| Author |
Topic:
Controlled Pets (turret)
|
Rena_Lanford
collection | wishlist
Title: Mythic Team Lead
Animist TL
Posts:
16,169
Registered:
Feb '01
|
Date Posted:
11/20/05 3:24pm
Subject:
Controlled Pets (turret)
- Date Edited:
11/20/05 3:25pm (1 edits total)
Edited By:
Rena_Lanford
|
Not that this would actually ever happen w/o other changes/adjustments to other spells, but its something I would at least need to gauge.
Think carefully before you reply - don't reply as in your specific case, but rather in terms of the class as a whole. Obvioulsy, it helps more specs than others etc.
If Mythic was to remove the groundset requirement on CONTROLLED pets, would it be nerf or boost to the class.
Pros: Buffed from DL bot pet, Interrupt tool, no long cast times diminishing its open field usefulness. Snarenuking pet or ML 9able melee pet would probably be the pets of choice.
Cons: It loses alot of seige effectiveness. No more shrooming the oil or destroying the oil with a ML 9 pet. No more summoning the Verdant pet under a ram then PBAEing off it. Pet loses effectiveness as a stable anchor in camp situations (for your AE demezz or added DPS).
Questionable Situation: Mobile Pet that casts an uninterruptable PBAE (gives verders a form of viable open field damage, but, minor risk to the PBAE caster so to speak) - ML 9'd PBAE pet in PvE possibly becomes rediulously cheesy.
Questionable Situation2: We become a superior class to enchanters (and possibly other pet classes - eg: Necromancer).
I wouldve made a poll, but I want to be sure the people replying actually play animists. Typical reply rules, animists name/server ... try to adress the questionable situations in your response.
Its very hard to argue for something like the above, so if the argument isnt clearcut or warranted - it wont happen if I put in in a report. Saying "well other classes can do it" is irrelevant.
-----signature-----
Hibernia
~ Devon ~
A gourmet, a hobby, money. I will enjoy a second life fully.
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Ciuld-Ishikal
collection | wishlist
Posts:
2,162
Registered:
Jul '03
|
Date Posted:
11/20/05 5:30pm
Subject:
RE: Controlled Pets (turret)
|
Sporata 48V/24C percival
if pbae stays the same as it is, about the only value you'll lose of verdant pet would be placing it on oil, since you can still ground target any shroom and pbae it under a ram.
one restriction i see that must happen if we get movable pets, is that pets should not be able to cast (or animist cast through them) while moving.
a verdant animist would take first place at keeptakes then, send the pet down the stars tell it to stay pbae the hell outta everything til pet dies, rinse repeat. would be a bit OP imo. i'd hate to force an los check on casting the pbae but you might have to in order to balance a movable turret.
i'd like to see some new functionallity in the animist, but i don't want to see anything that would make us even more overpowered in keep standoffs than we are.
-----signature-----
Ciuld Ishikal
Daranal Ishikal
Raven Wing
some witty expression goes here
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Ieritl_DeathStealer
collection | wishlist
Posts:
14,650
Registered:
Mar '02
|
Date Posted:
11/20/05 5:44pm
Subject:
RE: Controlled Pets (turret)
|
Bonsaii 50A/19C/7V RR7 (Tristan) / RR2 (Gareth)
It seems to destroy the flavor of the class and that's what concerns me most. It would be sort of a nifty change for your standard spec in that they always have an RvR interrupt tool. I bet Verders would also like it based on your comments. Provided no other changes were made (damage lowered, etc) I could live with it.
I doubt we'd overtake enchanters: we can't debuff nuke like they can (what is their top debuff? 50%?).
-----signature-----
Eve: Miss Monneypenni of the Amarr Empire http://www.weebls-stuff.com/toons/magical+trevor/ Bonsaii Deathfruit, RR7 Animist of Tristan (Retired) Ieritl Deathfruit, RR6 Druid of Tristan (Retired) Bonsaii, RR3 Animist of Gareth (Retired)
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Ceribis
collection | wishlist
Posts:
917
Registered:
Jul '03
|
Date Posted:
11/20/05 11:41pm
Subject:
RE: Controlled Pets (turret)
|
Tintagel - Guinevere
50 Arboreal - 12 Creeping - 16 Verdant
RR7L6 RvR Animist and Primary Character in General
As you're pointed out there are pros and cons to this change and it will be both a nerf and a benefit to our class as a whole. I'll start out by attacking the questionable situations.
