How To: Tame Pets With Appearance Buffs

[Rhyela]

Mine does that "You do not have any pets to summon" quite often. I'm not really sure when or why it does it, but I'm rather certain it has nothing to do with these pets. It was doing it to me well before I got the flaming boar. I just end up having to switch around my pets until the message stops appearing.

[Agravaine]

Ok. Thanks. Just wondering... I found out today that I do have lag slightly... 1-2 sec of it to be precise. Would that compromise the trick at all? Or do I just need to keep trying and hope for the best?

I'd keep trying, with good timing and some luck it should work.

[Acherontia]

Yeah, my husband gets the message all the time and he doesn't have any of the buffed pets : / I think it's just a stable issue (I had the same worry when it happened to me).

[evansataz]

For people with issues with it saying you don't have any pets to summons, try to keep pet in top and bottom slot seems to have stopped that issue for me. It is a known bug and blizz is working on it so they say.

[evansataz]

a couple people asking about timing of the macro. The confusion i think is that people dont understand the term "spam".

When you spam the macro , it means to click over and over repeatedly as fast as you can.

so for those that have what they think may be a timing issue, maybe you weren't "spamming" it enough.

when there is 2 secs left of the tame, "SPAM" the macro until the beast disappears. log out and see if beast is standing next to you on your character selection screen.

Let me know if this helped those with questions on timing the macro.

[Ryai]

Been trying so very hard to get a second burning boar. It keeps dying with .30 seconds or so left >_< and then when I do manage to get it to die as it finishes tames, they have so far rezzed as normal boars.

I just need to keep trying but it gets so disheartening lol.

[Rikaku]

I'd be much more wary if I were you guys taming these pets. I mean I know Blizzard just kind of grandfathered the previous appearance-buff pets, but going around and doing what Blizzard obviously DOESN'T want you to do is bordering on asking for punishment. I mean, Blizzard put it in the patch notes last time, it's obvious they don't want Hunters doing this, so the fact people are purposely going around the coding once again is, in fact, exploiting the game once again.

If this gets out.. again, which it seems it already has, I really wouldn't be surprised if Blizzard takes a more drastic step to remove them.

I just hope this doesn't end up with the removal of the perma-buff pets that had previously been grandfathered in. =/

[Rhyela]

I'd be much more wary if I were you guys taming these pets. I mean I know Blizzard just kind of grandfathered the previous appearance-buff epts, but going around and doing what Blizzard obviously DOESN'T want you to do is bordering on asking for punishment. I mean, Blizzard put it in the patch notes last time, it's obvious they don't want Hunters doing this, so the fact people are purposely going around the coding once again is, in fact, exploiting the game once again.

If this gets out.. again, which it seems it already has, I really wouldn't be surprised if Blizzard takes a more drastic step to remove them.

I just hope this doesn't end up with the removal of the perma-buff pets that had previously been grandfathered in. =/

I agree. It was one thing before to be using the exploit when Blizzard hadn't made a stance on the matter. But the fact that they hotfixed something in to fix it, said it wasn't intended, and yet people are still trying to do it anyway just seems like asking for trouble. I mean, on one hand it's a good thing to find bugs to report them, but I get the distinct feeling that that's not why this method is still being used.

Just...be careful guys.

[zedxrgal]

I'd be much more wary if I were you guys taming these pets. I mean I know Blizzard just kind of grandfathered the previous appearance-buff epts, but going around and doing what Blizzard obviously DOESN'T want you to do is bordering on asking for punishment. I mean, Blizzard put it in the patch notes last time, it's obvious they don't want Hunters doing this, so the fact people are purposely going around the coding once again is, in fact, exploiting the game once again.

If this gets out.. again, which it seems it already has, I really wouldn't be surprised if Blizzard takes a more drastic step to remove them.

I just hope this doesn't end up with the removal of the perma-buff pets that had previously been grandfathered in. =/

I agree. It was one thing before to be using the exploit when Blizzard hadn't made a stance on the matter. But the fact that they hotfixed something in to fix it, said it wasn't intended, and yet people are still trying to do it anyway just seems like asking for trouble. I mean, on one hand it's a good thing to find bugs to report them, but I get the distinct feeling that that's not why this method is still being used.

Just...be careful guys.

I'd be much more wary if I were you guys taming these pets. I mean I know Blizzard just kind of grandfathered the previous appearance-buff epts, but going around and doing what Blizzard obviously DOESN'T want you to do is bordering on asking for punishment. I mean, Blizzard put it in the patch notes last time, it's obvious they don't want Hunters doing this, so the fact people are purposely going around the coding once again is, in fact, exploiting the game once again.

If this gets out.. again, which it seems it already has, I really wouldn't be surprised if Blizzard takes a more drastic step to remove them.

I just hope this doesn't end up with the removal of the perma-buff pets that had previously been grandfathered in. =/

Thirded. There are Blizz Dev employees who's browse these forums also so ....... yeah. Be very cautious.

[Jin]

I missed out on the burning boar. I'm not even gonna try get it now. They said they dont want us to do it, I'm not risking my account when there's so many other pets to get

[Vephriel]

As I said on another thread, the warning's out there. Whatever people choose to do now is on their own shoulders.

