The Buffing vet pets, and their lack of HP

[Llewellyn Blackwell]

For those that have bothered to get the buff pets, you may of noticed they die instantly in any fight, even if you are taking all the aggro a single aoe effect will ash them.

 

I frankly feel they should get around 10 HP a level and have a very high aoe defense to actually allow them to serve their stated function. They cant very well grant buffs if dead the moment you engage an enemy.

 

While some ATs have power sets such as force fields to buff up the pet, buffing a buff bot kind of defeats the purpose of a buff bot to those who cant buff them up enough to let them do their job.

 

Many of us enjoy a few visual companions especially when soloing. At this time all they really are useful for is RP, and that is sad, and that comes from one of us evil serious RPers.

[justicebeliever]

For those that have bothered to get the buff pets, you may of noticed they die instantly in any fight, even if you are taking all the aggro a single aoe effect will ash them.

 

I frankly feel they should get around 10 HP a level and have a very high aoe defense to actually allow them to serve their stated function. They cant very well grant buffs if dead the moment you engage an enemy.

 

While some ATs have power sets such as force fields to buff up the pet, buffing a buff bot kind of defeats the purpose of a buff bot to those who cant buff them up enough to let them do their job.

 

Many of us enjoy a few visual companions especially when soloing. At this time all they really are useful for is RP, and that is sad, and that comes from one of us evil serious RPers.

 

+1 to this...I gave up on the free pets because they would die instantly.

[PaxArcana]

Another +1.

 

The only character I have that bothers anymore, is my Robo/FF MM.  Because /FF (also, the Protector Bot will bubble the buff-pet, too).

[Vanden]

The buff pets were never intended to be truly useful.

[Black Zot]

The buff pets were never intended to be truly useful.

 

Well then why give them a buff aura or make them target-able at all, other than to taunt players?

[TheBlindGirl]

It wasn't just to taunt players. It was also to get their money.

[justicebeliever]

The buff pets were never intended to be truly useful.

 

Well then why give them a buff aura or make them target-able at all, other than to taunt players?

 

I'm not asking to make them truly useful...just not completely useless.  The buff is already really small, but I will never see even that tiny value at all, because my wisp will die in 2 seconds...

[Vanden]

The buff pets were never intended to be truly useful.

 

Well then why give them a buff aura or make them target-able at all, other than to taunt players?

 

The were originally a veteran reward, added for a tier of vet rewards where putting truly useful items was becoming less and less attractive because of how long a new player would have to stay subscribed to get them.

[Oneirohero]

They could made into untouchable pets but last only X minutes with Y cooldown. You may have to resummon them more but they will actually live past the first AoE!

[justicebeliever]

The were originally a veteran reward, added for a tier of vet rewards where putting truly useful items was becoming less and less attractive because of how long a new player would have to stay subscribed to get them.

 

I get that, but just because that's why it is was launched is no reason for it to have to stay that way...Otherwise, we might as well push for an i24 server instead of i25, because there have been a lot of changes since Live.

[WanderingAries]

You can leave them as-is save their apparent agro. There's NO reason I should be losing my Fae because she has more agro than me from the mob that I just leaped into and started attacking. For example, yesterday I raced ahead of the Fae so that there was NO chance she would be in range when I launched my attack. Not 2s later she just Barely enters range and they ALL run towards her. Mind you, I'd been pummeling them all this brief period of time by changing my targeting, so I Should have some strong agro going on. But no, they have to go gang-bang her while I sit there and watch.

 

So yeah...

STAPH KILLIN' MA FAE!!!!!

[srmalloy]

You can leave them as-is save their apparent agro. There's NO reason I should be losing my Fae because she has more agro than me from the mob that I just leaped into and started attacking. For example, yesterday I raced ahead of the Fae so that there was NO chance she would be in range when I launched my attack. Not 2s later she just Barely enters range and they ALL run towards her. Mind you, I'd been pummeling them all this brief period of time by changing my targeting, so I Should have some strong agro going on. But no, they have to go gang-bang her while I sit there and watch.