Questionable Situation: Mobile Pet that casts an uninterruptable PBAE (gives verders a form of viable open field damage, but, minor risk to the PBAE caster so to speak) - ML 9'd PBAE pet in PvE possibly becomes rediulously cheesy.
One of the first changed I had thought about to balance out the change for the mobile pet would be to change the PBAE since it would be the most overpowered feature with the mobile pet (an uninterruptible PBAE cast by the pet while the caster is in a safe place).
The simplest way to balance out mobility and an uninterruptible PBAE would be to decrease how far away from your pet you must be to cast it. Reducing the range to cast this ability would put the animist in more danger instead of being relatively out of danger 1500 units away. Reducing the range to cast the spell to somewhere between 700 and 1000 units would help with this (putting the animist in my more danger to use it's PBAE closer to the way true PBAE classes work).
Secondly, putting a Line of Sight check on the cast for the PBAE would allow the animist to not cast it's pet and send it somewhere out of sight to cast the PBAE. For example, think about situations like Lord room defense in towers. You could summon your pet and send it after an enemy and begin to PBAE. The pet would still be within it's lowered PBAE cast range but the animist would be unable to be stopped and could effectively interrupt anyone on the bottom floor through the pet. The Line of Sight check added to the cast (being able to see the pet when casting the command) would alleviate this problem. Just on a side note, being able to cast the PBAE without Line of Sight to the pet seems like a bug to begin with that was overlooked when Shrouded Isles was released and just looked over ever since because of our low population and the fact that we have an immobile pet so people can easily move away from it.
Lastly, if it's still deemed as overpowered there is a last ditch effort, reducing the range of the PBAE itself to 200 or 250 units. This would be a severe detriment to the nature of the spell, but it would reduce the all around area that the uninterruptible PBAE would effect. Even though it is an option, I don't believe it should be used, and in fact should not even be considered because of the same advantages other realms have with similar situations. In Albion you have the monster resurrection where the newly resurrected player pulses a DoT while the player gets a huge boost in the damage they can take. Similarly in Midgard you have warlocks who can (and do more then anything else anymore it seems) chamber PBAE spells, effectively giving them uninterruptible PBAE damage which has a delay of 2 seconds between casts (in addition to the uninterruptible casting ability). I'm bringing this up as an options, but again it shouldn't be considered unless the changes need to be taken to such an extreme.
Questionable Situation2: We become a superior class to enchanters (and possibly other pet classes - eg: Necromancer).
I don't believe that this will be a major change to the way PvE will evolve. Enchanters are much better at what they do because of their utility. Area effect debuffs, Pet buffs, Heal procs, Focus sheilding, and PBAE to just begin naming them. Giving the animist a mobile controllable pet would just give the animist a benefit for moving around. Instead of relying on someone else to bring mobs to the mushroom field you can now do it because of your mobile pet. Dungeon crawls would be made much easier because the animist now does not need to waste time casting and buffing a new pet at each area, instead it can follow them around. Our superiority in certain cases over enchanters seem to be in our ability to have many attackers focus on one target to allow more damage to be done and I cannot see why anyone would want to roll an animist over an enchanter solely on the fact that our pet is now mobile.
With that out of the way I can go into my own freeform opinions on this subject. I'm an RvR animist and as much as I know that it gimps me most of the time I don't really use my pets to their full effectiveness. I sometimes use the creeping pet to snare people when the fight begins to get long or I have the time to cast it out (when we get the initial Crowd Control out and have the advantage). Otherwise I just use my bombers, lifetaps, Con debuff, and disease to take down my targets quickly for the most part. Being able to have a pet ready before we get into fights is an asset to the class as far as I can see. This allows us to be more useful in open field RvR because we no long have to waste the first 5 seconds or more of a fight getting a ground target and casting a pet (macro GTs help but sometimes the terrain is strange and you need to set one manually). It gives us the ability that all other pet classes have with the exception of Theurgs because they have no controllable pet. Using the pet as an interruption tool against healers and spell casters. It is true that during sieges not being able to cast up onto the walls to kill the oil will be a new detriment to the class, but we are the only class that can do it and while it's not the same as when New Frontiers was released, it may not be 'fair' that we are still allowed to destroy oil as quickly as we do with one pet (hint, hint, good way to say 'we want this, mythic, but look at what we're willing to loose'). However, in situations other the siege I fell many animist don't utilize our pets enough because it takes so long to get them up and running in the high speed and intense nature of RvR on the normal servers.
