Talk:Animal companion

11+ unevolved pet research
I'm writing down some notes of what I'm going to do to test if it's possible to level a pet from scratch to 20 unevolved. Will update when I remember. According to the Evolution Chart, absolutely NO dmg must be given/taken.
 * - caught from menagerie. lv5 red lurker (Citizn Snips), no dmg given or taken to pet
 * - leveling at Ice Cliff Chasms, hard mode. Set pet to passive and kept at a distance, using bow. (No dmg recieved to myself or pet. (unrelated: working on survivor also)
 * - pet is now lv11, pet name reset and is not aggressive/playful
 * - pet turned to Playful at lv13, possibly because was used

--Universe 14:57, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

New pet controls
Wouldn't it be epic to give pet also the "flag-control"? You can actually make your pets tank groups before going in yourself then. I think this would be epic though? Anyone else who thinks about this? I find it a pretty good idea to add this to the game? Eiion X 15:06, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * If you want your suggestion to be considered by Anet, you should use the Feedback:Getting started section, which is designed so that Anet can use ideas from players without any legal issues. G R E E N E R  17:09, 16 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Now would be an excellent time: ANet is adjusting the number of heroes that can join the party, which will involve revisiting the flag interface. If ANet ever has the resources to add a flag for a pet in GW1, it's going to be now. — Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 17:44, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Bosses "owning" pets
No one can "own" a pet, a pet is a companion, not an inanimate object, they have feelings too. This wording needs to change now. Animals rights cannot be infringed upon. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.248.210.31 (talk).
 * please sign your comment by typing four tildes (~) . also feel free to be bold and make the change your self.-[[Image:User_Zesbeer_sig.png|link=User talk:Zesbeer‎]] Zesbeer 04:15, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Repeat after me: "Rights do not exist without responsibilities." Now think carefully: what responsibilities do animals have?  None?  Ah, OK, then they don't have rights either.  Note that I'm not saying that that gives us a right to mistreat animals, but equally, Guild Wars pets aren't animals...  When my necro starts throwing blobs of whatever it is that comes out of an Asuran wand, La Terreur (L20 Hearty White Moa) just barges in and starts trying to beak whatever it is to death, regardless of the fact that the monster is perfectly willing to return the favour.  Real animals don't do that stuff.  (So, yes, Guild Wars pets have a responsibility: dive unhesitatingly into combat with whatever I'm fighting.  The right gained in returned is the right to travel with me.  I'm not prepared to spend a skill slot letting it do that if it isn't prepared to fight.)  You're as bad as the person who complained to Arenanet about the corsair prisoner, so now he has been replaced by a Sunspear who volunteers to dress up as a corsair and be killed repeatedly.  Personally, I find that more creepy than doing it to a captive pirate. Cynique 10:28, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 * That's a real fancy way to say "PETA doesn't have a base of operations in Tyria". -Faer 13:47, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 * This is true, but the point made in the first part of my comment has applicability far beyond the confines of a game world. When we give children rights, it is because (a) we are parents teaching them the lesson about rights and responsibilities ("you can stay up later now, but you must help me wash the dishes" and the like), or (b) we are the state trying to protect them from the lack of those rights, and the quid pro quo responsibility is collected later, bread-on-the-waters style ("we will give you the right to a safe home life now, and in return you must give your children a safe home life later").  We cannot collect an acted-on responsibility from animals (with certain exceptions, like sheepdogs and guide dogs ("seeing eye dogs" in the US, I believe), but even there it can be recast as being our rights and responsibilities), so they don't have rights as such.  We assign to ourselves and each other a duty to take care of them, and in return we assign ourselves and each other a right to make use of them, whether for meat, hide, eggs, work, companionship, or 1001 other things.  Note in passing here: 'responsibility' and 'duty' aren't the same, I know, but for the purposes of this argument, they are close enough to be equivalent. Cynique 15:09, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Faer, no not in Tyria, but there is one in the Battle Isles. -- 'Mai Yi ' talk  16:26, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Give me a break. You animal 'rights' nutters pop up every place these days.  Animals can have owners.  You don't like it, fine, go live inside your head.  I live in the real world, where not only animals are owned, but they are eaten.  Just ate one myself.  Yum. --La Visiteuse 21:19, 19 January 2011 (UTC)


