Yep, just split them out will be good. IMC will have to rework on their initial slot offerings though. I vote for a 3 char : 2 companion slot.
4 Likes
Separating them from character slots- i think that this is the best solutions. Well, pets would be worthy if they can farm shards, finish a dungeon etc (things that a player character can do) but this doesnât make sense so yeah, separation would be the best thing
1 Like
Those are nice ideas Neko but considerably more effort to resolve the more important problem of players being frustrated by the mechanic.
I also donât think it would actually stop players from being frustrated. And thereâs nothing stopping those ideas existing but with a pet kennel that people could buy more kennels with instead of as the current char slots.
Not intending to shoot down some obviously good ideas. Just strongly feel that the primary issue is âplayer frustrationâ. I would totally support ideas like those if there were no player frustration, and would support them after separation from the char slots.
2 Likes
Yep I also do realise that splitting will be much better after thinking about it. As we see the game is still constantly under going change, so hopefully IMC will take a look at our concerns, improve and implement them so we get to see the changes in future.
2 Likes
Itâs not a problem as long as they are not at the same rank⌠Itâs kind of weird you donât understand it is a bad design. Same with R8, you have to chose beteween mount only and 2h only. For people who donât need and donât want a R8, itâs ok, for people who need a R8 for their build itâs another story. If I want to do Archer 3 QS 3 Appraiser, am I supposed to take a R7 -= ? But I didnât pick Musketeer because no synergy with Appraiser, I didnât pick Cannoner because I donât like its playstyle⌠What class am I supposed to take at R8 when there are so much restrictions problems in Archer tree. Itâs same in Swordman tree because there are too much skills which need a shield (but at least itâs logic you need a shield to hit with a shield 
).
Still Hacka has no reason to have their skills restricted to mount only. Only Charge Cavalry should be restricted, you canât say Skarphuggning, Storm Bolt and Leg Shot are logic to be mounted only -_-"⌠I know there are a lot of skills which are not logic, but itâs a pure joke when you check animations of Hacka skills.
_ âIâm sorry guys, I canât use my pistolâ
_ âUh why ? Just press the button manâ
_ âNo I canât because Iâm not on my birdâ
_ âOh damnâŚâ
I disagree.
I mean if itâs not. Then they should just rename the whole class as it wouldnât serve its purpose. Itâs not about whether itâs technically possible to do those things without a mount but more like hackapells fought with a horse.
Youâre not a hackapell without a mount, so it makes sense theyâre restricted. 
In this case they have no horse, they have no right to exist in ToS.
You are not a Pyromancer without Pyromancer costume. Guess what, you can wear Chronomancer clothes while doing a Fire Ball. This argument is not an argument when your character is actually a rainbow. Your character itself is not a Hacka, itâs an Archer.
I mean, if they want to make a class that cannot use their skills without a mount, at least make skills related to the mount, not only one. It only shows the difficulties of IMC to milk money.
1 Like
Mount obviously is the horse, I mean real life hackas would have used a large sized battlebird or a penguin if it was a thing. 
[quote=âsoldatazur, post:90, topic:356713â]
You are not a Pyromancer without Pyromancer costume. Guess what, you can wear Chronomancer clothes while doing a Fire Ball. This argument is not an argument when your character is actually a rainbow.
[/quote]
I donât see this argument being comparable. [quote=âsoldatazur, post:90, topic:356713â]
Your character itself is not a Hacka, itâs an Archer.
[/quote]
Indeed. But perhaps this archer learned these set of skills from the hackapell master and the techniques were taught to this archer as techniques only usable while riding a mount? 
[quote=âsoldatazur, post:90, topic:356713â]
I mean, if they want to make a class that cannot use their skills without a mount, at least make skills related to the mount, not only one.
[/quote]
What qualifies a skill to be related to the mount? Obviously hackapell as a class is using skills that imitate the techniques a real life hackapell used, of course modified to be more suitable to this game.
You said
And QS fight with a shield, nothing restrict you to play your QS with a Shield. Corsair fight with a Sword/Dagger, Sword/Pistol, they can fight with a Rapier thank to Fencer.
So Hacka master told how to use Leg Shot only while mounted. Interesting. At R8 you need to learn skills from a brainless master lol.[quote=âVal, post:91, topic:356713â]
Obviously hackapell as a class is using skills that imitate the techniques a real life hackapell used, of course modified to be more suitable to this game.
[/quote]
Best imitation ever.
1 Like
I was mostly referring to the costume argument I should have used quotes differently.