RvR aside, I believe that PvE will change dramatically for the better and the worse. While we will not be able to cast our pets and pull to us and not have to worry about gaining agro because our pet cannot move and there is always a safe place to pull to, I believe that the mobile pet will still be able to be used effectively because we have the 'Stay' command on our pet windows. The only difference between setting a ground target and summoning a pet there and summoning a pet and moving it around to get it in the place you want would be the initial time invested (which can probably be avoided if you know how to summon pets). When you move camps you no longer need to kill and summon a new pet and waste time buffing, instead you tell it to follow you now and now easily set up and start pulling at the new camp. Like I said, PvE won't change very much because of the 'Stay' command we have available to us to use on our pets. I could see epic farming becoming slightly easier as well because we can now do Enchanter Sytle pulling for encounters (like Tartaros' Gift) that would be incredibly difficult to set up prior.
As I see it being able to have a mobile pet would be a grand benefit to the class with only a few minor drawbacks. The lack of being able to plant our pet away from us (think siege) is the worst situation I could think of and probably the most detrimental. PvE would seem to only change for the better because we can still have an immobile pet if we need it and with it being mobile it would cut down on the downtime of moving much more.
Keep us updated on this though, it's something I would like to see changed (and hopefully much of the community agrees) and I'd like to see it's progress. I'll be on pendragon to test if I see it in the test notes, I can guarantee that.
Also, just on a side note, is mythic asking for TL reports already? I thought they only did them every other major release or when an expansion comes out.
-----signature-----
Keeghan BallanLosgainn ~Sylvan Emerald Ridere Animist ------------------------------------------- Keeg UI 2 coming out for 1.91! Keeg UI 2 Classic Icons Available! http://keegui.ceribis.com
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
BanzaiBard
collection | wishlist
Posts:
2,133
Registered:
Jul '03
|
Date Posted:
11/21/05 6:08am
Subject:
RE: Controlled Pets (turret)
|
Rena:
I think we would be adding a huge can of worms to try to get a mobile pet that you could cast pbae off of easily. It might make far more sense to have the verdant pet move BUT limit the ability to PBAE off the pet until the pet was stationary for say 5 or so seconds.
Then you could "set up" the pet, chase a caster with a pet to chomp him, or remain static and really pbae. The problem is a "pet" chasing you with a PBAE where you can not interrupt the "pet" to stop the pbae.
If you asked me. . . I would want a mobile turret that casted a pbae root or snare spell. Require LOS to animist for it to cast (or it would be unfair in keeps and towers).
-----signature-----
Matric RR5 Bard/Akillerfungus RR4Animist
Luxorah RR4 Champion
Midnight Sun
Gawaine
BANZAI!
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Khalandra
collection | wishlist
Posts:
888
Registered:
Aug '05
|
Date Posted:
11/21/05 6:29am
Subject:
RE: Controlled Pets (turret)
|
Gardenr 50Verd Galahad
While I think the mobile pet would be 'thupa-Cool', to put it loosely, I think that unless we're careful the complaints from the other realms about mobile uninterruptible PBAEing pets(and resulting 'fixes') ... we might end up with a net result of a nerf. If the balance was to require LOS, or a stationary period, I would see no problem at all but reduced damage, increased recast time or reduced range would hurt.
As you would guess from me being 50V, I'm primarily PVE with this toon anyway, and it would be *really* nice to be able to move my pet around... for all the reasons cited previously. It would actually encourage me to take this toon out to RvR MORE however, since I'd have a more reliable, less time-delayed pet and be able to contribute more in non-seige situations.
