LF Feedback – Pet Abilities Adjustments

100 Troll Mage
14800
05/21/2013 08:51 AMPosted by Alona


I seriously don't get the point of the changes. The changes proposed or why it was even thought of. Anyone have any insight into this?


I'm guessing it goes hand in hand with the full revamp of certain families, like when Crithto posted here about changing some of the racial abilities.

To address Crithto's post:

The thing I've noticed, though, is that it's not the fault of the cycle of weaknesses that makes a pet not worth playing with. People are saying mechs are weak right now but that's mainly because of the absolute proliferation of elemental pets. They are EVERYWHERE. Two of the pet related achievements give you elemental pets. And unlike critters that are also everywhere, they have good movesets and stat builds.

I preferred elementals being a hard counter to mechs specifically when clockwork gnomes and FFFs were all over the place. To get people to start using more mechanical pets, you need to start making more appealing mechanical pets. The pet battle system is one of checks and balances, and unfortunately at certain points some pets come out to be totally overpowered or broken. This is the point where hard counters become necessary. In a perfect world where bugs didn't exist, it wouldn't be as necessary.

In terms of these changes, the second option is much more preferable. It helps a bit with undead popularity and makes aquatics slightly more appealing...I guess. And this without rustling the balance of the rest of the strengths/weaknesses.


The fact that mechanical was the only group that took more damage from and dealt less damage to the same family always felt stilted to me though. It makes sense on paper but it simply ends up being a travesty of a weakness because of that fact.
Reply Quote
100 Gnome Rogue
21810
The heals on the Elite pets need nerfed. It make sense to give them 50% less health but make them take 50% less damage, until you realize what was once 1-2 attacks to counter a heal is now 2-4 attacks because the heals are basically twice as strong. Dos-Ryga heals almost 50% of it's health in one move, and Nitune is hardly better. Basically I fail to see how a fight is supposed to take 3 pets when the second one of mine dies on the next turn the elite pet heals all the damage I did and is back to full.
Edited by Elementdemon on 5/23/2013 2:46 PM PDT
Reply Quote
100 Tauren Hunter
15325
The heals on the Elite pets need nerfed. It make sense to give them 50% ess health but make them take 50% less damage, until you realize what as once 1-2 attacks to counter a heal is now 2-4 attacks because the heals are basically twice as strong. Dos-Ryga heals almost 50% of it's health in one move, and Nitune is hardly better. Basically I fail to see how a fight is supposed to take 3 pets when the second one of mine dies on the next turn he heals all the damage I did and is back to full.


Oops, I think you were looking for a different thread. There are about a dozen active threads on this topic if you take a look below.
Reply Quote
100 Gnome Rogue
21810
No, this is a thread looking for feedback about changes made in 5.3 to Pet Battles, and that would include how the Legendary Pet Battles are effected by the changes. This is in fact, the correct thread.
Reply Quote
100 Draenei Shaman
11760
No, this is a thread looking for feedback about changes made in 5.3 to Pet Battles, and that would include how the Legendary Pet Battles are effected by the changes. This is in fact, the correct thread.


I think this thread is for feedback about the proposed changes in post #1, not changes that occurred in 5.3. He even asked for feedback about "these potential changes" in the post.
Edited by Totemtoter on 5/23/2013 5:54 PM PDT
Reply Quote
100 Undead Rogue
22365
Personally I think either of the changes sound fine, but I feel like the "strong" vs "weak" bonuses are a bit too strong. I'd prefer if it was more like +25% -15%, that way the game would revolve less around which pet family you and your opponent have (in pet PvP you have no way to predict the latter for example) and more around the individual mechanics of each pet.
Reply Quote
90 Human Paladin
15345
Here are some initial ideas that are being kicked around:

Mechanical abilities would deal less damage versus Critter (instead of Elemental)
Elemental abilities would deal less damage versus Dragonkin (instead of Critter)
Flying abilities would deal less damage versus Elemental (instead of Dragonkin)

And here is a second set of ideas we’re considering:

Undead abilities would deal less damage versus Elemental (instead of Aquatic)
Mechanical abilities would deal less damage versus Aquatic (instead of Elemental)

Your thoughts on these potential changes would be really helpful, so please take a moment to reply below and let us know what you think.


First off I'd like to thank Crithto for taking time to ask the pet battling community how we may feel about the changes. It's always nice to see that you guys really care. Now just my two cents on the possible changes.

