Oniana has never attempted to have a serious conversation with me. They’re just angry and scared that an open forum allows anyone to reply to anyone.
And, instead of ever replying to what I’ve said, Oniana just attacks me for daring to even respond to them.
For anyone wondering, I’m avoiding the “you” pronoun as much as possible because that also seems to set them off on a completely different and unhinged tirade.
They are supposedly going to add some customization to it in the future
My man you just spam the same thing forever. You haven’t ever “won” people just tire of pointing out your terrible points you repeat.
I’m not here to “win” over people who refuse to even consider any sort of compromise.
I’m willing to let people who don’t want to use a pet get what they want. What you lot are doing is fanatical at this point. You won’t let pro-pet MM Hunters keep their pets, no mater what we’re willing to give up.
You think you won people by telling then to play BM? 
Correct it causes unfixable balance issues. A generous compromise would be to have all damage the pet takes be applied to the hunter 1 to 1 without mitigation. Even that likely is to powerful and would need tuning.
No it doesn’t.
BL is already being made baseline so that’s out of the way.
Remove the Tenacious/Cunning talent node choice and let petless Hunters go to a stable master to pick which one they want. Summoning a pet would then replace the eagle’s pet spec with whatever pet you summoned.
Mortal Wounds can be handled in different ways. Make it baseline for all Hunters and give MW pets something else. Or make it so MW simply isn’t applied when you have a pet out.
Then put in a percentage damage loss to make up for the damage the pet does while having it out. Just the opposite of Lone Wolf basically.
Everything fixed and nothing to worry about. All this talk about being “unfixable” is just a bunch of debbie downers who don’t want to consider alternatives.
The fact you think its just damage really highlights that you don’t get it. Reread my post try again.
Explain, precisely, what your point is instead of beating around the bush.
I did its written down. I can’t gift you the wit to comprehend it.
You may want to consider that you’re not as good at communicating your thoughts as you think you are.
Try being as precise as possible in explaining why my suggestions won’t work.
Again repetition is madness. Enjoy mm on live in a month or so
So that’s a “no” on having anything to actually point out that’s wrong with what I said.
I do hope that Blizzard takes my suggestions into consideration so that everyone can continue to enjoy playing MM in the future.
For real it’s all been said already people just don’t want to accept it. Devs do not want to maintain a split paradigm. And they don’t have to any longer.
Anyone with any experience in systems design or development understands this.
The last time they didn’t want a split paradigm was with Druids and they gave them a fourth spec. So I appreciate the approval for an even more complicated solution.
I understood. You seem to have a blind spot into yourself.
But thanks for responding.
You clearly don’t understand. I don’t have a blind spot or whatever lol. You inserted your own context into what I said, which was about this thread being mostly nonproductive arguing.
See? Context matters.
Tbh I don’t know why you felt the need to self insert and twist my intent to make me out as a bully lol.
Wanna be white knight I guess? I can’t tell.
I already have more people who signed the petition on ipetitions for hunters to keep the option to summon pets than there are individuals in the forums who are against MM ever being able to summon their pets. Most players don’t even post in the forums, it seems. Also most pro pet posts have more likes than anti pet ones. Clearly the majority is for allowing MM to keep their traditional pets.
Funny thing.
Dude listed numbers to me as a source
Then admitted the numbers were messed up and not valid.
And thinks he won the argument rofl.
Guy is hopefully a troll.
Source please. Never mind I found it.
Rofl you have 50 signatures. Are you really trying to use that as “evidence” of a majority? Rofl
Even if that were true (it’s not) blizzard
Clearly has a design point made.