 

IIRC, the buff pets just follow you and, with a high recycle rate (or sloe resistance), repeatedly cast their (non-stacking) buff on you. And because they're buffing you, it increases their Threat each time the buff goes off, making them a bigger target than you are unless you've got something with a taunt effect. I believe that the Threat increase is coded into the buff powers, so dealing with it is likely to be complicated.

[Coyote]

You can leave them as-is save their apparent agro. There's NO reason I should be losing my Fae because she has more agro than me from the mob that I just leaped into and started attacking. For example, yesterday I raced ahead of the Fae so that there was NO chance she would be in range when I launched my attack. Not 2s later she just Barely enters range and they ALL run towards her. Mind you, I'd been pummeling them all this brief period of time by changing my targeting, so I Should have some strong agro going on. But no, they have to go gang-bang her while I sit there and watch.

 

IIRC, the buff pets just follow you and, with a high recycle rate (or sloe resistance), repeatedly cast their (non-stacking) buff on you. And because they're buffing you, it increases their Threat each time the buff goes off, making them a bigger target than you are unless you've got something with a taunt effect. I believe that the Threat increase is coded into the buff powers, so dealing with it is likely to be complicated.

 

Maybe, but you wouldn't have to code the buff powers, just give the buff pets an auto power that decreases their Threat Level.

[PaxArcana]

IIRC, the buff pets just follow you and, with a high recycle rate (or sloe resistance), repeatedly cast their (non-stacking) buff on you. And because they're buffing you, it increases their Threat each time the buff goes off, making them a bigger target than you are unless you've got something with a taunt effect. I believe that the Threat increase is coded into the buff powers, so dealing with it is likely to be complicated.

 

... they could just give the pets a Placate power they also fire off, PBAoE, with very high frequency, too.

[Vanden]

For better or worse, the intention behind the pets is that they would easily die in combat if they were attacked. If we're just going to throw out that intention, we might as well just make them untouchable instead of bothering with half-measures like a placate aura or reduced threat level. The benefits they give are so small as to be virtually meaningless either way.

[justicebeliever]

For better or worse, the intention behind the pets is that they would easily die in combat if they were attacked. If we're just going to throw out that intention, we might as well just make them untouchable instead of bothering with half-measures like a placate aura or reduced threat level. The benefits they give are so small as to be virtually meaningless either way.

 

“For better or worse” makes it sound like we are married to the concept.  :)

 

Seriously, NCSoft’s intent was that we had to do a cape mission at 20 and an Aura mish at 30.  I don’t think we need to stay true to all of the ideas we had in Live.

 

And I realize that the buff is small, and that the pets HP can be counted on all my fingers, and that they have -75% Resistance.  But the intent, beyond dying quick, is that you get some value from the pet.  I get more utility from the vanity pets.  It was supposed to be a reward...

 

Vanden, are you opposed to improving it, or just informing uof the history?  And to be clear, this is not high on my priority list...but does “seem” like an easy fix.

[Vanden]

I'm concerned about throwing out the intent of the original devs. If we start doing that willy-nilly, eventually what we have won't be CoH any more.

[PaxArcana]

The problem, IMO, is that they are too attractive a target for those attacks.

 

On my Robo/FF mastermind, when I've stayed well behind my pets, and the VetPet was behind ME, when I ordered the robots to open up on a spawn?  I've watched two of the three NPCs run past the pets, run past me, and beeline right for that VetPet.  While being attacked by my robots, and even ForceBolt'ed by myself.  The bloody thing has a better taunt than a level 50 Tank ...!!

[justicebeliever]

I'm concerned about throwing out the intent of the original devs. If we start doing that willy-nilly, eventually what we have won't be CoH any more.

 

Vanden, there are 2 big suppositions in your concern.