[Cialbi]

I'd be much more wary if I were you guys taming these pets. I mean I know Blizzard just kind of grandfathered the previous appearance-buff pets, but going around and doing what Blizzard obviously DOESN'T want you to do is bordering on asking for punishment. I mean, Blizzard put it in the patch notes last time, it's obvious they don't want Hunters doing this, so the fact people are purposely going around the coding once again is, in fact, exploiting the game once again.

If this gets out.. again, which it seems it already has, I really wouldn't be surprised if Blizzard takes a more drastic step to remove them.

I just hope this doesn't end up with the removal of the perma-buff pets that had previously been grandfathered in. =/

Bingo. I had been meaning to try this method out on the warp stalkers in that ocean trench near L'ghorek, but have decided against it even though the hotfix didn't work very well.

However, I don't really worry about what Blizzard's course of action will be. They already tried to fix this in such a way that can no longer be exploited by any means, and the hotfix probably needs some fine-tuning. This is the smartest course of action for them, seeing as success will eliminate any further exploits (unlike, say, simply disabling the PetAbandon script).

[Agravaine]

Personally I'm not fussed about having tamed another ghost wolf at this point since I had asked for it to be restored and they restored the wrong wolf. He's still a vanity pet, he doesn't have an unfair advantage over any other pet; in fact he has the distinct disadvantage of being lost if he dies.

I'm also not fussed about sparkle pets being tamed. Why? Because when Acherontia reported this taming trick, she did it to stop players exploiting damage buffed pets and getting the rest of us with sparkle pets into trouble. We agreed with it because we trusted that Blizzard would do the right thing, and those of us who got sparkle pets for their looks alone have done nothing to violate that trust. The hotfix notes specifically say "any buffs the creatures had on them prior to being tamed". What is a buff? It's usually an effect that increases stats. Sometimes it does something special, like allow you to breathe fire randomly in combat or deal damage to an enemy when he hits you. Do any of the sparkle pets have anything like that? No.

I'm sure some of you will disagree and insist that it's still an exploit. Go ahead. I laughed when they took Garwal away and I'll laugh again if our sparkle pets are taken too.

[Acherontia]

I laughed when they took Garwal away

I didn't

[Agravaine]

Ah yes, the loss itself did sting, but the brouhaha surrounding it all was a 3-ring circus.

[Rikaku]

Personally I'm not fussed about having tamed another ghost wolf at this point since I had asked for it to be restored and they restored the wrong wolf. He's still a vanity pet, he doesn't have an unfair advantage over any other pet; in fact he has the distinct disadvantage of being lost if he dies.

I'm also not fussed about sparkle pets being tamed. Why? Because when Acherontia reported this taming trick, she did it to stop players exploiting damage buffed pets and getting the rest of us with sparkle pets into trouble. We agreed with it because we trusted that Blizzard would do the right thing, and those of us who got sparkle pets for their looks alone have done nothing to violate that trust. The hotfix notes specifically say "any buffs the creatures had on them prior to being tamed". What is a buff? It's usually an effect that increases stats. Sometimes it does something special, like allow you to breathe fire randomly in combat or deal damage to an enemy when he hits you. Do any of the sparkle pets have anything like that? No.

I'm sure some of you will disagree and insist that it's still an exploit. Go ahead. I laughed when they took Garwal away and I'll laugh again if our sparkle pets are taken too.

Actually I will openly disagree with your opinion of a buff. To me, a buff (and to the same degree, a debuff) are irregularities to the character and whatnot. Savory deviate delight gives you a 'buff' but it doesn't actually make your stats stronger.

And my previous post was actually directed at the hunters who were stating ways outloud to get around the hotfix, it has nothing to do with the owners of the grandfathered pets. I think personally those who are encouraging ways to get around the latest hotfix aree encouraging improper behavior. So I do not see what the trust of the hunters of the petopia community has to do with that unless i am misunderstanding you. But one thing I also wish to add is although the forum community here may have agreed to not use the actually exploitive pets that had effective debuff/buff, that does not represnt the entire hunter community as a whole, or even the hunters who dont have accounts or post here.

[Agravaine]

Actually I will openly disagree with your opinion of a buff. To me, a buff (and to the same degree, a debuff) are irregularities to the character and whatnot. Savory deviate delight gives you a 'buff' but it doesn't actually make your stats stronger.

Ah, well, as to opinions... Wowpedia disagrees with your opinion of what constitutes a buff. According to them, buffs and debuffs are temporary beneficial or negative effects. Here's its list: http://www.wowpedia.org/Buff

Notice how "savory deviate delight" doesn't show up in there anywhere. Neither do Orb of the Blackwhelp or Orb of Deception, Dartol's Rod or any other appearance-changing items.

And my previous post was actually directed at the hunters who were stating ways outloud to get around the hotfix, it has nothing to do with the owners of the grandfathered pets. I think personally those who are encouraging ways to get around the latest hotfix aree encouraging improper behavior. So I do not see what the trust of the hunters of the petopia community has to do with that unless i am misunderstanding you. But one thing I also wish to add is although the forum community here may have agreed to not use the actually exploitive pets that had effective debuff/buff, that does not represnt the entire hunter community as a whole, or even the hunters who dont have accounts or post here.

