Did a small test to get a feeling about the T4 Bearer change:
Kathibria Featherstep killed the boss in 17 min with 2365/9900 left.
Daicas The Sharp killed the boss in 5 min with 4756/7425 left.
Both thralls fought consistently, even though both were backtracking quite a bit between the attacks. As I personally believe that the bearers should be tanky but not better than fighters, I think the results are pretty reasonable.
Thanks for testing!
GIves a reasonable idea of what to expect. That’s something we can work with.
Good news.
They aren’t even close to reasonable. No one would claim the bearers should score a kill more quickly, but 3 times as long is just ridiculous.
nah i think it’s cool, you either choose to kill faster or pack more stuf, it make sense
A fighter getting kills faster than a bearer is a good thing. Fighters getting kills 300% faster than a bearer is not a good thing.
sorry, Aria … but no matter how many times you decide to spam me with your opinion it won’t make me change mine. bearers should carry stuff and defend themselves, not fight bosses. plus the results are without any help from my side. the timings will certainly improve when you join the battle to help your thrall.
Anyone testet Bow Damage yet between fighters, bearers and archers?
I wasn’t spamming you with it. I was replying to @Bourgmestre with that second post to clarify that the issue wasn’t fighters being faster, and that the issue is with how much faster they are.
And if you bring them with you, they are going to be fighting. There is no way around that. It doesn’t necessarily even have to be bosses.
For example, if you teleport to the jungle, you often be attacked by Panthers before you are even out of the loading screen. The bearers needs to be able to deal with situations like that even before they have endgame gear since they will usually be the ones you are travelling far and wide with.
I took one of the hardest bosses in UC for my test and the bearer fought 17 min and had 2.5k hp left. Surely the bearer could kill some panthers on its own even with less gear.
I’m sure it could. That’s not the issue. The issue is how fast because remember the situation. You are standing in the center of several panthers, might not have the best armor, might not be at full health, and you have absolutely no control over your character for an extended period of time.
Then you also have to account for when this happens with things that are stronger than panthers. It can happen with any enemy that is place relatively close to any loading screen.
Seems fine to me. I love using my T4 bearer as a tanky DPS with loads of carrying capacity, but it sort of makes other thralls pointless in comparison. So a change is right and good.
Bearers in general should not be DPS machines, but them having a decent HP pool so they can survive until you rescue them (or run away!) is just as it should be. I’d much rather this change than their HP getting a nerf.
Bearers should really be jack of all trades, master of tanking. They should have the most health. They should do more melee damage than an archer but less than a fighter. They should do more arrow damage than a fighter but less than an archer.
It should be Most to Least -
Health: Bearer - Fighter - Archer
Melee Damage: Fighter - Bearer - Archer
Projectile Damage: Archer - Bearer - Fighter
And the highest should be double (at most) of the lowest. So the Fighter should only do double (at most) the melee damage of the Archer.
I disagree. Bearers are not warriors at all, and I think they should do less damage in both melee and range than either specialization.
So IMO:
Health: Bearer - Fighter - Archer 
agreed (fighter/archer can be tied, which they usually are currently)
Melee Damage: Fighter - Archer- Bearer 
bearer last
Projectile Damage: Archer - Fighter- Bearer bearer last
They have the most HP and a vastly increased carrying capacity - that’s plenty of specilization to warrant their existence without also making them the second-best melee and second-best archer.
Hell, you could have a whole archetype to fill just that niche (second-best melee, second-best range) without either the HP buff or the carrying capacity, and that would still be a viable type. I don’t think it’s necessary to have such a type, it’s just to illustrate how over-the-top I think it would be to give bearers that on top of what they already bring to the table.
Nope. Bearers should be completely invulnerable and deal 400 damage/hit with 150% armor penetration.
That’s the only fair solution.
they should also heal you and remove any negative effects on your character
The results posted earlier in the thread seem entirely reasonable. Right now, I can make a run through the city and kill all bosses & heroes, and not have to heal Kathibria one time. That’s a little ridiculous.
They also have lower defense because their pack is taking up an armor slot. Having them be second best would make them great as your default choice, when you just get on the game and play without a goal in mind.
Maybe you want to gather a bit, then you find a new dungeon and want to explore that now. They would make that whole style of play more enjoyable, but if you found a major dungeon, you would still be better off going and grabbing a fighter. If you wanted to cheese a world boss, you would still be better off grabbing and archer.
…you can just remove that. It doesn’t do anything or affect their carrying capacity. Are you just trolling? Because if so, well done you got me.