Ok so I think that the best of the two choices would be the second for several reasons.

First, changing the Critter's resistance from Elementals to Mech could be a very bad idea since Mech attacks are fairly rare outside of the family while Elemental attacks are very widely distributed among other familys (like beast attacks are). Critters family is fairly weak, I mean their hardest hitting attack is Mudslide and the only pet's that have it arn't even Critters. Taking away their resistance to common Elemental attacks will weaken the family to near useless levels. Second, Dragons are really popular and I feel they are in a very good spot since they are individually strong pet's and most have weathers allowing them to mesh well in many teams. Granting them resistance to Elementals would only make them even stronger; ATM their resistance to flying seems fairly balanced since like Critters, flying pet's arn't super popular outside Crow, Bat's, and a handful of flying abilities. Which keeps them competitive with the other strong familys.

I think the second option is a very good idea. Undead are super strong atm. Having their counter being the attack weak critter family, and their soft counter the super weak aquatic family really gives anyone very little reason not to bring an undead to any team. Giving them a soft counter vs a strong family like Elemental would really bring them into line with other familys. This also gives Mech's a fighting chance vs Elementals. I mean seeing a single elemental while having a mech on ur team really put's you at a disadvantage, other family's usually have a fighting chance and so should mech pets.

P.S. A little off topic but I really think Sandstorm should be on a 5 round CD like Call Darkness. It's a great weather and I would never want to see it go but it's a very powerful weather and there is currently very little risk of using it whenever it's off CD. Something that can cripple entire teams should carry a risk when being used. It would force players to be a little wiser when using it and would allow a bigger window then 3 rounds to counter it.
Edited by Annimositty on 5/24/2013 3:13 PM PDT
Reply Quote
100 Tauren Shaman
17030
I vote for the second set of options. makes more sense to me anyways.

Undead can't curse elementals, they are not fleshy.

Machines often don't function well when wet, lowers their damage attacking haddock.
Reply Quote
90 Goblin Hunter
7715
P.S. A little off topic but I really think Sandstorm should be on a 5 round CD like Call Darkness. It's a great weather and I would never want to see it go but it's a very powerful weather and there is currently very little risk of using it whenever it's off CD. Something that can cripple entire teams should carry a risk when being used. It would force players to be a little wiser when using it and would allow a bigger window then 3 rounds to counter it.


Agree w/ this sentiment wholeheartedly. Sandstorm brings the same amount of utility as Darkness (10% accuracy debuff + powerful secondary effect).

I don't feel that Sandstorm by itself is "OP" per se, but I think there should be more of an opportunity cost for using it, such as having to juke your opponent's weather changing.
Reply Quote
100 Pandaren Mage
11590
Why change what isn't broken? You overtuned the beasts of fable so that they are an annoyance instead of fun, now you want to "fix" things again? Just leave it alone and stop trying to fix problems that do not exist, you'll just ruin things.
Reply Quote
100 Tauren Druid
18590
I've taken some time to think about this, and I didn't want to make an overly reactionary response.

I appreciate that you are thinking about the system and ways to improve it. I don't think, however, that messing with the strengths/weaknesses is really a good way to go about it. A year ago in beta, sure. At this point, though I think a lot of people are very used to what we have and it works well. Such dramatic changes would not feel good at this point. If it provided a really positive benefit, then it might be worth it. But switching it up just for mechanicals doesn't seem to be worth the negatives of switching things up so dramatically for people. Its not entirely a drawback for mechanicals, as it means you only need to be concerned about one counter (though its rough), whereas every other family does have two. Would it be nice if they didn't have the double counter of elementals? I suppose. Is it absolutely necessary to make that change? I don't think so.

Further, on your specific ideas that you've been tossing around, some of them just don't feel right. For example, right now Dragonkin takes less damage from Flying. Thematically that has always been one of the ones that makes the MOST sense to me. They are both capable of flight, but the big scary dragon (ok, teeny tiny scary dragon -- is probably not going to be too concerned by the moth or bird). Just always really made sense. Right up there with "Beasts do more damage vs. critters" in terms of logical counters.

