If you don't like it, why did you waste so much time?

[Palladiamorsdeus]

I seen plenty of hunters that want to play the "ranger" class and want nothing to do with pets to the point of not even using them in instances. They are one step above melee hunters in the /facepalm hall of shame.

And WHY, exactly? I happen to enjoy SHOOTING with a GUN. I don't enjoy having to deal with keeping a pet alive to save 5% of my DPS. -.-

As I said it's the equivalent of down ranking your spells because you don't want the hassle of dealing with mana issues.

If you have played the class since early vanilla, you obviously know that Blizz has basically made pet management a non factor compared to how it used to be. There is very little left to complain about when it comes to pet management.

Except that it is nothing like that. IF Saturo were BM and doing that, then yes, it would be similar. But as an MM, it's just not paying attetention to a small percentage of DPS. And even then, she just said she has problems keeping it alive, not that she doesn't use it.

[Silvarain]

i SO dont like people attacking Saturo or anyone else who would rather not have a pet out. its not nice! their SHOULD be an option for hunters to turn off pet use for an attack boost to make up for the lost pet damage. LOTS of hunters would use it. i want that for those hunters as much as i would like to have most of my abilities coming from my pets (MM = hunter damage and BM = pet damage in theory anyway). id love this for the good hunters like Saturo and for the... hunters who dont even name their pets. blizz makes us use pets but DOESNT give us the option to how to play with them. i personally love my pets and would love more options for them in game play, and i respect the desire to not want to have a pet out. i dont know how mend pet works is cata but in lk theres a CD, its low healing, and it DOESNT crit! blizz should give us the option to play with our pets the way we want: whether to use them more or not at all.

lets not lump hunters who would rather not have pets out all the time in with the bad ones who dont care about the hunter class in general. hunters who want more pet use are not the better hunters

[Saturo]

lets not lump hunters who would rather not have pets out all the time in with the bad ones who dont care about the hunter class in general. hunters who want more pet use are not the better hunters

Thank you.

I do realize that this is not the place for me to say "ZOMG TAKE PETS AWAY!", but I do think that I'm entitled to say my opinion and not be dumped with the people who run with white northrend worgs named Wolf.

[Bellatryx]

Couldn't you just put the pet on passive and ignore it?

[Saturo]

That's a DPS loss, tough.

[Silvarain]

Couldn't you just put the pet on passive and ignore it?

yes they could now but at a loss for dps as it stands in LK. come cata they could just keep them on passive for the de/buffs but there will still be the dps loss. blizz can make a skill that would give a small boost to hunter damage in exchange for not having a pet out at all, but they seem to not want to give hunters that option and thats just WRONG. we, the players, pay good money and give much time to blizz and i find it unfair that there are not more options for us as players in general (hunters having to have pets out, no more hybrids, ect). i know there has to be rules but cookie cutting everything is not very fun to me.

Edit: hehe beaten by Saturo

[Tulune]

Couldn't you just put the pet on passive and ignore it?

I just have it on defensive for raids and then ignore it. I have yet to have my pet die in a raid. I honestly do not understand how pets could even die in raids. No growl and the pet attacks the boss from behind, and 90% of AOE damage reduction, plus they get residual heals from chain heal and such.

[Mindsprocket]

I hope nobody minds me derailing the thread by answering to the OP

Looking at them? They had Loque'Nahak...If you don't care, why did you waste so much time taming it? They also had a Thunderlord Dire Wolf, which would require five levels of grinding compared to a normal whitesaber and the ghost saber which requires the same.

People like that I can't understand. No offense to anyone here is meant...<3

Yeah, I agree. That's really strange for someone who allegedly doesn't like pets. Not just that he goes out of his way to get rares, but that he even is BM, probably just to tame the shinies.

And demanding that things others like should go just because he doesn't like is just rude.

I'd like to think that he's just a troll, but unfortunately I know that people can actually be that stupid, so I'm not too sure.

[Mockingbird]

I think the quoted OP was most likely being sarcastic about hunters who DO appear to have that point of view, rather than espousing it themselves. It's sometimes hard to tell with text.

Re: Hunters with no pet.

I personally don't think the no-pet thing works for hunters as they are in wow lore. I'd be completely happy if they decided to make a new class called a ranger (i.e. a petless ranged DPS) or perhaps chose to specialise one of the trees that way (because I agree that people who want to play that way should be ABLE to play that way), but the pet-hunter bond is such a core part of the class's identity that I think it'd be a shame, and I'd much prefer it to be a new class (or even a specialisation of a rogue or something).

Warlocks have the ability (if specced) to dismiss their pet in return for a buff, but IMO that fits much better with their "controlling a subjugated demon" thing, where it's clearly a deeply unequal partnership where the demon is enslaved.

[Redith]

I dont see them making a new ranger class but I could see them doing a "no pet ups dps thing" and sure dont use a pet I dont care its your play style, just....dont spec BM then bitch about pets, thats like a mage specing in fire and bitching because he hates being a pyromaniac.

[Raydex-of-the-dawn]

I'm not a very sarcastic person, Mockingbird. Also, one of my toons is Mockingbirds, that's funny!

I could see Marksmenship becoming a "ranger" tree with a buff ~equal to a pet and Go for the Throat getting moved.

[Gumballs]

Raydex I think Mockingbird was refering to the person you quoted that was complaining about his/her pet, not you yourself. ^_^

On subject, yes I think it's stupid that he spec'd BM and then complained about his pet. However, what if he didn't know about Loque's damage output or whatever until AFTER he had him? I only keep Haikili (my Skoll) in my stables because he is beautiful, one of my favourite models. I don't like the spirit beasts abilities however, they seem rather weak, especially compared to my other pet. Don't take this as me defending the hunter being rude etc. or that I am saying spirit beasts suck. I love spirit beasts because they are beautiful however, not because their abilities or damage, so I keep them in my stables. I use them anyways because being top damage isn't more important to me as pet looks! I'm just saying we don't fully know the story so it's harsh to jump down the hunter's throat because of what he is saying. You know what I mean? Kinda hard to explain my feelings haha!

On the topic of hunters without pets: I would LOVE that. My pets are my favourite thing about my hunter, but I think it would be really interesting to even give one tree (Marksman would make the most sense I think because they are sharp-shooters) the option to not need a pet. Not remove pets completely because too many people would be upset, but just the option to have a damage boosting buff instead. It actually might tempt me to dual spec!

[Cerah]

Considering this is the Petopia message boards, and most people here love their pets, I think the original poster was just stirring it.

Ultimately, it's your character. Play the way you want to play. If you're like me and absolutely love your little pixalited animals, to the point where you tell your fiance off for nagging you to play with your devilsaur in instances instead of your raptor, that's your choice. If you're like Saturo and prefer to focus on your own dps over your pet's, that's also your choice. You pay the monthly fee, you make the decisions.

[kamoodle5]

Based on that guy's trolling, I believe in the complete opposite: I have always thought pets of all families are useful, hence the reason why all my hunters are BM's, although my third hunter is becoming BM because I want to save a silithid. There's really no reason to vilely rant a pet regardless of dps or being a pet overall. I really didn't like his trolling. Even if a pet's dps isn't all that great, people must still admit it was fun to find the pet to begin with.