-----signature-----
http://camelotmonkey.com/s.php?u=khalandra "You've never been awestruck til you've seen a VW two-shot an inf from stealth" - Dekafa Nated
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
fizbann
collection | wishlist
Posts:
407
Registered:
Nov '01
|
Date Posted:
11/21/05 11:38am
Subject:
RE: Controlled Pets (turret)
|
greenbeen / iseult - 50 arb
stringbeen / iseult - 45 creep / 26 verd
I'd like that alot. We don't have much in the way of defense in open field as a caster since we don't have a stun or mez and have to leave the pet behind. We just get a root that casts pretty slow & frequently your dealing with someone or some thing that can't be snared anyway. So now at least we'd have a pet that can interrupt or do damage to whatever we're kiting from. And this would give us a shot against the other classes that can send a pet in to interrupt / stun etc. while they attack you from range. It would be nice to have an Ml9 pet that can actually chew someone up - it's really not very useful as is except for PvE. Even in PvE if you make the ml9 pet, say to do one of the champ level mobs, and then have to move, you have no ml9 pet for 5-10 minutes. It's also a pain having to make a new pet buff it etc. every 1K range as you make your way thru a dungeon or whatever. If you could tell it to go to a ground-target then using the pet in pve wouldn't really change. I've barely used the creep ani for RvR but I think this would make him semi-viable if I get him thru the ml's.
I don't think we'd lose the oil / ram utility if pets still get summoned to the ground-target, and can then come to you after. Maybe they get summoned with "stay" set and you need to hit "follow" to get it to come with you. For the PBAE on the pet the range is already low but could maybe be lowered some more. So if your out of range you can't PBAE and have to get close enough to be at some risk. I don't think this would make animists superior to other pet classes - for PvE it's more of a convenience, and for RvR it just brings us in line with the classes who have pets that can defend them in open field.
-----signature-----
<Forestt 50 Warden Iseult><Duncann 50 Hero Iseult> <Jook 50 Bard Iseult><Tasz 50 Mentalist Iseult> <Greenbeen 50 Arb Animist Iseult><Stringbeen 50 Creep Animist Iseult> <Papakeen 50 Enchanter Iseult><Fizbann 44 Ranger Iseult>
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Ugh_Lancelot
collection | wishlist
Title: Ooo...bouncy!
Posts:
3,707
Registered:
Jun '02
|
Date Posted:
11/21/05 12:22pm
Subject:
RE: Controlled Pets (turret)
- Date Edited:
11/21/05 12:31pm (1 edits total)
Edited By:
Ugh_Lancelot
|
Ughmahedhurtz -- 50 Animist (ML2/RR2), Gaheris (PvE) (leveled as creeping, been verdant for a while now)
No comment on RvR aspects specifically, though it should be obvious that the verdant-mobile-pbae-instas-zomg will cause much wailing and gnashing of teeth. Considering the past results of said teeth-gnashing, the pessimist in me says it's a bad thing. The optimist in me says that it wouldn't be much different than any other pet class and, in fact, might actually end up being a utility nerf when looked at objectively. In fact, aside from PBAE through the shroom, this would end up making our controlled function much like zealots (with their associated limitations) in that they must stop to cast taunt/snare/nuke/etc. As you can see, though, I'm on Gaheris, so take all that with a grain of bittersalt. 
As for PvE positives: Chasing mobs and uninterruptible-PBAE-on-the-move = good (though I can see whining about this from other PBAE classes, especially necros). Getting the pet into range easily = good. Not having to replant/rebuff every single time you move camps or don't like where you dropped him = GOODGOODGOOOOOOOOD.
Downside: having to worry about the controlled experiencing wierd LOS/pathing issues = bad (one more thing to worry about, though arguably wouldn't be much worse than the current situation). Getting him to sit/stay where you want him for whatever reason = tedious. Having him chase something running away only to stop every 10 feet to try to cast and end up out of range again (for all but verdant pet) = bad. Filling up 3-5 more slots on my already overcrowded hotbars = bad.
Overall, I'd say it's a wash. Assuming the pet must stop to cast all spells but verdant PBAE and it suffers from all the same LOS/pathing/etc. problems that chanter/SM/etc. pets do, the net result is it makes us comparable to other pet classes and definitely increases our mobility/utility in fluid situations. I don't see anything that stands out as being nerf-worthy or class-breaking, though I'm sure it would be grounds for a whole new slew of "ZOMG NERF AMINIST" whining. /shrug
As for me, I like the idea assuming the verdant PBAE nerf doesn't happen with it.