I guess the short version of all this, is I think its change that is unnecessary. But if you think that changing it is very important for mechanicals and something must be done, your second set of changes are probably the better ones. Its less changes for people to adapt to and it focuses specifically on the issue (Mechanicals and Elementals). It throws off strats or teams that people may like or be familiar with to a lesser extent due to their being less families involved. So leave it alone, or go with the 2nd set, is my opinion.
Reply Quote
90 Tauren Death Knight
13145
05/26/2013 10:16 PMPosted by Bellezza
a good idea to make it so you that you can be attacked on a pvp server during random pet battles, but not during "blizzard sanctioned trainer battles"


levelled mostly on PvP, and while i died ... 482 times at low level while pet battling, it's stressful the first few times. more so when being ganked, more when being followed by flying players, when at low level, having people chase you down because they think you're gathering mats, or a really strange bot that walks 10 steps every 4 minutes, idk.

it should be an achievement, it feels like one.

there's so many feelings i have about pet battles on PvP servers, most using unprintable 4 letter words.

the most annoying has been doing the dailies, and having mages pop out from CRZ and kill you who are standing right next to you as you pop out of a trainer battle, and kill you before you can target them. repeatedly. i suspect they wait in the trainer battle without taking a turn, forfeit, just to gank players from the other faction as they land and arrive.

if you've ever been killed at halfhill in a supposedly neutral area, you know how it works, some AoE can take you out of the trainer battles, shaman totems, some trinket effects, etc.

The first time, i was pissed. the last memorable time, i think i was about to capture a rare "little black ram", it took about 2 hours to find another one. that was fun. flying around an alliance zone for 5 hours as horde... and standing around expecting to be murdered.

as for 5.4 changes or hotfix changes,

the 50% elite buff is too high, it makes the strategy for fable pets very, very limiting, and is likely not in the spirit of "not making explicit pets for solving battles" pet choices that was touted as a design imperative.

if twin emperor battles are no longer added because of the danger of specialised mobs and specialised roles and bringing the buff instead of the person to a team is frowned upon in PvE, then the same iterative rule should apply to pet battles, by not creating Pet Specific challenge mobs that can take 1 damage, and consistently hit for the entire health pool of 90% of player pets, at 1300-1400 in return (Ti'Un/Dos'Ryga).

i do understand it's a challenge, but there has to be some flexibility in the system, or it won't be used; just as people don't often use betamax and VHS tapes, floppy diskettes or optical caddy storage, etc because their utility is suspect.

do i think that fable pets are backwards and archaic ? it's only been 3 months. so, probably, yes.

i suspect a few of the hit/dodge tables are too high and too low now that data is available, and could be improved by either switching to "Dodge/Parry/Crit" buffs, or by debuffing both pets in the same family, rather than relying on counters so heavily for mechanics.

an aquatic v aquatic, should be a longer fight as a result, and more prone to miss on heavy hits for both opponents. the upside is teaching about counters, the downside is that PvP and PvE then relies mostly on double counter pets that don't play as their family defaults. a very heavy-handed way to train what you "didn't" want to happen in training players to handle counters, but that's your issue.

the short list of double-counter pets is perhaps far too short, humanoid / elemental / dragonkin /undead / magic numbers are very low, and while that makes each one preferably unique, there are likely about ~110 / 560 pets in those 5 types, 4/5ths are in the other 5 family categories.

so there needs to be either some increased diversity in beast, critter, aquatic, flying, elemental families as they compose more than 75% to 80% of the pets available as wild pets, or just more types in the weaker areas, like elementals and magic pets, perhaps in type/counters, or in team composition, sympathetic spell types that react opposed to weather types, etc.

it's just something other than breed types, that makes generic pets more individually useful.
Edited by Toliman on 5/27/2013 4:05 AM PDT
Reply Quote
Blizzard Employee
Thank you to everyone who has shared their feedback with us so far, we appreciate it. Based on some of the comments we’ve received, here is an updated list of potential changes we’re hoping to include in Patch 5.4:

  • The Magic passive now caps damage taken at 35% of maximum health, buffed from 40%.
  • The Dragonkin passive effect now activates when the enemy is taken below 50% health, up from 25%.
  • The Aquatic passive now reduces DOT damage by 50%, up from 25%.
  • The Elemental passive effect now only affect negative, direct effects of weather (e.g. the accuracy reduction of Sandstorm won’t be applied, but the damage reduction will).
  • The Critter passive now makes critters completely immune to roots, stuns, and sleeps.