 * In GW, animals are not 'tamed', they are 'charmed'. They feelings get erased, and they become mindless tools of destruction! Even people can have owners. And voluntarily. Ask in your local S&M shop for more info :D . Mith[[Image:User MithranArkanere Star.png]]Talk 15:43, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I guess that's why they're called "Animal Charmers" then. Oh wait, they aren't. Rikk Panda 06:46, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

dispute tag
this has been on this article for over a year is someone still disputing it?- Zesbeer 07:25, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
 * if no one responds from when i posted that comment in a week then i am removing it.-[[Image:User_Zesbeer_sig.png|link=User talk:Zesbeer‎]] Zesbeer 07:51, 21 February 2011 (UTC)


 * I think the dispute tag must remain with the Evolutionary Chart table. There's not really enough systematic research to confirm the evolution details. And the reason it has sat for a year without further discussion is the topic is less important, since the introduction of the menagerie (you can easily DL any pet to unlock all evolutions and come back at any time to charm one).


 * I would support removing that table (and the dispute tag) and replacing it with some sort of a general statement (something like this, only better: "pets generally evolve based on the ratio of damage dealt to received, but we don't understand all the details"). In other words, if you plan to remove the dispute tag, please also remove the disputed statements. — Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 08:12, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
 * well seeing as no one has even been discussing it and i cant be bothered to look threw the archives to see what was disputed in the first place.-[[Image:User_Zesbeer_sig.png|link=User talk:Zesbeer‎]] Zesbeer 10:56, 21 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Not all disputed topics get actively discussed, for a variety of reasons. — Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 17:32, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Through a ~5 min search of the page's history, the dispute tag was added on 31 March 2008 by Anja Astor. 2008. By looking through the 07-08 archive, I found the discussion which started the dispute (at least I think that's the discussion, as the adder of the tag only commented there). Apparently the dispute was by an IP. Yes, an IP - albeit one who has lots of edits and has been around since 2007. But one who provided no proof for its claim of "the table is wrong" - a table which has changed very little over about three years despite the dispute and it "being wrong." I say that the dispute is over and we can remove it. Oh, and by rough searching, it seems the table is "wrong" because it is "impossible" to get an Elder pet in PvE (without Wyn of course). -- Konig / talk 01:44, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

i asked john if he could make some kind of statement about it.- Zesbeer 01:47, 22 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Konig: can you restate your point? I'm confused by it. On the one hand, you say the dispute (over the accuracy of the table) is resolved; on the other, you say the table is wrong.


 * However, I think it's moot; I think it would be better to remove the table altogether: (1) it's unlikely that anyone needs to know more than evolution is affected by damage dealt vs received (and perhaps vs healed); (2) it's unlikely that anyone is going to verify the details b/c the menagerie removes the need to train your pet (death level it and get the evolution you want from Wynn). (Still, Zesbeer, thanks for asking Stumme about it. I'm still curious about it, even though I'm not convinced the details are correct here.)


 * Does anyone have any objections to removing the table and replacing it with a generalized statement? — Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 03:11, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
 * My point, TEF, was that the dispute tag was never supported - it was merely constant statements of "the table is wrong" with nothing to back it up while people could back it up. And removing the table is a worse option because you're reducing the quality of the article when nothing has been shown to provide that it is wrong. And, as I said, what was claimed to be wrong was that you can obtain an Elder-tiered pet in PvE through normal leveling. Something even I have seen done. And people, while not having to train their pets, still can which is merit enough for the knowledge to be looked into.
 * We're hear to document everything not merely what we want. So yes, I object to removing the table. -- Konig / talk 03:19, 22 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Gotcha, there was never a dispute...and coincidentally, etc. Thank you for explaining.


