Pets having health adds nothing to gameplay.

[DrivaMain]

Pets should be either be invulnerable or have auto respawn. The latter can be done if DE doesn't like 100% Vacuum uptime, which is the hill DE choose to die on.

AI fix? Yeah I don't trust DE are willing to invest on that venture. Smart AI demands powerful hardware, which a lot of the player base doesn't have the luxury of.

I can give command crew an exception to this because they can defend themselves with powerful gear. But pets do not have that.

[TheKurtiStryke]

17 hours ago, Reaverhart said:

I dont want to have to revive a wandering idiot every 5 seconds so that i can pick up loot. What exactly is empowering about having a dead pet every 5 seconds. It adds nothing to gameplay having to revive a pet make them immortal already

yeah! i'll agree! reviving them every 5 seconds it's annoying....... hey, atleast it's not as if we couldn't use the revive and after their health drops to 0 for 2/3 times, they are permanently dead(because they have terrible survivability with low health and armor) and we are forced to kill ourselves to get them back- OH WHAIT! those are the sentinels.

[Larrell]

17 hours ago, Reaverhart said:

I dont want to have to revive a wandering idiot every 5 seconds so that i can pick up loot.

Take Link Health. If the warframe has good armour take Link Armour and if they have good shield, take Link Shield. Take the mod that gives them health when you hit in melee (pack leader?) and they get almost fully healed per hit on an enemy assuming you can hit something in melee.
I'd like it if pack leader was simply tied to damage (so ranged worked too) but 'eh'.

[Cloud]

18 hours ago, Reaverhart said:

I dont want to have to revive a wandering idiot every 5 seconds so that i can pick up loot. What exactly is empowering about having a dead pet every 5 seconds. It adds nothing to gameplay having to revive a pet make them immortal already, you literally just released one that is immortal and i am willing to bet ANYTHING its one of the most used pets in the game now. I literally named mine immortal vacuum. vacuum being the number one reason to have a pet in the first place, if you dont believe me try playing warframe without vacuum, if you say its easy go to steel path where drops matter. 

Most I am asking the question what is lost if pets are immortal? and is what is lost something that players like in the first place? 

Does anyone like reviving their pets? anyone? does anyone actively think it makes gameplay more engaging?

What exactly is overpowered about a pet not dying? 
Answer to this used to be infinite vacuum but that is in the game now, and we are back with the old everyone runs carrier conundrum.

I belive the only reason why pets have health on warframe is for their damage and cc abilities. Of course they are not good for strong enemies, but let's face it, 50% of the content in the game is made out of wet paper enemies. 

Having a good modded pet can give you exactly what new AI crewmates are giving you right now in RJ... the game plays itself.

Now, is it a good reason imo? Not so much. I don't belive being able to solo low-mid level content is such a threat for the balance of the game.

What would I do? make them invisible to enemies except if they have some kind of low cc ability, and lose their corporeality.

[Gahrzerkire]

 

15 hours ago, Yamazuki said:

Nothing, because if it really mattered, DE would've nerfed the loadouts that already make companions never die, especially given one of the most played Warframes achieves this. It's also not as if Warframes are "balanced' [lol] around whether they make companions effectively immortal or not. They even buffed Wisp's ability to keep companions alive back when they made the changes to healing objectives.

The only reason they have HP is because DE intentionally removes functions that are standard in other games to pad out the modding system as a form of "progression" or to shove solutions behind grind. There are the mods specific to different types of companions, the aura, the arcane, the companions on Deimos, and who knows what else in the future.

What do you mean "solutions" where is this thing that makes my pet immortal and doesnt force me to use melee all game long? Not a single pet in the game doesnt get completely destroyed when taken into any legitimate end game, and the pet becomes a massive annoyance as a result. 

[(PSN)Unstar]

If playing with pets you don't need to revive is important to you, there are 3 different kinds of Vulpaphyla you can use, as well as Djinn.  It's your call to choose what functionality you want to prioritize.  As you've noted, you can also heal pets with melee, and you could use Auras to enhance their survivability, or you could alter your play style to protect them during gameplay.

You have all these options available to you.  If you choose not to use them, that's a valid choice, but it's a choice you should own.

[Gahrzerkire]

49 minutes ago, (PSN)Unstar said:

If playing with pets you don't need to revive is important to you, there are 3 different kinds of Vulpaphyla you can use, as well as Djinn.  It's your call to choose what functionality you want to prioritize.  As you've noted, you can also heal pets with melee, and you could use Auras to enhance their survivability, or you could alter your play style to protect them during gameplay.

