Can you actually read ? Two classes at rank 6 in Archer tree need a pet to work. How is that hard to understand ? And it means at R8 you have to go Mergen (if you want/need a R8 class), but hey imagine if you don’t use 2H Bows. A lot of restrictions lead to no choice after all.
For no reason it is mounted ONLY.
Well the difference is the extra 14 slots is paid? Don’t really get you, even as a player who pay for slots, when I’m at my current character/companion slots cap and wanted a new mounted character or character which needs a companion for skills, I will have to make either cough up the TP or make adjustments to my current team to accommodate the class I want to play.
It is the same thing for both free to play and paying players, we both face the same decision on how to utilise the available slots given to us. Just that f2p players have a base limit of 4 due to their self-imposed restriction of not buying TP.
Yes I would if I wanted to play the class. It comes as one of the requisites of the character so I need to make team adjustments to it. I have that problem too when I max out my current character slots last time. My 1st 3 chars are Kabbalist, Chrono and Squire, then I wanted an archer who is part falconer.
Kind of veered from the topic though, but… Hackapell/Hakkapeliitta is a mounted class. From the names right to the very 1st time it was teased it was always a mounted class.
That’s the restriction for non-token accounts. And the best part is, tokens are entirely buyable from market too, which lifts all the rest of the restrictions IMC placed for f2p players…
Not really, at least from what I see here. If people would love to pay to play then this thread wouldn’t even be made.
GW2 does have restrictions in its F2P model too. Here is the link:
Take a look and see how many additional restrictions is imposed on the f2p accounts besides character limitations. ToS’s model gives a lot compared to it.
LoL on the other hand, is a MoBA and not an MMO though.
I was talking about team level.
A self-imposed ? It’s going really far to say that kind of things, but no surprise for the lord of slots buyer 
. People don’t want to buy slots for a pet, they want to buy slots for a character, nothing weird.
I remember a video of Hacka using skills while not mounted, and when you check ToS Base classes, you can see the old version of Hacka. Anyway, the skills Hacka is using have no reason to be restricted. This is also why they changed few rogue skills in the past 
.
Not really dude. It’s a lot of time spent to buy one poor Token. Or would you ask me to go for Necro afk ? And it last for one month, so if you are not playing this game a lot, you’ll not be able to purchase more Tokens. Just because you can buy Tokens with silvers doesn’t mean people are able to buy them.
Because it’s a cash grab 
. If I pay 30/40$ to play without all those restrictions (Token, Market, Slots, Team Storage…) I’m ok with it. People are not paying because they love to play ToS, they pay to buy outfits for their Waifu, nothing else.
I know restrictions in GW2, I don’t know how you can say it is more restricted than ToS. You can have everything you need to play the game by playing the game (and not farming like a slave). Plus, if you want to have access to everything it costs you ~20$ if you find a good opportunity. And when you buy GW2 you can buy everything in gem store with golds, can you do this in ToS ? No. You can buy Tokens and Costumes, but you can’t buy slots. Oh this is so weird best guilds had free Tokens in the past and you can buy Tokens in the market 
.
By the way, you don’t buy GW2, you buy GW2 + its DLC. Both cost 80$~, and you can have it for 20…
Yes, it doesn’t change anything.
IMO it is a bad design from the beginning. I said ages ago that pets should have their own slots.
I think the problem is not free player vs those who pay. It is more like simply…: character>pet
A pet is not better or as good as a character so it is almost not worth it to let it take up a slot…
Also free player life slot-wise is not that bad… I already bought like 3 slots from event TP… It is manageable… I just don’t like the design of it. Pets are just extra helpful “tools”…but they are not like the characters themselves… and yeah it is rly a bad realisation for a newbie that he can’t have a pet or sacrificed a slot for it…
It should have been already revised imo.
I think pets should have their own slots. You could start with 4 character slots and 2 or 3 pet slots. I think it would be more reasonable.
Actually there’s no reason for them not to be restricted to mounted only. Hackapell is based on a finnish term hakkapeliitta which is finnish light CAVARLYman.
If it wasn’t mounted it wouldn’t fit the thematic and the class should not be called hackapell. :x
If hacka’s skills cannot be used without a mount, then the mount should not be counted as a character
I don’t disagree with that.