 

1.) That the original devs are the only ones who understand the true intent of CoH.  I don't see how that's true.  There are many times we've questioned Dev's decisions as a community.  There were times that the Dev's made changes to things they themselves implemented.  Had the game continued, some Dev's would have left, new ones would have been brought onboard and new philosophy's would have taken root.

 

2.) Slippery Slope.  The challenge here is that Slippery Slope is that we assume that if A happens, it automatically will lead to B happening, and that will lead to C happening, until we hit H or I and the world is falling apart...But that assumes that we aren't capable of making rational informed decisions along the way.  We should evaluate each change on it's merits, or lack thereof. 

 

I submit 3 examples that I think have made the game better and that were NOT part of the original Dev's vision:

• Capes/Auras unlocked at creation - SCoRE could have kept it the old way, but updated the vision to include no locked costume parts...
  
• Eliminated TF Minimums - SCoRE updated the vision to players can solo all content
  
• Elimination of Prestige for Base creation
  

 

These are all much bigger changes in the game from the Dev's intent, but none of them have ruined it...

 

You have great opinions sir, please feel free to share more...Don't take offense, as none is offered.

[WanderingAries]

The problem, IMO, is that they are too attractive a target for those attacks.

 

On my Robo/FF mastermind, when I've stayed well behind my pets, and the VetPet was behind ME, when I ordered the robots to open up on a spawn?  I've watched two of the three NPCs run past the pets, run past me, and beeline right for that VetPet.  While being attacked by my robots, and even ForceBolt'ed by myself.  The bloody thing has a better taunt than a level 50 Tank ...!!

 

THIS

[Vanden]

I'm concerned about throwing out the intent of the original devs. If we start doing that willy-nilly, eventually what we have won't be CoH any more.

 

Vanden, there are 2 big suppositions in your concern.

 

1.) That the original devs are the only ones who understand the true intent of CoH.  I don't see how that's true.  There are many times we've questioned Dev's decisions as a community.  There were times that the Dev's made changes to things they themselves implemented.  Had the game continued, some Dev's would have left, new ones would have been brought onboard and new philosophy's would have taken root.

 

2.) Slippery Slope.  The challenge here is that Slippery Slope is that we assume that if A happens, it automatically will lead to B happening, and that will lead to C happening, until we hit H or I and the world is falling apart...But that assumes that we aren't capable of making rational informed decisions along the way.  We should evaluate each change on it's merits, or lack thereof. 

 

I submit 3 examples that I think have made the game better and that were NOT part of the original Dev's vision:

• Capes/Auras unlocked at creation - SCoRE could have kept it the old way, but updated the vision to include no locked costume parts...
  
• Eliminated TF Minimums - SCoRE updated the vision to players can solo all content
  
• Elimination of Prestige for Base creation
  

 

These are all much bigger changes in the game from the Dev's intent, but none of them have ruined it...

 

You have great opinions sir, please feel free to share more...Don't take offense, as none is offered.

 

There are absolutely people on these forums and in this community that don't know or don't care about the original design intent, and see the revival of CoH as a "devs are asleep, we can do what we want" situation. (Not that I'm accusing TC of being one, but they are real.) Letting that kind of mentality drive decisions on changes can only result in bad things.  And it's not a "slippery slope" argument, it's a question of gradual drift. Contrary to what I posted earlier, the buffs given by the buff pets are actually significant; I actually looked at the numbers and they don't suck. They're on par with certain very rare global IOs, and they're available to all players at absolutely no cost or build investment. If we change those to remove their only significant downside, that's just straight up power creep. Eliminating TF minimums, removing base costs, unlocking costume options from level 1, these don't actually make players more powerful or the game easier, just more convenient. Buffing the vet pets, however, would have a real effect.