 * If the table remains, then I think we need to make available the supporting evidence. I can't prove it wrong, but I wasn't convinced by what I saw published either. Which is my point: are we documenting fact or speculation? The fact that the table hasn't changed in some time doesn't make it reliable (I've found older inaccuracies here and on GWiki); sometimes things don't get corrected for all sorts of other reasons. It's very difficult to watch a pet evolve through to L20 and be sure that you've counted damage dealt and received. (I've tried just watching while death leveling and ZZzzz.)


 * In any case, I think there are other issues with the article and would like to address those before offering my support to featuring it. If we do that, I would also volunteer to find the supporting research and make sure it's easier for others to find (e.g. by offering it either on a sub-page or in my user space). Is that a more acceptable possible compromise? — Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 03:39, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Keeping short: We're here to document player observations. They will be flawed at times, but they should have support. And said support for the 3 year+ old table should be somewhere in the 3-year+ old talkpage archives. -- Konig / talk 04:25, 22 February 2011 (UTC)


 * About the whole "leveling an Elder pet", I've always gotten unevolved pets (which are functionally the same as Elder) by leveling the pets while farming Vaettir. The build is

Just send the pet in with a bow, run away, farm. So basically the only dmg they do is 2 or 3 hits on a mob that has very high armor against non-armor ignoring damage and most of the damage they take is from degen hexes, which might not count as damage taken (not sure on that one). razor 39999 11:55, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Exp. from quest?
Do pets gain experience from quest rewards on outpost? I can't find references to this and I want to know if ny DoA character is going to evolve at a much higher rate than the pet (1000exp everyday from VQ reward). 89.130.39.177 22:01, 24 May 2011 (UTC)


 * They do not, even if the quest reward is given in an explorable area. — Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 22:05, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
 * If you read the article, you would of noticed it states: "The experience bonuses from missions, quests, and experience scrolls do not apply to animal companions."


 * Thanks for the info, I passed over that note without really reading that :P 46.27.78.23 21:58, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Pwoned by Evolution
Well, after looking over this page numerous times and the section on pet Evolution and how "high damage dealt to damage received" = an Aggressive Pet, my roommate and I decided to give it a go in Pre Searing. I dropped my current pet (I'm a level 14 Warrior with Ranger secondary and an 8+1+1 in Swordsmanship and a 9 in Beastmastery) and tamed a new Stalker Pet. We let the Pet kill Oakhearts on repeat while they were focused on my roommate's Monk and his Monk kept Shielding Hands and Reversal of Fortune on the Pet at all times in the extremely rare event that one of them did throw an attack the pet's way. When the Pet leveled to 10 and could no longer get adequate experience from the Oakhearts, we began carefully selecting groups of Charr that had two Shamans and two Warrior, and then killing the Warriors while they were on the Monk and when all was clear, letting the Pet attack the two Shamans from behind while the Shamans focused on the Monk and I, and the Monk kept Shielding Hands and Reversal spammed upon the Pet as a precaution, and 99% of the time the Shamans were more than willing to attack the Warrior who kept using Frenzy and and Healsig and the Monk was was simply a natural target.

This took us several weeks, as you can imagine, but we were able to level the pet to 12 on the select groups where he got to do massive damage and received almost none, with no deaths or encounters with degen. The pet would often take five or more minutes to kill two Shamans who kept Infusing each other while Healing Area as they attacked us. In theory, all our work and effort would result in an Aggressive Pet upon Evolution, however once he hit 12 and we mapped back to town and stepped out, the pet was merely Playful.

So yes, I feel we were Pwoned by Evolution, as we worked our asses off trying to evolve an Aggressive pet and were especially careful to make sure he didn't take damage but delt massive amounts of it. This does make me wonder if it's even possible to evolve an Aggressive pet in Pre Searing Ascalon. Does anyone know if this has ever been done? ~ Screwed 95.154.230.191 20:45, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

heel
will my pet get xp if i keep it at heel?
 * Yes. It appears to gain experience through foe deaths the same as you. You can even let it die and it will still continue to level (which is sometimes better for low level pets). — Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 19:14, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
 * ahh ty-- Icyyy Blue  User IcyyyBlue Elementalist Blue.png 19:33, 25 June 2011 (UTC)