Team Quitter: Damon and Jaden overview the Ranger + look forward

[Sir Jack]

What about reduced stamina cost for rolls?

The more I see of Rangers and pets, the less I currently want to play the class, which annoys me because Ranger is my main in GW1...

Just looking at the GW2 Dev Team PAX exposition video, the pets don't contribute anything at all. Hell, at one point, the ranger starts shooting and the pet just runs off into nowhere because the other player was standing on a ledge. So pets are literally no help at all when 1) your target can not be directly gotten to by melees 2) you remain out of melee range/path because it's the ****ing smart thing to do from a range 3) you're jumping around a lot, as pets seem to not be able to follow you. On top of that, it seems they heel back to you when you use a heal or any skill that takes longer than direct attacking instead of laying down pressure, though that could be because you need to lock/unlock targets for them to work efficiently (which as shown in GW1 is baaaaaad). The whole point of the Ranger idea in most games is the one attacking from a distance and pissing people off because of that coupled with high survivability. GW2's Ranger seems to promote the exact opposite, get into melee so you can get the most out of your pet or be outclasses at range by Warriors and Thieves.

Thiefs really seem like the better choice for those who loved GW1 rangers...

[Alaris]

While being a Diablo 2 tester, I told the devs (via the forum or whatever of course) that necro's minions pathfinding was terrible, and they had to fix it even if it meant that they made minions teleport to you if they got too far.

And that's what they did.

Give the ranger pet a shadowstep skill that he uses if he can't pathfind decently. Problem solved.

[Sir Jack]

Minions have weak AI though, attack anything in sight. And keep following until 1) Dead 2) too far away. The obvious AI flaws GW1 pets have are still very much visible in every ranger video where they use pets, delayed attack response, ranged attack response, run back after kill, delayed attack when approaching foe, and so on. Really not encouraging hope they'll have that fixed when 6 years couldn't do it, though they supposedly are testing out new melee AI.

I'd actually rather see them as there being ranged options (and not derp, out of range so I just stand here) or passively swarm around you being able to provide buffs, either personal, partywide or area effect, like "put trap there" (able to send a pet to drop a trap further than you could throw it, Pet must be large enough to carry), "light this area on fire" (Fire Drakes), "Howl at Moon" (provide Fury), "Blend in" (Stealth), "Run as one" (Swiftness), etc...
The difference then being different pets can provide different buffs and you still have to pick 4 of them, or from overall skills like the trap thing.

Of course, there's still the GW1 solution. Make pets deal stupidly high damage compared to every single other weapon in the game. But that only means regular ranger attacks would have to be weakened for the balance, as running a pet and bow efficiently in GW1 is not possible, and that restriction, as well as energy, has been removed in GW2.

[Alaris]

Agreed in providing ranged pets and utility pets.

[Skyy High]

Relevant blog post regarding pets.

Also, ranged pets are apparently confirmed.

[Alaris]

Also, ranged pets are apparently confirmed.

For example, bears are hard to kill, drakes do AoE damage, devourers use ranged attacks, etc.

Yes they are. I am happy with that. This is a good alternative to the petless option.

[Sir Jack]

Yes they are. I am happy with that. This is a good alternative to the petless option.

It's not, really. The same flaws are still there, melee pets are still pretty much useless for ranged Rangers using obstacles, but instead of running off and likely aggroing everything in the area, they stand besides you doing nothing by being Passive, so petless might just be the better plan. Ranged pets are probably going to have the same AI flaw Heroes have when you use a longbow from a height, stand around doing nothing until the foe gets close enough, or run too close ignoring height/range advantages, or have Shortbow range when you really do want Longbow range (Devourers already seemed to use a ranged attack/skill but still ran in pretty close).
The whole "Pikachu, I choose you" mechanic will likely only be used to swap between ranged/melee depending on your range, and I really don't see me using a melee pet unless I have a melee weapon set on me, but other than that, it changes nothing to the inherent flaw of pets, they simply suck. They apparently even use (most of) their skills on their own. GG trying to time a spike or combo with lolrandom pet skills going off. I thought they tried to improve the synchrony, control over 1 skill and the same pet controls as GW1 just doesn't seem enough to give the Ranger an edge or that little extra compared to other classes.

Odds are you'll be able to ignore the bear or any other melee pet by using obstacles/2 player blocking (see: melee heroes/foes getting blocked) or jumping on a ledge, allowing you to focus on the Ranger and not the pet. Kill Ranger, pet goes bye too, no need to care. Drakes doing AoE means less damage on single targets, so you really want a Ranged/Single/AoE option. Devourers see above, depending on their range and AI, ranged pets still won't be very useful and likely deal less damage as well.

[Alaris]

Sir Jack, you got it all wrong.

Sure there are flaws, but now players have a few ways to meaningfully workaround them. The 1 skill is enough, having to micro 4 skills would be a pain, and having them on your bar means you're less of a player too. The ranged pet means less aggro, even if it runs a bit closer it's still not melee. Besides, you can pull without the pet going into melee range with passive.

[Sir Jack]

Old way: F1-F4 controls pet skills
New way: F1-F4 control AI and 1 skill

No, I do not consider GW1 Pet Control and reduced skill control an improvement.

Other classes have complete control over their class-specific (actually defining) benefit. Rangers with pets will, in every possible scenario, be dependant on Pet AI. It's the main flaw of the benefit and thus the class. Either you get control over the movement *cough*if it's the same as GW1 means it's *****cough* but lose control over most of their skill usage, which is actually bad as optimal skill usage is now dependant on luck, or complete control over skills, losing AI control with frustrating results.
The only fitting way would be to turn F1-F7 into pet AI and skill control buttons, thereby turning the ranger in a cluster**** of skills and micromanagement and there'd STILL be issues with the Pet AI.

I'm sorry, but Pet as THE Ranger defining benefit inherently makes the class flawed IMO. I could see Pets working in a similar way as the Engineer whips out a Flamethrower (keep standard attack skill, switch other 4 skills with Pet skills depending on pet, F1-F4 become AI control), but not as the thing that's supposed to be making the difference between the Ranger and the other classes. At the end of it all, you'll never be able to make optimal use of the pet, no matter how much time you pour in the class, no matter how insanely good you become, the presence of an AI entity will at one point screw you over, whereas players of all other classes only have their own skills and timing to blame.

[Alaris]

So you'd rather have a viable petless option? ;)

Honestly though, sounds like you'll never be satisfied with pets, even if they do manage to get it working fairly well. It makes it hard to take you seriously.