Can only DPS at about 40% of normal with new pet aggro changes

When the pet is tanking, who is performing the "busy tasks" of tanking?

I'm open to active tanking abilities for pets. Not really sure what the point of a 'tanking' pet is if they can't hold agro.

I'm not entirely sure what you're suggesting here, but it probably makes more sense to consider a pet's DPS attributed to the owner.

Irrational to think that my pet should hold aggro properly? Doubtful.

I know plenty of people you have 'tanked' for and they view your tanking as not very good. I didn't even call you a bad tank, I was merely drawing a comparison that Triton is the poster child for pet Tanking which would show how you and Babble would be upset with pet tanking. If you choose to associate that with bad tanking that is your issue, not mine.

As to ROI tanks? Does not bother me one bit if they think I am irrational about pet issues. They can think what they want on the issue I am not their owner...

Babble is comparing Warrior DPS to Mage DPS. The Warrior tanks in that scenario while the pet tanks in the Mage's scenario. So comparing the Mage DPS to the Warrior DPS is not apples to apples. He should be comparing the tank to the tank, and I doubt he would like that comparison from a DPS perspective.

Plenty of Tanks say that until it would happen though. Then it would open up the same argument in a different way.

Am I reading this wrong? It sounds like you're saying that when comparing the dps of a pet class to the dps of a regular class, you should just consider the dps generated by the character, and not factor in the pet at all? Is this justifiable in a way that I'm missing? I'm not bothered by it but that seems a bit surprising to hear.

Logically, it seems like if you want to compare a class, even if they aren't apples to apples, dps should be the sum damage created by the class. A mage pet is not only easy to parse, but also an obvious benefit brought about by the mage. So to me, a mage's dps includes the damage caused by that mage's pets. I think what people are doing here is taking the total dps of the mage and pets, and comparing that to the warrior. Do you have a justification for suggesting to do otherwise? I'm not against mages as far as I know. I hope they fix your agro soon.

They pet tanked one mob the Entire Time I was there. While we killed the adds in Brath what are you talking about ?
Go read the posts I have done the last week all over this forum on how I feel about what they need to do about the pet aggro nerf .

I feel you are irrational because instead of helping this issue be fixed years ago in underfoot you told me I should learn how to play which you were mistaken about and that it should be fixed on the tanks end which Elidroth tried for 5 years and the only thing that made it a non issue was warlord's grasp and our rage of the forsaken being op Oh and phantom actually working right everytime .
When it has been a Servant issue this entire time . For 5 years instead of utility or dps we got hate ability bloat . Thanks for that ...
And welcome to the nerf club the whole reason any tanks even complained about Servants since Nov was because the abilities that fixed the problem got nerfed allowing the issue to pop up again and pop up even more when they did the pet tanking for groups change.

And good tanks don't have aggro issues well they sure shouldn't with the ability to increase all hate by 175% while doing 30 k hate instant cast aa as a base ability lol. Heck even bad tanks shouldn't have an issue with those kind of numbers .

Warrior is a Tanking class, Magician is a DPS class. So comparing a DPS class with a meatshield to a Tank class with a baseball bat is not comparing apples to apples. It's illogical to do so. Just like anyone saying a pet tanks better then them.

The portion Babble is upset with is he tanks very well but doesn't do the DPS of the Magician while tanking. He feels if our pets are tanking we should be brought down to a Warrior's level of DPS just because our pet is tanking. As I said the pet should be the one he is comparing to, because that is the actual role they are both filling. And for comparison he would not want to have our pet's level of DPS at any point, whether it is tanking or not.

Well, assuming that they fix agro, and your pet can tank for a group in a manner that will suffice, is there any advantage in your mind to a group picking up a tank class to tank vs a mage to tank? Maybe that will help the other side of this see the part that's hard for them to see.

I think people are justifying that the only point to a tank class in that world would be raids, and in that case, the changes allowing mage pets to tank for melee would sort of make all other tank classes not as worthwhile as they should be.

Irrational is trying to help a class that cries for nerfs on a monthly basis about your class. Irrational is assuming Tanks will ever accept pets being able to tank, and be open to them losing power in order for pets to gain power. Irrational is trying to have a discussion with the same class trying to nerf your class for over a decade.

So, based on that last point, I am irrational. However, that is not necessarily a personal problem its more of a problem with the community then anything else. Why would I try and fix your class when you helped to get my class nerfed because you can not find a way to fix your class? It would seem you chose to not use your time wisely with Developers or asked for things that were unnecessary if it took you 5 years to fix something and you still did not get it done properly.

I didn't get you a hate ability bloat because I didn't actively speak to anyone about your class. I would not be able to have a conversation on Warriors as I do not know them well enough to pretend to be able to get you anything. Not my job to help get your class abilities, I have a class of my own to try and speak for to make sure we do not crumble yet again under nerfs.

I'm glad you take pleasure in nerfing a class you play though. It does speak volumes about your character and credibility. Also seems a bit irrational as well, but that's just me.

You can see my posts on the topic, having pets be able to tank with PCs in range is a dumb change. Makes no sense at all and I would have never tried to get that for Pets. One of the dumbest design moves EQ has made over the last decade if not since the game was created.