[justicebeliever]

 

There are absolutely people on these forums and in this community that don't know or don't care about the original design intent, and see the revival of CoH as a "devs are asleep, we can do what we want" situation. (Not that I'm accusing TC of being one, but they are real.) Letting that kind of mentality drive decisions on changes can only result in bad things.  And it's not a "slippery slope" argument, it's a question of gradual drift. Contrary to what I posted earlier, the buffs given by the buff pets are actually significant; I actually looked at the numbers and they don't suck. They're on par with certain very rare global IOs, and they're available to all players at absolutely no cost or build investment. If we change those to remove their only significant downside, that's just straight up power creep. Eliminating TF minimums, removing base costs, unlocking costume options from level 1, these don't actually make players more powerful or the game easier, just more convenient. Buffing the vet pets, however, would have a real effect.

 

I hear you - but we are in a position of gradual drift and always have been.  While the core mechanics of the game are mostly the same, there has been a gradual drift from Issue #1 to Issue #24...Change is inevitable, and it's going to happen here.  But slippery slope says that we just say no because we assume that any change request is only driven with the intent to break things.  It's not slippery slope if we evaluate the merits of the change itself based on it's own merits and not held to some phantom ideal of no change.

 

So let's talk merits -

You say that these buffs (paragonwiki) are actually pretty good:

Buffs: Empowering Aura:

• Defense/Recovery (Shield) +Rec, +Def - Base Defense +3.00%, Recovery Rate +1.75% (+0.08 end/second)
  
• Resist/Damage (Power) +Dmg, +Res(all) - Damage Bonus +3.00%, Resist (all) +5.00%
  

 

and I say these limitations (again paragonwiki) are pretty bad:

• Will draw aggro if seen
  
• Low Health: 5 to 10 depending on level of the summoner (5 up to lvl 28, 10 from level 32 on, inbetween not certain yet)
  
• Have -75% resistance to all damage types (to further help them die easily)
  

 

So what we have then is a conundrum...It's too powerful, but totally useless...I still say that was not the Dev's intent, and if it was, then the Dev's made a mistake in trying to present it as an award.  It's not even good as a vanity pet, which offers no functional value except it won't die at the drop of a hat or a strong sneeze.

 

So is it a compromise?  Cut the buff's in half, but drop the Resistance to -30% and double the possible HP?  Remove the aggro?

 

 

 

 

[Xaeon]

The issue with the pets is that because they are mechanically constantly placing a buff on you that causes the threat calculator to go haywire and basically assign them essentially infinite priority that cannot be redirected.  They will ignore taunts, provocations, gauntlet, pokevoke and everything else to deal with the thing that's basically breaking the threat calculator in two. The issue is born mostly out of some weird code interactions.

[jack_nomind]

It's not even good as a vanity pet, which offers no functional value except it won't die at the drop of a hat or a strong sneeze.

 

I mean I get plenty of use out of them when I'm low in health.  Plop them as far away from everything as you can and run.

 

The issue with the pets is that because they are mechanically constantly placing a buff on you that causes the threat calculator to go haywire and basically assign them essentially infinite priority that cannot be redirected.  They will ignore taunts, provocations, gauntlet, pokevoke and everything else to deal with the thing that's basically breaking the threat calculator in two. The issue is born mostly out of some weird code interactions.

 

If that's accurate, the pets are written in a way that no other buff aura (e.g. Dispersion Bubble) is in the game.  It seems like they could be revised to use the non-broken version of that effect.

[Vanden]

The issue with the pets is that because they are mechanically constantly placing a buff on you that causes the threat calculator to go haywire and basically assign them essentially infinite priority that cannot be redirected.  They will ignore taunts, provocations, gauntlet, pokevoke and everything else to deal with the thing that's basically breaking the threat calculator in two. The issue is born mostly out of some weird code interactions.

 

If that's accurate, the pets are written in a way that no other buff aura (e.g. Dispersion Bubble) is in the game.  It seems like they could be revised to use the non-broken version of that effect.

 

I remember a dev post that the engine could calculate mob aggro based on a lot of things, like who's doing the most damage, who's healing, etc., but most of it never actually got used. That post might have been before the buff pets were implemented, and they might have decided to unearth those mechanics for them.