You have all these options available to you.  If you choose not to use them, that's a valid choice, but it's a choice you should own.

Oh dude I own the crap out of my decision. Its just a stupid choice that shouldnt be in the game because from a design perspective it only forces you to play melee if you are using specific pets, up to the point where they get oneshot then it doesnt matter, or you get staggered and then it also doesnt matter. So basically some pets invalidate themselves, whereas others never do.
 

Its a player choice with no depth. Do you want to be annoyed constantly reviving a pet? or do you want to just play the game? (fun fact pre vacuum no one cared about pets or even used them or talked about them seriously, because vacuum didn't exist.) (and again there are like 4 useful pet abilities, and 3 of them can be used on the immortal pet, so screw cat's eye, and screw using other pets, which brings me to the point of the post in the first place; pets shouldnt have HP because the majority of them are invalidated by it even tho they are S#&$ anyways) 

[(XBOX)Apoll0 666]

If they removed pet hp they'd need to add mods to make up for the loss of like.. half of the companion survivability mods that'd be removed. I do know that for a while there was rumored to be a pet rework in the future so it may be taken into consideration honestly. The amount of times I see someones weird pet name flash on my screen and seeing their corpse teleport to follow their owner..

[(XBOX)Apoll0 666]

1 minute ago, Reaverhart said:

Oh dude I own the crap out of my decision. Its just a stupid choice that shouldnt be in the game because from a design perspective it only forces you to play melee if you are using specific pets, up to the point where they get oneshot then it doesnt matter, or you get staggered and then it also doesnt matter. So basically pets some pets invalidate themselves, whereas others never do.
 

Its a player choice with no depth. Do you want to be annoyed constantly reviving a pet? or do you want to just play the game? (fun fact pre vacuum no one cared about pets or even used them or talked about them seriously, because vacuum didn't exist.) (and again there are like 4 useful pet abilities, and 3 of them can be used on the immortal pet, so screw cat's eye) 

Don't know why this guy was defending pets having hp, it adds nothing to the game and is detrimental to the whole companion concept

[(PSN)ErydisTheLucario]

On 2021-03-23 at 12:04 PM, vanaukas said:

I laugh a lot when eeryone talks about panzer (viral), but all vulpaphylas has the "inmortal" mechanic.

You already know why Panzer is always brought up lol. Everyone likes the free viral procs.

[Gahrzerkire]

1 hour ago, (PSN)ErydisTheLucario said:

You already know why Panzer is always brought up lol. Everyone likes the free viral procs.

Love how when the devs reworked status they just were like HRM what if we made the combo that was OP BETTER (viral slash) and the combo that was worse (corrosive) WORSE. HRM. 

Like did they do the #*!%ing math that half enemy health = 2x damage, and their new version of viral was just 3x damage??? Ah yes, that'll balance the slash procs. 

[TARINunit9]

Everything about pets was balanced around gameplay circa 2014

Huge chunks of Warframe need an update -- if they were capable of doing World of Warcraft style expansions, I think it would greatly help the game

[Lutesque]

On 2021-03-23 at 9:41 AM, Reaverhart said:

you literally just released one that is immortal and i am willing to bet ANYTHING its one of the most used pets in the game now. I literally named mine immortal vacuum. vacuum being the number one reason to have a pet in the first place,

Wait... There's an Immortal pet now... ? 😮 Who is this creature ?

On 2021-03-23 at 9:53 AM, Reaverhart said:

what you mean the thing that forces me to play melee to keep my pet alive? im good.

Yeah I'm not down with Primed Pack Leader either... It definitely works as Advertised.... Your pet will not do.... However the price to pay for this convenience is to never use Guns ever again 

Also why not just ask for Universal Vacuum ? 🤔

[Tesseract7777]

I think the wrong statements, answers and questions entirely are being made here. 

What we need to ask is: What does DE really want from pets? What is there actual purpose in the game? 

Are they supposed to be good for combat, or just utility? Right now they have essentially been deemed by the community as only for utility, but does DE want to embrace that, or try to make pets something more useful in combat, where having stats and survivability actually makes more sense? 

What do they want? That's the question. What is DE Steve's actual vision for them? If it's for them to be useful for combat as well, I'm okay with health and other mechanics staying, but they need a lot of work to be considered useful for that, starting with the fact this is a horde based game, and even a pet that is effective at killing is going to have KPS at a snails pace compared to tenno because they mainly kill one target at a time. 

[(PSN)Onder6099]

20 hours ago, Tesseract7777 said:

I think the wrong statements, answers and questions entirely are being made here. 

What we need to ask is: What does DE really want from pets? What is there actual purpose in the game? 