In simple terms:

1. I don't see anything wrong with taming a sparkle pet. I did encourage this, as these are vanity pets at best. This is where we disagree, in that you believe that their unique appearance is a buff, and I do not.

2. I do think it's wrong to tame a pet with a damage buff. It gives an unfair advantage and I do not encourage it.

As to trust , I was referring only to those of us who agreed with Acherontia's bug report, and our explicitly stated trust that Blizzard would do the right thing.

I also believe that sparkle pets without damage buffs would simply be untameable in their unique appearance state if they were that much of an issue at this point. For all I know, it might still be done to them.

[TygerDarkstorm]

They ARE supposed to be only strictly tamable without their "sparkly" look; in order to get them to maintain their look you have to exploit Blizzard's coding, and even then, the pet is completely temporary because if it dies, you lose the unique look.

However, as Veph said, the people continuously going around Blizzard's policies know they are doing so with risk to their account.

[Rikaku]

Actually I will openly disagree with your opinion of a buff. To me, a buff (and to the same degree, a debuff) are irregularities to the character and whatnot. Savory deviate delight gives you a 'buff' but it doesn't actually make your stats stronger.

Ah, well, as to opinions... Wowpedia disagrees with your opinion of what constitutes a buff. According to them, buffs and debuffs are temporary beneficial or negative effects. Here's its list: http://www.wowpedia.org/Buff

Notice how "savory deviate delight" doesn't show up in there anywhere. Neither do Orb of the Blackwhelp or Orb of Deception, Dartol's Rod or any other appearance-changing items.

Yes, but I was mostly pointing out that it still does appear in your buff bar area of a UI. (at least if you have a standard/unmodded UI like I do [so bad with UI addons])

And my previous post was actually directed at the hunters who were stating ways outloud to get around the hotfix, it has nothing to do with the owners of the grandfathered pets. I think personally those who are encouraging ways to get around the latest hotfix aree encouraging improper behavior. So I do not see what the trust of the hunters of the petopia community has to do with that unless i am misunderstanding you. But one thing I also wish to add is although the forum community here may have agreed to not use the actually exploitive pets that had effective debuff/buff, that does not represnt the entire hunter community as a whole, or even the hunters who dont have accounts or post here.

In simple terms:

1. I don't see anything wrong with taming a sparkle pet. I did encourage this, as these are vanity pets at best. This is where we disagree, in that you believe that their unique appearance is a buff, and I do not.

2. I do think it's wrong to tame a pet with a damage buff. It gives an unfair advantage and I do not encourage it.

As to trust , I was referring only to those of us who agreed with Acherontia's bug report, and our explicitly stated trust that Blizzard would do the right thing.

I also believe that sparkle pets without damage buffs would simply be untameable in their unique appearance state if they were that much of an issue at this point. For all I know, it might still be done to them.

Did I ever say I had a problem with taming a sparkle pet? No. I never did.

I've stated numerous times in this long thread that I am actually a fan of sparkle pets and in reality, am quite fond of many of the "sparkle pet" skins that were grandfathered in.

My problem lies in the *method* of how people are obtaining them, NOT the pet themselves. I have never had an issue with sparkle pets, and I've always been a supporter of interesting pet tames like the ghost wolf. However, personally, I've felt the ways presented in this thread were exploiting, and I chose to not participate in taming these pets. But I am quite pleased that my fellow Hunters who did managed to keep their pets. I am in no way against the pets themselves. I have just had issues with the first method (which is now hotfixed) and this new method to circumvent the hotfix.

My problem is that this issue was *hotfixed* and Blizzard basically said 'no, we don't want Hunters using this method and keeping pet appearance buffs'. Whether or not we can agree on what *is* a buff is technically irrelevant since it's obvious Blizzard *did* consider these appearances a *buff* as most of them were visual buffs on an otherwise normal mob.

* It is no longer possible for hunters to tame pets in a way that allows them to keep any buffs the creatures had on them prior to being tamed.

The fact that this lead to the original "pet appearance buff" method being nuked clearly shows that Blizzard does consider appearances part of the "buff/debuff" category.

So my problem is mostly that Hunters are basically going "Ok, Blizzard doesn't want us exploiting their codes to get these sparklepets, so they removed the method to do so. But here's a new way to get around their fix so you can continue to tame pets that they don't want you to have!"

My problem, again, is not the sparkle pets. My problem is the encouragement some people are giving to basically go around Blizzard's obvious hotfix and stance on the issue regarding sparklepets. I don't think it's right to encourage people to, essentially, 'break the rules'.

[Agravaine]

Rikaku, our whole disagreement boils down to this:

You believe sparkle pets are buffed and that as of the blue post and hotfix, they're not to be tamed.
Appearance effect = Buff.

I believe they're merely appearance changed, retain no true buffs after taming, and that they're still fair game.
Appearance effect =/= Buff.