-----signature-----
WoW - 70 mage(x8)/hunter(x5)/shaman/pally(x2)/warlock(x8)/priest(x5) DAoC - http://camelotmonkey.com/s.php?u=ughmahedhurtz Charter Member - Altaholics Anonymous VNIgnore - http://l00py.net/misc/VNIgnore.html
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Faradn_Caladan
collection | wishlist
Posts:
577
Registered:
Aug '03
|
Date Posted:
11/21/05 1:55pm
Subject:
RE: Controlled Pets (turret)
|
|
I sent you a PM on my thoughts on this. I wasn't sure if you got it though so I wont go and repost it here but I am all for at least one of the controlled pets being mobile.
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Momolicious
collection | wishlist
Posts:
1,886
Registered:
Jan '02
|
Date Posted:
11/21/05 2:00pm
Subject:
RE: Controlled Pets (turret)
|
30 Arb 44 Creep 8 Verdant - Creepincrud Tristan/Gareth
Mobile pet is bad.
1. You cannot HERE or STAY a pet and then have them attack from that point. 100% revamp in Animist XP and RVR play.
2. A mobilised pet needs 2 modes of combat. Melee and Casting.
3. Buffing a pet at the border keep is not a consideration for 50%+ of the current games population. (Amen) This is still relivant to groups though.
Controlled pets need to be addressed. (As I have stated in the past). Making them mobile looks good on paper. It opens a can of worms in the real game though.
Lower cast times, lower power costs sure. Mobile. No.
Can you picture a Grove Executioner... chasing down a scout.
A Forrest Servant nuking for almost as much as the baseline wisps. Talk about DPS upgrades.
A PBAE tank with 60% (+25%) ABS and *ALMOST* no line of sight heals.
Add to all that the ability to 'place' the pet then buff it.
All things to drool over but just like casting onto walls we all know it will need to be nerfed. I don't know about you but overall Animists seem to not be on par let alone above par right now. I don't want another nerf.
There is no other class in the game that summons their controlled pet as much as animists. Even counting Cabalist -> Necro sacrafice festivals. For that we need to have some changes. Mobile is not one of them we should explore.
Besides I get the feeling there is a technical issue with mobile summoned that Animists are currently excluded from. This being the lvl limit on pets per casting tier (Gray Earth pets from a lvl 50 for example). I do not think we want to open that page, even though it would greatly help Creeping spec's appeal it is still a downward path from where we all are now. A path I do not want to follow.
-----signature-----
Tombstone high with graveyard eyes. 2 foot 2 and I dun mind dieing.
Momolicious -- 50(Tristan)/50(Gareth) Luri Champ
Mezmiro -- 50(Tristan)/4X(Gareth) Luri Ment
Creepincrud -- 50(Tristan)/50(Gareth) Creeping Spec. Generating VN whines even as we speak!
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Wepwawet
collection | wishlist
Posts:
1,672
Registered:
Jun '04
|
Date Posted:
11/21/05 5:07pm
Subject:
RE: Controlled Pets (turret)
|
NO!! HUGE can of worms.
BUT how about allowing to Move in PvE ONLY nothing changes just that ina PvE zone it moves RvR zone it stays as is IMO
SIG BELOW holds my anim info 
-----signature-----
http://gimpchimp.etilader.com/display.php?user=Wepwawet Name dropping is a nono, but yes it does seem like I zerg when all 92 pounds of my solid steel dwarf body rolls a noob--Riddlegmf
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Ceribis
collection | wishlist
Posts:
917
Registered:
Jul '03
|
Date Posted:
11/21/05 5:37pm
Subject:
RE: Controlled Pets (turret)
|
Why would it be a can of worms if it's done properly? I don't understand 
-----signature-----
Keeghan BallanLosgainn ~Sylvan Emerald Ridere Animist ------------------------------------------- Keeg UI 2 coming out for 1.91! Keeg UI 2 Classic Icons Available! http://keegui.ceribis.com
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Ieritl_DeathStealer
collection | wishlist
Posts:
14,650
Registered:
Mar '02
|
Date Posted:
11/21/05 5:52pm
Subject:
RE: Controlled Pets (turret)
|
|
Because it would be seen by some as adding power to an already over powered class, so they'd have to take something away to balance it all out ...