Are they supposed to be good for combat, or just utility? Right now they have essentially been deemed by the community as only for utility, but does DE want to embrace that, or try to make pets something more useful in combat, where having stats and survivability actually makes more sense? 

What do they want? That's the question. What is DE Steve's actual vision for them? If it's for them to be useful for combat as well, I'm okay with health and other mechanics staying, but they need a lot of work to be considered useful for that, starting with the fact this is a horde based game, and even a pet that is effective at killing is going to have KPS at a snails pace compared to tenno because they mainly kill one target at a time. 

Isn’t that our purpose to figure out?

[HadeZx]

should make sentinels invincible too. enough with being one shot

yeah slap on the primed regen to expand its life 2minute longer

[Shinyah]

In Steal Path missions, companions are wet noodles even with the best tanky builds.
The main role of companions is a support bringing buffs and utility (vacuum, radar) but in "high" level content, they are totally useless. It's sad.

[Tesseract7777]

2 hours ago, (PSN)Onder6099 said:

Isn’t that our purpose to figure out?

It's our job to tell them what we want. 

It's their job to provide us with a clear direction for what the purpose of pets are in the game. according to Steve Sinclair's grand vision(tm) for Warframe. 

[Zimzala]

3 minutes ago, Tesseract7777 said:

It's our job to tell them what we want. 

It's their job to provide us with a clear direction for what the purpose of pets are in the game. according to Steve Sinclair's grand vision(tm) for Warframe. 

My Job has nothing to with playing WF.

IMO, my role in the overall transaction is to play the game and if I enjoy it, play it some more.

There is not, IMO/IME, any other onus on me as player of games.

It's DE's Job to try and make a fun game that turns a profit, not give us Book Reports.

[Tesseract7777]

5 minutes ago, Zimzala said:

My Job has nothing to with playing WF.

IMO, my role in the overall transaction is to play the game and if I enjoy it, play it some more.

There is not, IMO/IME, any other onus on me as player of games.

It's DE's Job to try and make a fun game that turns a profit, not give us Book Reports.

Well that's kind of my point though, I don't mean to make it sound like we as players are obligated to do anything but play. 

We don't have to say anything. If we want them to change anything, then the only responsibility we have is to say: "This is what I want! Please make it happen if you can!". Or if we don't like something, say we don't like it, so they know. 

I agree though, that's actually my main point. It isn't our job to do a book report for them and figure out for DE what pets place in the game should be and how to fix it. That's THEIR job, as you stated. Not ours. They need to figure out what pets place in the game is supposed to be, communicate that to us clearly, and fix them based on those metrics. 

Right now, their place in the game is ill defined, and that is not the community's fault, or responsibility to fix, or provide answers for, especially when we don't have clear direction from DE as to what their role is supposed to be. They experiment all over the place, but there is no clear direction. 

I upvoted your post because I agree. My job is not to give feedback, I just give it because I love the game and want it to get better, I feel no obligation to do so. At the end of the day fixing WF is the job of the people who get paid to do it as their job. 

[Jarriaga]

Having less than 10K HP, 10K armor, 10K shields, 500% power strength adds nothing to gameplay.

Because why on earth would I want anything other than the most convenient, hands-off, automated, stress-free and worriless experience? Why do I have to waste mod slots on pet survival instead of convenience, enemy radar, and vacuum? Link mods are useless in my min-maxed Rolling Guard build anyway.

While we're at it, why do I have to chose between a beast companion and a sentinel? I should be able to use both, and their vacuums and enemy radars should stack. And why can't I give Charm and Cat's Eye to the Panzer? Why do I have to invest in them individually? It's tedious and a waste of forma.

Because why stop at just immortal pets? 

[Zimzala]

Just now, Tesseract7777 said:

Well that's kind of my point though, I don't mean to make it sound like we as players are obligated to do anything but play. 

We don't have to say anything. If we want them to change anything, then the only responsibility we have is to say: "This is what I want! Please make it happen if you can!". Or if we don't like something, say we don't like it, so they know. 

I agree though, that's actually my main point. It isn't our job to do a book report for them and figure out for DE what pets place in the game should be and how to fix it. That's THEIR job, as you stated. Not ours. They need to figure out what pets place in the game is supposed to be, communicate that to us clearly, and fix them based on those metrics. 

Right now, their place in the game is ill defined, and that is not the community's fault, or responsibility to fix. 

No, I don't think DE should be 'forced by player peer pressure' to make Book Reports, any more than Players should be.

I do not agree that any Game Maker has any onus on them to produce these detailed plans and reports.