Pets lack a lot of what it takes to actively tank for a group. Snap aggro and AE aggro are 2 huge things they simply do not have. As it stands the best exp is to group up mobs and burn them down and just plow through zones, pets can't do that. If that Wizard jumps aggro and gets summoned the Wizard tanks the mob until the mob is dead, no snap aggro.

A normal tank will always be head and shoulders over a pet in all situations. Even a moderate tank will perform better then the top Mage controlling their pet while tanking mobs.

Congratulations on missing my entire point.

I agree that ae killing is the best way to go, and by a long shot. I think the issue people face is that it takes a long time for a tank to get the gear/skill/etc to do it well in some cases. You could argue that warriors with no time to bleed can do it pretty well with a bit less gear, but that can be shaky too depending on the group. The other factor is getting a group to that point that is suited for it sometimes can be hard. Still, they do have a definitive advantage in this area, so there you have it.

I'm actually okay with mage pets being able to tank for melees as long as there are advantages that will just always be there to having a real tank do it, like better agro, or an environment that is very conducive to adds.

Maybe someone should make a thread on the issues tanks have, but as for this thread:

I would (and have) chosen the competent tank every time. Having a real tank makes a group better. Having pet tank is a slight upgrade to a tank merc (based on the few weeks it was viable). Real tanks can handle adds, snap aggro and take more of a beating. They're also capable of easily positioning mobs to meet the needs of a group.

Is there any advantage for a group to pick a tank instead of a magician pet?

Well, I remember doing some merc task where six bokon mobs came at once. The tank handled all six at once, and never died. Now if my magician pet was the tank, it could tank two with a high level of degree and difficulty. Three would kill the magician pet. And six (triple that amount of what a magician pet could do) was successfully handled by the tank.

Now. I am no expert. But if you told me option A was the player who could tank six mobs at once, and option B was a pet who had a 60/40 chance of tanking two mobs at once.... I am just sayin...

Thats not the norm tho. The advantage of picking a pet tank over a warrior is you can then fill the warriors spot with another DPS.

Which zones constitute what is normal? Can you give a few examples of missions that are better done with a mage/mage pet and another dps in that tank slot than with a warrior in the tank slot, and any dps class to replace the previously required mage?

edit - I realize that smaller groups may benefit more from the mage, and that if the group has a valid puller it opens up a lot more, so this is a bit hard to do, but I think that it makes the case better when you attach it to the game with examples.

Literally all I read is #itching an moaning mages can no longer solo "CURRENT" group named mobs.

Get the #uck outta here with that garbage GET A GRP .. GO KILL like the rest of us. Thee only class in the entire game that SHOULD be able to solo = Necro period.

I'll never for one .. EVER .. feel sorry for any mage that cries they can no longer solo / molo current named grp targets ..

Your class is designed for solo / molo ability yes (Not solo / molo named mobs) for zone wide garbage / trash ..

How do you for one , not know if your class "WAS" broken .. before an just now is fixed / tuned to how the Dev's TRULY want your class balanced out finally ?

As has been pointed out, the "Everquest This is your class write up" from years ago is no longer a valid point of view for your own class (no class is now defined as those write ups)

Get over it , man up .. grp up .. or quit .. and stop your #itching ..

-Whulf , Povar. Triton.

Wait, what? I know some enchanters, beastlords, paladins, shadow knights, shaman, monks and others who would be unhappy to hear that sentiment...

you forgot wizzys bards and druids

Your point was understood clearly, but rejected.

Tanking is an active role. DPS is an active role. Healing is an active role. Pick a role in EQ - it's an active one. The days of /attack on (and similarly, /pet kill) are behind us.

As such, if a pet is tanking for others, a pet's owner should probably be actively supporting that function in the same "busy" way that tanks actively tank... i.e. juggling defensive abilities and mashing aggro buttons.

This probably looks a little different for pet owners, but you get the idea. "Going full burn on DPS while my pet tanks np" seems to have met its day. We already saw pet healing, aegis and AC changes in support of this. Follow the yellow brick road a little and I submit this aggro change may not be an accident.

Now you're probably thinking this is a huge nerf, and maybe it is just a "whoops". Certainly wouldn't be the first time. But if you open your mind a little you might see there's an opportunity.

See, now if you are properly "tanking via pet" you can be entitled to proper tanking tools; E.G. defensive abilities, and both AE and "snap" agro (assuming this means ranged instant hate abilities like Terror/Crush lines)

I couldn't disagree more. This has enabled group options that didn't previously exist and fixed a long standing major issue with the Beastlord class.

Look, I get it. Healing sucks. I hate doing it. Way easier to just pop a merc and go to town. And if you're a DPS class you want to be doing DPS, not splitting time between DPS and supporting the tank. I'd imagine folks who fit that playstyle chose the Druid class. But you know what? Tanking isn't all sunshine and flower fields either. Tanks would love to go all out on DPS while we tank, but that's just not the way the role is designed. None of us get to have our cake and eat it too.

All that said, if this is "all part of the plan" then DGC has put the cart before the horse and as a result pet aggro is broken. The hate abilities should have gone in first. They didn't, and that is NOT cool.

Send them my way, I'll keepem straight up for ya all day twice on sunday .