pets right? Because removing primarily damage buffs from primarily damage pets doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. That being said, I would like to see a pet buff/debuff rework someday. Though I know Cunning is not that far below Ferocity in pure damage, I would love to see Ferocity pets provide all the buffs in Malazee's Logical Pet Usage Flowchart (for raiding).

For those that don't know, we currently must use a Ravager (cunning) for 4% physical damage increase, a Dragonhawk/Wind Serpent (cunning) for the 8% spell damage increase, a Sporebat (cunning) for the 30% casting slow (if non BM), a Shale Spider (tenacity) for the 5% all stats, and a Silithid (cunning) for the increased health. In a perfect world we could use any tree we wanted for any situation but I'd at least like to see the damage buff/debuff pets all be Ferocity (or at least have a Ferocity counterpart).

Personally, I'd also like to see a ferocity non-exotic pet for every buff/debuff on that chart but I guess it'd make for less reason for people to be BM (on a side note, I'd like to see all hunters get silencing shot too w/ MM getting the talent to reduce its CD to 6-10 sec but I suppose I ask for too much).

EDIT: Yeah, I re-read your initial post and saw that for the Devilsaur/Wolf and Spirit Beast/Cat thing.

An example of a rework I could think of, strictly from a raiding perspective:

((Buffs))
Dog = 5% Stats (Kings/Mark/Drums)
Fox = 10% AP (Abomination's Might/TSA/Unleashed Rage/Might)
Wolf = 5% Crit (LoP/Rampage/Moonkin/HaT/Elemental Oath)
Cat = 549 Agi/Str Buff (SoE/HoW/BS)
Tallstrider = 10% Attack Speed (Windfury/Icy Talons/Hunting Party)
Wasp = 3% Dmg Bonus (Ferocious Inspiration/Arcane Tactics/Communion)
Hydra = 30% Haste Buff for 40 sec. (Heroism/Bloodlust/Time Warp)

((Debuffs))
Raptor = 12% Armor (Sunder Armor/Expose Armor/Faerie Fire)
Hyena = 30% Bleed Damage (Mangle/Trauma/Hemo)
Carrion Bird = 4% Physical Damage (Blood Frenzy/Savage Combat/Brittle Bones)
Moth = 8% Spell Dmg (CoE/Earth and Moon/Ebon Plague/Master Poisoner)

EDIT2: After thinking about it, the 584 Stamina Buff, the 30% Casting Slow, and the 20% Attack Slow debuffs would probably make more sense as cunning or perhaps tenacity as they aren't really increasing YOUR dps but reducing the enemy's or increasing resistance to death.

The way I see it, Ferocity should be the pet you use when you are focused on doing your maximum DPS (through increased pet base damage and buffs/debuffs).
Cunning pets should be used when you have conflicting interests between survivability and damage thus should include stuns/slows/interrupts etc and also perhaps popular damage increasing buffs.
Tenacity pets should be used when you are focused on survivability or pet aggro so they should reduce damage taken, slow, interrupt, taunt, etc.

[Harvoc]

Vanquished. No, I didn't mean remove them. I meant change the families that have them so that the buffs are more spread out. That way, every buff/debuff can be provided by both a cunning and a ferocity family since both are viable in terms of damage for PvE. As for the PvP abilities, every single family type would have one of each, since all 3 family types are viable in PvP.