Curious minds might want them, that's fine, I love data, and if someone at DE decides/wants to make more data available, great, but no, IMO, the company has no onus to do so.

There is nothing to fix.

Some curious people always want more information than is available, that's just reality, not something to fix.

[Tesseract7777]

Just now, Zimzala said:

No, I don't think DE should be 'forced by player peer pressure' to make Book Reports, any more than Players should be.

I do not agree that any Game Maker has any onus on them to produce these detailed plans and reports.

Curious minds might want them, that's fine, I love data, and if someone at DE decides/wants to make more data available, great, but no, IMO, the company has no onus to do so.

There is nothing to fix.

Some curious people always want more information than is available, that's just reality, not something to fix.

Again, I think you are missing the point I am trying making here, I don't think we actually disagree. I'm not asking for a physical "book report" just using a similar metaphor to you or what have you. 

I'm not asking for a bunch of hard data even. Just a "pets are supposed to be mainly for utility", or "they are supposed to be more for combat", or "they really are supposed to be capable of both". That's what I'm asking for. What do they want from them? It's really just a simple question, and something that helps when people who do wish to give feedback are giving it. Because we want to know: What is the very basic, general direction they wish to go with this game system? Taking that into account helps us give feedback that won't waste our time, knowing it doesn't line up with the developer vision. 

And by the book report metaphor, I mean it is literally their JOB to work on systems in the game, and improve them based on player feedback in order to improve player retention and engagement. I think you have misunderstood both of my posts entirely so far, with all respect. I don't think I am saying what you think I'm saying. 

[Zimzala]

12 minutes ago, Tesseract7777 said:

Again, I think you are missing the point I am trying making here, I don't think we actually disagree. I'm not asking for a physical "book report" just using a similar metaphor to you or what have you. 

I'm not asking for a bunch of hard data even. Just a "pets are supposed to be mainly for utility", or "they are supposed to be more for combat", or "they really are supposed to be capable of both". That's what I'm asking for. What do they want from them? It's really just a simple question, and something that helps when people who do wish to give feedback are giving it. Because we want to know: What is the very basic, general direction they wish to go with this game system? Taking that into account helps us give feedback that won't waste our time, knowing it doesn't line up with the developer vision. 

And by the book report metaphor, I mean it is literally their JOB to work on systems in the game, and improve them based on player feedback in order to improve player retention and engagement. I think you have misunderstood both of my posts entirely so far, with all respect. I don't think I am saying what you think I'm saying. 

OK, I think I see your point of view and I can somewhat agree that the 'intent' of some things could be a good thing to convey, for the reasons you put forth, ie. if a pet (or other system) is supposed to be X and I was expecting Y I don't have to waste my resources to go get one.

I can agree with the basics there, but here's the rub, where the jaded, cranky old geek voice steps in...

We both know if DE says "pets are there to give you a little extra fluff, for funsies, nothing more", as an example, IME, the player base would lose it's mind over telling DE just how pets (or other system) are supposed to be this or that, should not cost as much if they have no TTK value, etc., etc...

That's my real underlying point...no matter what DE says, it will get twisted one way or another through hype and hate into something by which to hold their 'feet to the fire'.

Then, if said system does not do exactly what players thought was said, in the time frame they prefer, well...

So, IMO, it is always a no-win for game makers to reveal anything ahead of time, at all, really, other than, 'new stuff coming'.

As to letting us know, at least in WF, the intent of a system introduced, the first thing I see in my minds eye is someone like me twisting it to do something else, for fun because I like that sort of thing, entering a mission and being told I am doing it wrong, because I don't follow the 'instructions'. 🤣

Since we have to figure so much out in WF, I would just prefer pets (or whatever other systems) are there for ME to figure out how I want to use them, like the rest of WF, but I can get behind DE saying "we added this thing to generally be used in this way", so we know the basic intent as players.

[Lutesque]

On 2021-03-24 at 7:02 PM, (PSN)Unstar said:

You have all these options available to you.  If you choose not to use them, that's a valid choice, but it's a choice you should own.

As long as you don't have Preferences.... Right ? 😐

On 2021-03-24 at 9:58 PM, TARINunit9 said:

Everything about pets was balanced around gameplay circa 2014

Didn't Pets die Slot back then too ? 

1 hour ago, Jarriaga said:

And why can't I give Charm and Cat's Eye to the Panzer?

Hang on... Would Charm still work while Panzer tries to Revive itself ?

1 hour ago, Jarriaga said:

Why do I have to invest in them individually? It's tedious and a waste of forma.

6 Forma per Pet ....

Yeah they are a MASSIVE resource Drain...