I’m still far from being a Lord though lol. 
Some might already hit cap.
As for the hacka case it does make sense that they make it all mounted, since it’s origins are from a known cavalry in history.
Perhaps the idea coming from the dev’s point of view is that since companions can be shared between characters, level up, carry equipment and have stat attributes, they should count take up a slot too. I come from playing tabletop games so the idea of some characters/units taking up more than just 1 slot/point doesn’t seem alien to me.
I would very much love to too to see ToS having a full subscribe to play model with no character creation restrictions too. Am ok with 30-40 per month too like what you said. But then with a paying model, IMC will have to setup trial accounts for players who want to experience the game before committing to it, just like WoW, GW2, Ffxiv. Those accounts likely to come with limitations too just like the top AAA paying MMOs, which may include character slot limitations.
ToS’s model is actually somewhere in between imo. It’s TP pay model mimicks the modular “pay-what-you-need” structure which is found in many of the services we see and use in the real world.
Like telcos, pay basic service, add module (additional service) for caller-id, module for overseas roaming etc.
ToS is base token for token services, then additional character slots for 33TP each.
This is something which I agree too. The current wording makes easy for players to misunderstand. Doing a 3 character slot + 2 companion will be really great. Additional character/companion slots can be purchased at the same 33TP each.
As to why 3 character slots and not 4. Do note that IMC do need some way to generate income from their IP. The goal of the game is to convert players from free to play to paying customers, just outright giving everything for free isn’t really a good model for business.
People might see this as a cash grab; but IMC is a business, they do need to find someway to make money in order to get funding to make improvements and create more content. I would rather they choose to make money via transactions such as character slot purchases and comestic stuff rather than pay to win items.
One thing I’d also like to add to discussion (sorry if it was already talked about) but not only companions gives Team Level but it also gives in-game advantage and have stats themselves.
One low level characters can use a Lv.330 companion to progress on early part of the game. Hunters and Falconers ( ? ) depends on a well leveled companion for their skills. Companions can be given equipment and used to transfer equipment between characters and as well can have their stats enhanced to higher values than default. Some even can be mounted by any class and some even gives certain stats to characters. I’d say it’s pretty fair for them to occupy one character slot.
On the other hand, if companions were to not use a character slot I think they should also not give any benefit at all in any way nor be customizable (stats, gears). Something purely for cosmetic purposes.
Actually, it could be a good thing if we had a second type of pets for cosmetic purposes that stays near the character or something like that. Like a small popolion following you around without any purpose or any advantage, then it shouldn’t use any character slot.
I’ll repeat a couple of things I said earlier in the thread since it’s lost in the noise now. Below are the 3 main talking points of the thread, and the arguments going with them. I disagree with 2, I agree with 1 and 3. I’ve tried to rewrite 2 in a different way to make it obvious why I disagree with it.
1. Team level is affected by pets.
Counter argument: Nobody cares about team level. Nobody is really going to say “This is a mechanic I have a lot of fun with, I would be upset about it changing!”.
2. It’s unfair that some classes have to use more slots than other classes.
Counter argument: It’s not unfair as you have the choice to use any other classes.
Really really read number 2 and say it out loud. Say it this way instead:
“It’s fair that some classes mean you can only have 2 characters instead of 4.”
Still agree with that statement?
3. It is an income source for the game!
Counter argument: People that would spend money on a frustrating character slot will spend money in the TP shop instead. People have x amount of money to spend, if you’re not getting it from this frustrating char slot, you’re still getting it from a cute dress. OR from the pet that they could buy with that TP instead because it doesn’t take up a god damn character slot.
Solutions:
A. Remove pets from team level. Remove pets from character slots.
B. Remove pets from character slots. Keep team level.
C. Do nothing.
Outcomes:
A. Make people that might like team level unhappy. Make everyone that doesn’t care about team level very happy. Stop frustrating aspect of game for new players.
B. Make everyone very happy. Stop frustrating aspect of game for new players.
C. Nothing. Keep frustrating aspect of game for new players.
The only topic of debate that really matters here is whether it should be option 1 or 2. The entire issue is simple when broken down.
This should really be a different thread entirely. It deserves its own thread as I know many people want it.
