Old Hunter...what's new??

[pieceofmeat]

Originally Posted by JakQuickFootOp

Why should a hunter participate in rvr ? i hate fort wars its boring as f**k. is there any problem using confu ? ok ill not even skill it next time.
plus hunters are meant for hunting not fort war. oh wait do you know how actually hunters should be played ? read description. we use pets. we dont hit like jeweled marks plus 2dsr and crimson amu is all i have and almost shit long bow.

This game is rvr, not necessarily fort wars but rvr none the less, all classes are made for war in this game, none are made to be purely lone hunters/gankers.

No, cofuse is fine and vital in rvr as well as the perfect gank power and a hunter is expected to provide that kind suport to his allies in rvr.

Pets are fairly useless in most rvr fights, it can even be a liability to your allies if you are not careful.

Looking back i cant remember any hunter of significance that used a pet build much and there is reason for that. If you are lvl 60 and carry a pet, be sure to be labeled more as noob and a ganker in best case, whether your consider it apart of you class or not. There just is no reason for a pet build other than to gank easy or to power level.

[JakQuickFootOp]

Originally Posted by pieceofmeat

This game is rvr, not necessarily fort wars but rvr none the less, all classes are made for war in this game, none are made to be purely lone hunters/gankers.

No, cofuse is fine and vital in rvr as well as the perfect gank power and a hunter is expected to provide that kind suport to his allies in rvr.

Pets are fairly useless in most rvr fights, it can even be a liability to your allies if you are not careful.

Looking back i cant remember any hunter of significance that used a pet build much and there is reason for that. If you are lvl 60 and carry a pet, be sure to be labeled more as noob and a ganker in best case, whether your consider it apart of you class or not. There just is no reason for a pet build other than to gank easy or to power level.

fine i agree but do you actually know reason of pets ? hunters are meant to use them. even in description its clear plus ever played other games ? the same class requires pet. Oh and forgot to say i like petless style but i was testing things on pet so i used pet. nothing to say other than that depends on what you understand.
best,

[pieceofmeat]

Originally Posted by JakQuickFootOp

fine i agree but do you actually know reason of pets ? hunters are meant to use them. even in description its clear plus ever played other games ? the same class requires pet. Oh and forgot to say i like petless style but i was testing things on pet so i used pet. nothing to say other than that depends on what you understand.
best,

Yes pets are ment to be used of course, but the implimentation is a total failure in this game since they can just barely be used in war is totally OP in most 1v1 situations.

Maybe it more correct to say petless hunters are OP, because really the class shouldnt even be playable without a pet if it was done correctly.
It would feel wrong to change it after 8 years and all time and money people spent on their petless hunters, then again, it wouldnt be the first time they would ruin a class for its players.

[Comp]

You can be a pet hunter and be very useful in fort fights so don't throw the baby out with the bath water. The irritation usually comes because most hunters when they skill pets end up choosing "Control Monster" and they go grab the biggest troll they can find - those suckers get in the way.

Historically I've always been a pet hunter. I personally have felt that it's just the way a hunter was meant to be played and leaving a complete tree unskilled seems kinda wonky to me. From time to time I monkey around, build out a petless config but usually end up swinging back to a pet.

The hunter is an interesting class to play. By-and-large we are squishy, few wacks and we are dead. I think what's been a bit of a shock to the community is what happens when a ranged class is allowed to dawn major damage dealing jewelry. I have high damage jewelry, but don't wear it - it feels wrong to me when I deal a 1.3k hit from 35m away...I shouldn't be able to do that....if time allows I'll skill me up a warrior, dawn that stuff and roll up to folks like a crazed lunatic...

[Robasiewicz]

Originally Posted by Compost

Historically I've always been a pet hunter. I personally have felt that it's just the way a hunter was meant to be played and leaving a complete tree unskilled seems kinda wonky to me. From time to time I monkey around, build out a petless config but usually end up swinging back to a pet.

I think what's been a bit of a shock to the community is what happens when a ranged class is allowed to dawn major damage dealing jewelry. I have high damage jewelry, but don't wear it - it feels wrong to me when I deal a 1.3k hit from 35m away...I shouldn't be able to do that....if time allows I'll skill me up a warrior, dawn that stuff and roll up to folks like a crazed lunatic...

I've been doing the opposite. trying out a pet build and going petless after a few days. true, my ability to utilize my pet were severely lacking and overall i'm kinda of a noob, but a pet didn't seem to be much fun.

Also, it used to frustrate me greatly when a jeweled hunder wrecked me hard, when i just barely scratched him. It was also annoying I couldn't even finish of and enemy in RvR due to pathetic dmg.
Then i thought that hunter's role in RvR isn't to deliver final blows unexpectedly, assassin style, but trolling my opponents.
After putting this into practice, most of the frustration went away and overall enjoyment sky-rocketed.

[godismyjudge]

Originally Posted by Robasiewicz

I've been doing the opposite. trying out a pet build and going petless after a few days. true, my ability to utilize my pet were severely lacking and overall i'm kinda of a noob, but a pet didn't seem to be much fun.

Also, it used to frustrate me greatly when a jeweled hunder wrecked me hard, when i just barely scratched him. It was also annoying I couldn't even finish of and enemy in RvR due to pathetic dmg.
Then i thought that hunter's role in RvR isn't to deliver final blows unexpectedly, assassin style, but trolling my opponents.
After putting this into practice, most of the frustration went away and overall enjoyment sky-rocketed.

You can get Specialist 4 with and without a pet, you can also get 5-9 dex from sb tree at the same time with a pet, so I don't see a decrease in damage here. If you want WM skills, that is the issue, it is impossible* to get them with pet and damage passive from long bow tree, which is sad ... on the other hand, you get the damage offseted by the WM dexterity passive, more or less.

[Robasiewicz]

Originally Posted by godismyjudge

You can get Specialist 4 with and without a pet, you can also get 5-9 dex from sb tree at the same time with a pet, so I don't see a decrease in damage here. If you want WM skills, that is the issue, it is impossible* to get them with pet and damage passive from long bow tree, which is sad ... on the other hand, you get the damage offseted by the WM dexterity passive, more or less.

I know
I didn't want to imply that using a pet would decrease dmg of the hunter himself.

Second part of my post was merely describing how i felt about hunter dmg - quite low by default and ridiculous with jewels. It also described how I overcame some things that annoyed me in this subclass.

[JakQuickFootOp]

i skill specialist in pet and dex sb too. it does good dmg we dont need wm passive if we have good bows. hunters role in war mainly is to camo go conf conjs etc or skill massive areas. i play good petless rather than.pet but it had been so long i havent played with pet so i wanted to try it. plus if we are warring i log my useful.classes i dont stay on hunter.