Players want to have the control in their hands. Yet those same players who want mechanical control of their characters are resisting a very basic change that gives your character more control. Maybe I want to order my follower to stay for any reason, from RP to convenience. Does it matter why I want to manipulate my environment?
The PK consideration is not zero, but it is effectively zero. Contrary to the storm people are brewing up, this feature will not effect balance in any meaningful way. In very insignificant ways, yes, but hardly worth this level of discussion. Grasping at straws there.
Players want to make the game have greater accessibility, more quality of life features. Well, this is one, and a very basic one at that. In fact, I think we should have a lot more follower commands. Followers are one of the few aspects of the game you can develop that make the game enjoyable when you don't have many other players around.
No quality of life feature is "pointless". By their very nature, they make the game more accessible in some way. We should be doing dozens of these small, easy changes.
The coding aspect is negligible. Not even worth considering for such a simple thing.
Why such vehement resistance?
This is why the game is so damn inflexible and can't develop anything quality of life related.
If you can't allow such an easy thing, how are you going to cope with the much more drastic quality of life measures this game will have to go through if it wants to continue?
Other than rangers? Cant be DK charmies, that would expire. That leaves what, cabal pets?
Purchased pets. Necros. I'm mostly coming at it from the perspective of either of those: why shouldn't my professional soldier be competent enough to obey a "wait here" command? Why shouldn't my zombies, that I have direct mental control over, hold position if ordered?
I have to agree with Celerity here - the level of resistance to a simple command that gives more player control and interactivity, with extremely minimal impact on PK balance, is disheartening.
I would say PK balance. For shamans a ranger is nightmare. If they can't plague the pets ...
Ok, from what I have seen, the only real disadvantage for this is the plague issue. I would like to add another, using cabal ground to protect pets. If you have your pets stay inside the cabal, no one can kill them. Stay command should have a risk.
So my proposal is this:
Quote
Stay: The stay command will allow you to order a single of your pets to stay in the room. You can order all of your pets to stay in a room, but you will have to order each of them individually to stay. If your pet is affected by a disease such as plague, he will be fearful to be left alone and will refuse. As every living creature fears dying alone. When ordered to stay, your pet will eagerly wait your return, forgetting to hide in any bush you order him to.
@Unknown Criminal @f0xx @Kyzarius
I'm still ambivalent regarding Blademasters and rangers. Since the blademaster can't change their stance. They could go deathweaver, and have the ranger quickly drop the pets and use arrows. Once the blademaster changes to anti-arrow stance, they can just Auto-Fire and get the pets...
Perhaps it should just be disallowed when blooded and ignore the disease thing.
The argument doesn't amount to much. If a ranger doesn't want his pets plagued, he can already not use them in a fight against a shaman. How does this change anything? If the ranger uses pets, they can get plagued as normal. This change doesn't change how easy/difficult it is to plague a ranger pet. If the ranger has time to separate their pets and hide them before a fight, it is no different than releasing them or pass dooring.
It amounts to quality of life AFTER the battle in retrieving pets if you put the work in BEFORE the battle to hide them somewhere (which already is possible, so even that is not a balance issue).
Plagued pets are typically just released if they are a burden anyways. Having to run around to find a place to have your pets stay so they can wait it off for 10 ticks isn't really a feasible thing in an active PK environment. If it is feasible, any other tactic of separating yourself from your pets is at least as feasible, thus not having an effect on balance.
If I flee out while the pets are still engaged, I've separated. If I flee out and use pass door, I've separated. If I flee out and use stay, I've separated. If I flee out and release, I've separated.
Especially if you put a lag on stay, running around and finding a place to 'save' your pet while it is plagued is not worth plaguing yourself typically. Plus it puts you completely on the defensive. In fact, poor tactics revolving around people trying to use stay might in fact benefit the OTHER class taking advantage of your trying to micromanage something that shouldn't really be micromanaged in this way.
This all really amounts to almost nothing though, as I said in the last post. It gives no competitive edge to either side from what is already offered in game.
And @mya, living things often DO want to die alone. Not only in humans (walking into the desert, ever heard of a suicide in front of someone?), but many mammals as well will separate from their group if they think they are going to die.
It may be argued that it is more common to want to die alone in higher mammals.
I also really do not get all the comments stating this command would be OP. I totally agree with Celerity here, this is not a PK buff, it is a QoL buff. Those opposing it are probably extra against the idea because it comes from UC who is obviously trying to make something better for a class he likes to play. If anyone else suggested it would people have objected so heavily?
You can already choose to leave your pets behind as a ranger, you can simply release them entirely, or you can use pass door to leave them somewhere "safe" or even in your cabal @Mya. This change would not introduce anything new to the PK front that we have not already seen, it simply gives the ranger more options as to where to leave his pets. It might even make it easier for people to kill ranger pets if they get lazy and leave them somewhere out in the open. Classes with plague also have summon, if you really want to kill the pets you can still do so regardless if there was a stay command.
I repeat, this is hardly a PK buff at all folks, and if there was any lag or a timer on the command then it is almost a nerf :P
I would suggest stay has a 2 round lag and a small mana cost of 20 or something and a 6 hour cooldown. You can either stay or stay all. If you just want to stay one pet you can only do it every 6 hours, but you have the option to stay all in one shot if you want, the downside would be if you walk back into the room with them they will follow you, so you could accidentally screw up your own stay if you chose a bad location or got chased or summoned back to your pets.
Two round lag, 20 mana, and 6 hour cooldown? What is this, berserk? A one round lag per command per pet (order, follow) is more than sufficient for what we are talking about here. That is two rounds total per pet to stay then retrieve.
You know what else would be neat? Pets don't assist on 'stay'. Maybe they don't wimpy either.
If you can't allow such an easy thing, how are you going to cope with the much more drastic quality of life measures this game will have to go through if it wants to continue?
Really, really disappointing.
Is it just me or does being chastised by @Celerity make you want to hang your head and say sorry?
I'm all for such a small cosmetic change. Add a blood timer to it. IG you're attacked your minions seek to aid you automatically and will return to you.
Otherwise it's hardly broken in pk. See my earlier post.
After reading @Celerity and @Manual Labour's posts I have been swayed. You make good points.
I also admit that when I see a suggestion from UC I always think in terms of "he is only trying to change this for some PK edge". Although that isn't just specific to UC but anyone who wants changes to a class they appear to be playing.