Aint anyone trying to bring you down love,
I just propose 4th spec, you could even name that spec “Pakapaka-Sniper”.
2 Likes
Neither are you from what I am seeing.
Try the following, and see if you can pick up what some of us are saying:
We leave the pet in for solo content or as a choice for solo contemnt
It is not that we don’t understand it, it is that we have ZERO issue with the changes for content we go petless unless we need the utility anyway but for SOLO content we still want the pets we have, and we might not trust Blizzard to get the eagle right for solo content as long as their focus is on group content.
And you are coming across as so focused on design for group content that you are throwing designing for SOLO content completely out the window.
3 Likes
Wait until you realize that hunters have some of the best solo capabilities WITHOUT a pet.
But anyone that plays a hunter past RP can understand this.
1 Like
Hey, I prefer the pet out for world/solo content, but I fall into that group that finds things better to have and not need then find out I need but don’t hav.
Then again, anhyone who is not a condescending, know-it-all pos that has to put others down to make themselves look good would realize and understand such things, in addition to the basic idea that the class may have the best capability in some area, but that does not mean people will be able to use that capability.
1 Like
Your first interaction with me here was being condescending lol.
So am I condescending or are you just full of crap projecting nonsense trying to make your argument look innocent?
Exactly. You PREFER. You don’t NEED it. You WANT it.
You are perfectly capable of solo content w/o a pet.
When has Quiver done this?
Oh, pulling that card eh? Here is a little hint, my first interaction with you might might have been condescending, but ever think that you responses to others, which could come across a scondescending, could not have triggured it?
Get this through your thick head, I may not NEED it 95-99% of the time, but there is that 1% chance I will in order to set something up or get away from a dangerous situation. YOuare trying to tell me I don’t need a pett at all.
I do solo content on pet less casters, butat least one has something else: baked in slows/roots to their standard abilities (frost mage). On the hunter, I can sometime s1-2 shot mobs, pet or no pet, if I open up, if I get jumped ot have to try and kite, that is when issues appear without the pet.
With things like
Which can translate into: “but anyone who does not play hunter with the skill or ability I do does not know wha tthey are talking about”.
1 Like
It can also translate into “anyone who is interested in the mechanical ins and outs of the class will be aware of this.”
It isn’t putting anyone down.
The tone is a little sour, but that’s following your own aggression. You don’t get to sow onions and be mad at the dirt when you reap onions.
2 Likes
Nope. Why? Because I am amicable unless someone decides to be the aggressor.
If your first message to me is directly condescending, you opened the door for me to return the favor.
You don’t want me being condescending to you, yet you can’t refrain from talking down to me yourself.
Make it make sense.
Yes. You do not need a pet.
Hunters have an insane soloing kit. Between multiple speed boosts for getting distance between you and your target. Defensives. A many number of traps, slows, knockbacks.
They are quite literally built for soloing. If anything, the pet is a crutch so you don’t have to use any of the above.
See. You don’t understand the mechanics or the kit hunters have for soloing. And mm is even more proficient at it since it gets an additional knockback and they have the highest burst out of the 3 hunter specs.
Antimony caught his feelings and commenting on a class he doesn’t main
WHODATHUNK IT
You were not condescending to me till you response to me, but you were such to other posters, some of which I may among the same group.
This is a simple “you are condesending to me because I was such to you, but I was such to you because you were such to other posters:”.
Ok, let me try to put this as succently as possible, YOU don’t need a pet, I can likley make due without one for most content, what about those that fall into neither group? , also lets break down your tools:
I count 3, hard cast aspect of cheeta and disengage (up to 2 casts) activsating it, the latter can depend on terrain to execute.
a damage reduction that has 2 casts and turtle which, like paladin bubble, is used to cheese some mechanics.
Tar and freezing are the main ones for CC and some are talents that may or may not be taken.
In the end I even stated that I would be happy with sa glyph that made the “eagle” (if it becomes visible) takes the form of one of our current pets, or maybe a talent, that would be taken for solo content only, that lets us trade some of our damage for being able to have a pet out.
Maybe all of this could have been avoided if you had at least shown you were able to think beyond x group of those that play hunter, but no you had to take the stupid “if I can do it, anyone can” stance.
Making a dedicated ranger specialization actually rules. Not sure why people are up in arms over this lmao
1 Like
But Quiver has supported the idea of a glyph for the Eagle.
1 Like
For great reason, so they can make the main MM spec what it should be. They clearly can’t jUsT dO bOtH, they tried for years.
1 Like
Based on context going on for probably a few thousand posts. Then you jump in immediately talking down to someone and you except them to be cordial?
Correction. YOU don’t need a pet either. You WANT a pet.
Why do you need more?
Wars have leap. Paly’s steed. Rogue sprint.
Most classes only have 1 and disengage ALSO removes snares.
And if you run ranger, your DR also triggers exhil. And exhil triggers DR.
And ranger has a perk where shadow damage heals you, which makes for nice burst healing.
Binding shot is also a must, aoe root.
Explosive trap is either an aoe knock up or knock back.
Bursting shot is an aoe knockback.
So thats +3 on top of tar and freezing trap.
Maybe this could have been avoided if you weren’t so presumptuous and actually engaged me in honest discussion.
Me and snow have been back and forth discussing this as well as with anyone who doesn’t reduce the convo to petty squabbling and one uping.
Just do better and stop projecting your nonsense on me. If you want honest discussion, START with honest discussion.
1 Like
Because ranger should be it’s own class. Hunters whole class theme was man and beast with you taking aspects of the wild.
4 Likes
Same way m+ players didn’t need to use pet and lust, they just wanted it? well well well, how the tables turned.
FOR THE GREATER GOOD, LETS REMOVE MM PETS COMRADES!!
Yeah, this mentality always go well, your “great reason”
2 Likes
After a point, lust does become a requirement.
Because you want it, you dont need it, you could just invite a mage 
1 Like
Insofar as you mean you don’t need hunter’s lust specifically, yes. This is part of what the changes are trying to fix, the issue of needing to gimp the hunter for a valuable resource they can bring.