Immersive (battle) Pets Concept

LadyNalcarya

Gidorick wrote: »

Lol. You are NOT going to like my marriage concept @KoshkaMurka.

Hehe

You mentioning guildies is a good example of a mechanic that some see as a mechanic that is required in game and some wish it wasn't. If you want to sell in game you must join a guild. Many feel this is unfair. I do not.

You mean an access to crafting?
But in this case, there's a choice: you can craft the gear for your char, find a crafter in zone or ask a friend or guildie or wear dropped gear. So the game is not forcing you to craft.

Of course, I'm not the type of person that must partake in every aspect and facet of a game. My main hates magic and sees himself as an honorable man. He doesn't steal. He doesn't partake in legerdermain. He also only uses weapon skills, a few fighter guild skills, and potions.

Yeah, and its nice that you have a choice to play a honorable warrior if you want to.

So I see where you're coming from. If pet skills only improved and effected pet abilities and pet success, it would be better.

I do agree that this kind of mechanic needs to be an optional mechanic. I'll have to think about the best way to do that.

Well... I think it will be easier to balance these "active pets" if they were integrated into character skill system. So the players who chooses a summoner role, wont get their summons in addition to their current skills, they will be a part of their skills. And ofc, there might be supplementary skills and passives to adjust this playstyle.

MornaBaine

Gidorick wrote: »

KoshkaMurka wrote: »

Gidorick wrote: »

The idea that "some people wouldn't want to do it so it shouldn't be added" is wrong @KoshkaMurka.

Not really.
I'm not against player housing or lore-unfriendly costumes or any other fluff I dont care about. Because everyone has different tastes, and these things do not change the base game anyway.
But your concept includes fundamental changes to combat balance (mitigation and buffs) and economy (harvesting part).

MMOs, and Elder Scrolls, should be about options, not limitations.

Yeah, exactly, and this is precisely why I'm against the idea of buffs and harvesting helpers.
If you can gather the materials 2 times faster with a pet, then you will be less effective without one. If a pet gives you more resists and damage, you wont be on leaderboards without a pokemon.
So everyone will be forced to use pets in order to be effective... Which doesnt really look like a freedom of choice, of course if you dont mean that pet skins would be the "options".

if you care about gathering mats... you'd get a pet... if you care about getting on the leaderboards then you get a pet. Similarly how if you care about being effective in PVP you get the best gear.

Is it unfair that those who craft the best gear are better suited for PVP than someone like me, who just uses any armor they find lying around? Are those players not benefiting in ways I am not because I don't really care to craft? Should ZOS remove crafting because I don't really want to do it?

Of course they shouldn't.

This would be a gameplay mechanic addition to the game so yea... if you want to be effective in certain situations, you would need a pet. I don't see an issue with that. The game changes. The game grows.

Like I said, ZOS could mitigate the issues by doing things like disallowing pets in certain situations (PVP... maybe even trials and such) but I don't think it would be necessary. I did play with the idea of pet command being an active slot-able ability, that way, players with pets have to give up something (a skill) to have their pet help them in battle.

I think the main difference is that players who don't craft CAN BUY crafted gear from other players with in game gold. Under your proposed system only those who spend real money would have access to this advantage, however slight it may be. Ultimately, I don't want to see anything in the crown store that conveys an advantage to mechanics. Things that help you level faster or accrue in game gold faster don't fuss me because they do not translate to an advantage that others can never have unless they spend additional cold hard cash. If your idea could be implemented in the game itself rather than the Crown Store I'd fully support it but I understand that you don't advocate for this based on the fact that we both know ZOS would never bother to do something that cool that didn't garner then more cold hard cash.

BabeestorGor

Some lovely ideas.

1 thing I hope is not added in is pet shards. Just no.

I'd also like some individualisation of pets with each having their own talent.

Monkeys could be pickpockets, felines could have a sneak attack bonus, canines being pack animals attack at the same time you do making it impossible for your foe to block both of you etc. Coming up with talents for each and balancing them would be near impossible but since I can't see the idea being taken up I'm not going to worry about that.

Gidorick

MornaBaine wrote: »

Gidorick wrote: »

I agree that not having pets that are attainable in game is an issue @KoshkaMurka. By the generally accepted definition of pay to win this mechanic would not be pay to win because there is one pet that is attainable in game without paying additional money in the crown store.

I do think there should be more pets earnable in-game... but there is one earnable in game.

What are the reasons you think this would be a pay to win mechanic @KoshkaMurka ?

Are you talking about Justal's Falcon? I love that one but wish you could keep it out and have it sit on your fist!

Naw, that's just a trophy. I'm talking about the Dwemer spider thing

MornaBaine

Gidorick wrote: »

MornaBaine wrote: »

Gidorick wrote: »

I agree that not having pets that are attainable in game is an issue @KoshkaMurka. By the generally accepted definition of pay to win this mechanic would not be pay to win because there is one pet that is attainable in game without paying additional money in the crown store.

I do think there should be more pets earnable in-game... but there is one earnable in game.

What are the reasons you think this would be a pay to win mechanic @KoshkaMurka ?

Are you talking about Justal's Falcon? I love that one but wish you could keep it out and have it sit on your fist!

Naw, that's just a trophy. I'm talking about the Dwemer spider thing

Oh yeah, forgot about that one since I never have it out. My bad! LOL

Wily_Wizard

@ZOS_GinaBruno or @ZOS_RichLambert , Does ZOS have an official stance on this? Sorry if you posted before, but a lot has changed recently, maybe ZOS has taken a new stance?

BennyButton

make it so some of your pets can grow up to become mounts (obviously depends on the type of pet)

me_ming

I not sure about pets helping in combat. It really brings the issue of play-2-win, no matter how you look at it. But I do like the idea of having more interaction with your pets. It would be nice to be able to pet my pets, maybe some emotes and animation the player can command, other than their standby animation.

Gidorick

me_ming wrote: »

I not sure about pets helping in combat. It really brings the issue of play-2-win, no matter how you look at it. But I do like the idea of having more interaction with your pets. It would be nice to be able to pet my pets, maybe some emotes and animation the player can command, other than their standby animation.

You are right @me_ming . There are a few tweaks I made to the original concept that adds pet early on in-game and makes the skills slot-able skills instead of automatic skills. These tweaks addresses some of the concerns other posters have expressed.

Gidorick

They mentioned "utility" pets on the latest ESO Live

ZOS_KaiSchober wrote: »

Dear - Will you ever add pets that have utility features to the game? Pets for auto-looting, auto-gathering, inventory space, area awareness, etc?
We’ve talked about this internally a lot. We think it would be super cool but the idea always falls flat when we consider the min-max implications. Now a cat lover has to have a dog because the dog has the mechanic they want. Then we start talking about training pets to do things so you can apply the behavior you want, and the scope gets crazy! We could see building a robust system to support it, but right now it’s behind further character customization and housing as far as big systems we’re working on.

@ZOS_KaiSchober , This thread is this one player's suggestion as to how these pets can be implemented... when and if they ever are! It actually addresses some of the issues you mentioned, such as the cat love HAVING to have a dog. This concept solves that particular issues.