I’ve long wanted to have taming mobs in the game to have a cosmetic only pet separate from our standard pets. Give us the option to go out and make a friend out of any monster in the game. Ragnarok and a few other games had this.
I’d have to go with “remove pets from character slots and keep team level, BUT make a separate tab for pets that can only contain ONE pet for free initially.”
This means people can make 4 chars and have a pet (which is the bare minimum considering utility). Anyone wishing for more can buy char slots with TP and pet slots for half the price of a char slot. My view in this is that despite pet being a considerable fighting force on its own (thus needing their own keeping cost) they are in no way comparable to a player character, which is why I think sacrificing a character slot for a pet is unfair.
Can you actually understand english? lmao. IT IS YOUR CHOICE in the first place to play those classes. understand now?
Do they force you to play mount classes? ‘‘two classes at rank 6 in archer tree’’ there you go, its only the two classes out of so many classes in archer tree.
But if you choose the mount class to play, it’s entirely your decision, it is not compulsory to play mounted classes? if you go a2 ranger2 fletcher 3 mergen1, at rank 6 you do not need a single mount. its your choice to go mounted class or not dude.
LOL i’m actually sure that he can understand english. And yes it is your choice to play those classes but having 1 char that takes 2 chars just because you have a mount is actually unfair. Don’t you get what we are trying to point out here?
I agree but think it should be 1 kennel and 1 aviary. One for ground type, one for bird.
This allows a new player to take Hunter/Falconer as a class build without a pet taking any slots.
After that, having to buy pet slots seems sensible t me.
Something being someone’s choice doesn’t change the fact that a class build requires 3 character slots, which basically makes it a premium class build.
Everyone else can see that it shuts players out. I don’t see why you’re intent on arguing it. Why does it matter to you? Does it affect you? Do you like it? Why?
It seems like arguing for the sake of arguing rather than talking about the actualy outcome on the game, how players view it, how players spend their money, etc. You’re very focused on something unimportant compared to the important parts of the discussion.
It doesn’t even matter if you’re right or wrong here. That matters is that players dislike it, find it frustrating, and that is causing harm to players view of the game in the early days of them joining. What matters is the outcome. The perception. You being right doesn’t change how it makes players feel. That’s really what matters and the reason this discussion has come up.
this is the reason why companion takes up slot. tbh it is totally reasonable cause it gives benefits.
After reading this:
I’m more inclined to agree with @Awoooo. Especially because the 2nd point, it really limits the player choice.
It really makes sense to make separate character/pet lists if you think on the thing as a whole. It does makes sense to have each pet using character slots but not when it’s effectively limiting general gameplay to this point >.<
If it really can’t be done in any way it would be nice to give out one character slot or make Hawks actually don’t use spaces. Then we have the problem of mounted classes (2 slots instead of 3).
Making separate lists really feels like the right way.
Actually, expanding the debate on companions not being worthy enough to hold a character slot, why not push forth ideas on making them actually worth that slot so that players will consider sacrificing one of the initial 4 slots for them (on top of actually needing them for mount/falcon/hunter classes)?
What if…
Having companions in a Team allows interactions such as the following?
1) Companion missions
Once a day, the player can send a companion out on mini missions. The player can choose an area to send the companion out to and after a period of time (1-2hrs) the companion will return with the spoils/materials it gathered.
Spoils can roughly follow the rewards the current event (Donne’s wanted list), which is rewarded based on the companion’s level and of course RNG. Companions can return with no spoils or lower level rewards if they aren’t leveled up/gear up sufficiently enough.
.
(This is borrowed off Monster Hunter’s send Felnye out on mission concept)
2) Companion Race League
Create a companion race league, which is like TBL/GVG held for an hour every day. Players can enrol their companion into such a race where they vie for the top positions in the league.
Race controls can be as simple as when to use speed boost, to adjust speed vs stamina reduction etc.
Companions can be customised by equipping them with various new items made for companions in which the player can farm from PVE maps and dungeons, like some give them an extra speed boost, to others which increases the endurance and stamina of the companion.
Will new content such as these make companions worth a character slot?
It sure does increase the amount of things in which the player is able to engage in the game, making it more than just a daily saalus/ET/DG run game.
now that I think about it, it does seems the best way is to make a separate list, as long as they dont affect team levels. else there gonna be another complaining about that.