  • Keep that feedback rollin’ in!
    Reply Quote
    90 Blood Elf Priest
    BnB
    14295
    91647416580:
    Thank you to everyone who has shared their feedback with us so far, we appreciate it. Based on some of the comments we’ve received, here is an updated list of potential changes we’re hoping to include in Patch 5.4:

  • The Magic passive now caps damage taken at 35% of maximum health, buffed from 40%.
  • The Dragonkin passive effect now activates when the enemy is taken below 50% health, up from 25%.
  • The Aquatic passive now reduces DOT damage by 50%, up from 25%.
  • The Elemental passive effect now only affect negative, direct effects of weather (e.g. the accuracy reduction of Sandstorm won’t be applied, but the damage reduction will).
  • The Critter passive now makes critters completely immune to roots, stuns, and sleeps.

  • Keep that feedback rollin’ in!


    Some decent stuff there.
    Reply Quote
    91 Troll Shaman
    12855
    91647416580:
    Thank you to everyone who has shared their feedback with us so far, we appreciate it. Based on some of the comments we’ve received, here is an updated list of potential changes we’re hoping to include in Patch 5.4:

  • The Magic passive now caps damage taken at 35% of maximum health, buffed from 40%.
  • The Dragonkin passive effect now activates when the enemy is taken below 50% health, up from 25%.
  • The Aquatic passive now reduces DOT damage by 50%, up from 25%.
  • The Elemental passive effect now only affect negative, direct effects of weather (e.g. the accuracy reduction of Sandstorm won’t be applied, but the damage reduction will).
  • The Critter passive now makes critters completely immune to roots, stuns, and sleeps.

  • Keep that feedback rollin’ in!


    for clarification, would elemental pets, during lightning storm, get 25% extra mechanical damage and get the lightning strike on their attacks and not receive the lightning strike or 25% extra damage?
    Reply Quote
    100 Tauren Hunter
    15325
    This sounds pretty solid. I like how it keeps the basic flavor of all the passives.

    I wonder how "DOT" damage is defined for aquatics. Is it only effects that are applied directly to the pet? Does Immolation count? How about weather effects like Lightning storm and Scorched Earth? Death and Decay?
    Reply Quote
    100 Human Warlock
    20180
    91647416580:
    Thank you to everyone who has shared their feedback with us so far, we appreciate it. Based on some of the comments we’ve received, here is an updated list of potential changes we’re hoping to include in Patch 5.4:

  • The Magic passive now caps damage taken at 35% of maximum health, buffed from 40%.
  • The Dragonkin passive effect now activates when the enemy is taken below 50% health, up from 25%.
  • The Aquatic passive now reduces DOT damage by 50%, up from 25%.
  • The Elemental passive effect now only affect negative, direct effects of weather (e.g. the accuracy reduction of Sandstorm won’t be applied, but the damage reduction will).
  • The Critter passive now makes critters completely immune to roots, stuns, and sleeps.

  • Keep that feedback rollin’ in!


    The change to the magic passive really doesn't seem to to do to much. It helps but the big issue with the passive imo is it doesn't do much for high health magic pets. I think something like reduces all dmg taken by 10% or something like that would be much better. Could also give them the reduced damage taken when swapped in like you were thinking of for elemental.

    The change to the dragonkin passive might make it to strong. Atm it seems like if you get a pet under 25% with a dragonkin your next hit will kill them anyway but i don't want to see the passive turned into if you get an enemy below 50% they are dead next hit either. So maybe lower the damage buff a little.

    The changes to aquatic elemental and critter all seem like really good changes and i don't see any negatives with them.
    Reply Quote
    100 Human Paladin
    21370
    91647416580:
  • The Magic passive now caps damage taken at 35% of maximum health, buffed from 40%.
  • The Dragonkin passive effect now activates when the enemy is taken below 50% health, up from 25%.

  • Problem: Dragonkin supposedly counter Magic, but Magic renders both Dragonkin alpha strikes such as Deep Breath and Cataclysm, AND their family special Execute, completely moot. Not that this is any different from before, but the effects will now be more severe and increasingly noticeable for a greater portion of the match.
    Reply Quote

    Please report any Code of Conduct violations, including:

    Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.

    Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.

    Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.

    Forums Code of Conduct

    Report Post # written by

    Reason
    Explain (256 characters max)

    Reported!

    [Close]