Quarrel refers to the usage of crossbows. Corsair is a pirate themed class and pirates used a large variety of different weapons.
Not restricting these classes doesnât go against their themes. [quote=âsoldatazur, post:92, topic:356713â]
So Hacka master told how to use Leg Shot only while mounted. Interesting. At R8 you need to learn skills from a brainless master lol.
[/quote]
Well itâs their design. Canât argue that it isnât flawed. 
So is Rogue not against Hacka theme ?
Hacka player words :
1 Like
Rogue is a different class obviously it doesnât fit hackas theme but itâs not supposed to? I donât know why this relates to what Iâve said.
I donât know for what reason you quoted that other post?
And so Rogue is against Hacka theme, but IMC patched Rogue so they can use backstab while mounted.
I donât know. You are defending Hacka being a mounted only class because itâs his theme or itâs due to his master who told him to use those skills this way. Reality is when you play a Hacka you have to dismount and remount all the time.
So end of this useless debate, stop trolling and say you donât understand, you clearly understand you canât defend IMC bad design as you stated above.
1 Like
I donât know why youâre bringing rogue into this when weâre talking about hackapell.
When I said the thing you quoted multiple times itâs in context for what I said about corsair and quarrel shooter. The fact that these classes arenât restricted doesnât go against their themes.
Hackapell is different, if it wasnât in my opinion it would against its theme.
Rogue being able to use backstab while mounted has nothing to do with hackapells theme. Itâs simply there to make class synergy better I suppose.
Remounting thing is a design flaw IMC has to solve but I firmly stand behind that hacka skills should be mounted only.
Iâm not trolling. We just clearly disagree where the problem with the design is but we both agree that there is a design flaw.
I believe that hacka skills should be mounted only and you donât, end of discussion?
I actually wish companions had their own class tree, something simple like tank (every now and then the companion takes the agro away from the player)
damage support ( the companion is able to use damage skills exlusive to companions, no rush dog or sonic strike or whatever)
support (recovery boost when sitting, a small area slow skill or something)
Companions use slots, theyâre dumb, deal no damage at all, even when theyâre equipped with stuff they deal little damage. theyâre easy to kill.
Do they bring anything other than teamlevel to the table? Theyâre mandatory to some classes (mounted, hunter, falconer), in the case of hunter and falconer theyâre really bad, why? because they use a really bad path finding that hinders class performance.
I do understand that it is a business model this whole companion uses character slot thingy. but they add no value at all. Also: TP companion are p2w for hunter, unless they remove that 30% damage from pet attribute (rush dog will no longer use pet stats it seems)
2 Likes
Maybe because you think Hacka without a mount is against its theme when you can actually go Archer > QS > Hunter > Scout > Fletcher > Schwarzer Reiter > Musketeer > Mergen. If you still donât understand why âthemeâ is not a strong argument, Iâm sorry. No, you canât talk about Hacka and forget the 7 other ranks, it doesnât work this way. In this case your point would be right.
No, it has to do with Rogue theme. I didnât know I had to mention it, it seems to be pretty obvious. Hacka without a mount is against its theme, but a Rogue with a mount is not against its theme ? Weird.
And remember what you say :
It involves Rogue Master taught you how to use Backstab while mountedâŚ
Iâm speechless, I found a WK of IMC 
. If you are really here to defend Hacka theme, then you should try to do some researchs, because Hacka shouldnât be in Archer tree .
Cool.
Yes.
1 Like
To make things more favorable, they could do like Mabinogi and let the player play as the pet, and also be able to bring a character from the lodge as companion.
So based on your arguments lets say. Would you agree it would make sense if I could learn and use ice skills from inside the pyromancer class? (No cryo or elementalist in build just pyro.) Cause you know theme of the class has no meaning cause thereâs bunch of other classes too, like you say.
Rogue isnât based on a real life influence of a certain type of a soldier. It sure has real life influence but the options are much more fluid to go with.
lmao I said perhaps there but then again perhaps it did in this case too 
lmao ok, and where am I defending IMC here? Nice that you try to insult me when you donât have any good arguments.
I did. And I donât disagree with what say you here. Hackapell should be using a gun(or 2)as the other weapon and would have fit nicer inside swordie class tree. I find their decision to go for xbow lazy.
2 Likes
They should give us 1 free character spot everytime a new rank is introduced
Itâs kind of funny. You donât understand what I say, and you are the first one to say it, but you can say I donât have good arguments. Godwin point with the âinsultâ⌠Nothing else to say, itâs what was this âdebateâ in a nutshell.
1 Like