-----signature-----
Eve: Miss Monneypenni of the Amarr Empire http://www.weebls-stuff.com/toons/magical+trevor/ Bonsaii Deathfruit, RR7 Animist of Tristan (Retired) Ieritl Deathfruit, RR6 Druid of Tristan (Retired) Bonsaii, RR3 Animist of Gareth (Retired)
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Dranzerk
collection | wishlist
Posts:
6,122
Registered:
Feb '02
|
Date Posted:
11/21/05 6:21pm
Subject:
RE: Controlled Pets (turret)
|
Not really sure what to say, surprised you even mentioned it. 
I say it sounds good, the pros and cons pretty much been covered by everyone else.
One Pro part i would like to bring up is that using the animists rr5 ability with pets moving would be crazy insane..moving pet and moving me in rr5 = overpowered lol
I don't really see any major CONS sort of speak, more pros.
-----signature-----
Heartspark | Bors (SOLD) Animist RR12 First animist Lone Enforcer Currently Playing: Tetris till Warhammer comes out War is coming Sep 18!
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
dreamwalker_fr
collection | wishlist
Posts:
183
Registered:
Aug '03
|
Date Posted:
11/21/05 8:34pm
Subject:
RE: Controlled Pets (turret)
- Date Edited:
11/21/05 9:08pm (2 edits total)
Edited By:
dreamwalker_fr
|
50 A / 19 C / 7 V animist, on Orcanie-Carnac clusted french server, main rvr and pve char.
(as for your last consult thread, i opened a thread on french forum, if any cares:
http://forums.jeuxonline.info/showthread.php?t=612014)
first i feel, having the 15 shrooms AND a controled pet in RvR, is too much.
if shrooms would be limited to say 6, IN RVR, then i would say yes. with of course los check on verd-pbae, and maybe range lowered to 1000. anyway it's not that overpowered, one root on the shroom and the guy is pretty useless. and it's not really uninterruptable, the animist is interruptable, one interupt, one guy chasing him, and no pbaes. So really it's not that much a big deal except for LOS check. it's a bit like a necro in fact, and what danger is a necro in rvr ?
pve situations: this part almost won't change. The verd animist will pex easier and faster, saving time mostly. Other animists, for many situation, we'll set the pet to "stay", and that's it. Things will be easier for pulling, and like verdants it will be faster for everything, no rebuff, no time waited cause we killed the ML9'd pet somewhere else, etc. time saving that's almost all. (and that's pretty nice).
Now, we use to have the 3min lasting moving insta cast shroom as an RA, and they took it back when NF came. Did they feel it was too much ?, was it op'd or was it useless ? maybe by then, animists didn't realize the power of this stuff, but now with ML9, and verdants out there, and the fact we have only one 5-10-15 pts RA, it might be loved by anis.
anyway i feel this was much more coherent to the class than a perma moving shroom. this, plus controled pets on 2s cast-time, or even insta-casting, would be much more balance and coherent i think. We made a choice as animists: no controlled moving pet. The two changes i propose are tweaks to the class, but not a change of what animists are.
A moving controlled pet would not be a tweak, but a big change. Anyway why not ? so ok i'm agree with changing the animist, but keeping the 15 shrooms besides seems really weird and overpowered (static AND moving stuff on the same class).
furthermore lowing down the shroom limit could be good for realm balance.
how surprising from you i must say, "animist is almost fine", "we need little tweaks that's all", and then BOOM: "what about a moving shroom ?!"
but i still would prefer faster bomber casting, straight root, changes to what exists so that it become usefull as the wisp chged to energy debuff or whatever, maybe some 2000 unit for some bombers etc, etc... (see last post)
i don't want animist to become the fotm, and i don't want to see hundreds of ML9'd pet moving around in the fields from brand new animists
-----signature-----
Yperion RR11 ML10 animist
Dreamwalker RR9 ML8 vw
Orcanie-Carnac - Clusted French server
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Dranzerk
collection | wishlist
Posts:
6,122
Registered:
Feb '02
|
Date Posted:
11/21/05 9:34pm
Subject:
RE: Controlled Pets (turret)
|
Yah one thing to press is bomber issues, like letting bombers go through friendly keep/tower doors. Now if they let our PET do that then we have another story... 
-----signature-----
Heartspark | Bors (SOLD) Animist RR12 First animist Lone Enforcer Currently Playing: Tetris till Warhammer comes out War is coming Sep 18!
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
RSS Feeds