Pet Score vs Total Collected

[Mastr]

I am a bit dismayed about hearing that the rankings from now on will be based on pet score. I always thought of this as a pet collecting website and list and now it will be a pet leveling website. I understand that some pets are unobtainable due to their limited availability in time and prohibitive cost that some of these pets command on ebay.

I have been collecting pets in some form since early vanilla and being high on the collection list has been a fun motivator over all these years. I've made friends through it and had lots of help along the way. I am one pet away from having them all and tied for top collection in the entire game but in a couple of weeks I'll be 80th just on my server. To obtain any sort of ranking days upon days of leveling pets will be required. That is a separate facet that has only just been added to the game.

I understand that this will allow newcomers to collecting pets to get on the list, which is good. As it stands now they can't get some pets and will never have a chance to get to the top. If someone is dedicated enough to level hundreds and hundreds of pets to 25 they deserve recognition.

I would ask that both pet score and total number lists be posted.

[GormanGhaste]

While pet level has a minor effect on the score, pet rarity is much more important. I think the WarcraftPets method of scoring is much better for collectors than what Wowprogress uses.

[Stabya]

I agree for a totally different reason.

I myself had no use for pets until they could battle, so obviously when I think of rankings, I view it in terms of pet battling.

This means to me, Pet Level means alot and should be a major factor in rankings

Some people want to be ranked for the number of pets they have

Some want to be ranked by the number of competitive level 25 battle pets they have

And, thanks to the efforts of this website, some want to be ranked for a mix of the two.

Either way, I appreciate what this site is doing, and I thank you for the time you put in to this. We appreciate it

[Nosiara]

"I would ask that both pet score and total number lists be posted."


I second that!

[Velgana]

While pet level has a minor effect on the score, pet rarity is much more important. I think the WarcraftPets method of scoring is much better for collectors than what Wowprogress uses.

I agree. Wowprogress has a weird way of ranking.

While I think that they should display the amount of pets a user collected, I'm glad they are going to tally according pet score. One person could have 300 mini pets of different qualities, but someone else could have those 300 all rares. To me the person who had the dedication to get all of them rare quality should be recognized more than the other. I personally like the change, but that's just me.

[Stabya]

Let me take your thought one step further.

If you have 300 rare pets under level 25, and I had 250 level 25 pets, then I'd think I accomplished more

and I am sure many of you with the sheer number of pets would disagree, and have a right to.

[Velgana]

Let me take your thought one step further.

If you have 300 rare pets under level 25, and I had 250 level 25 pets, then I'd think I accomplished more

and I am sure many of you with the sheer number of pets would disagree, and have a right to.

I'm sure level will have some play into the rankings as does WoWProgress. I'm just saying that it's a more fair way because obviously someone who had time to level up & collect rares of different pets will be ranked higher than someone who just collected everything (no matter quality) and did nothing else with their collection.

[Stabya]

If you had 300 Level 1 Rare pets, and I had 275 Level 25 Rare pets, it appears you would have the higher pet score.

Someone can correct me if I am wrong, but it looks like the most points you can get from pet levelling is (4*Avg Level) which is 100 right?

If Levelling pets to the maximum can only get you 100 points if everything was level 25, then "to a lesser extent" is an understatement to pet level factoring in on a total score

[Formerruling]

Once you start getting into the top numbers quantity wise (490+) there really is no other way to seperate people other than who can snag $2000 event pets off ebay or was collecting when some now unobtainable pets could get caugjt, so this gives them a way to continue "collecting" toward a higher rank when therrs nothing left to collect.

[Velgana]

If you had 300 Level 1 Rare pets, and I had 275 Level 25 Rare pets, it appears you would have the higher pet score.

Someone can correct me if I am wrong, but it looks like the most points you can get from pet levelling is (4*Avg Level) which is 100 right?

If Levelling pets to the maximum can only get you 100 points if everything was level 25, then "to a lesser extent" is an understatement to pet level factoring in on a total score

I see what you're saying now. I did the math on my own collection as of right now (if my average level would be 25) and it only put me a little over 100 points.

I still don't have a problem with the changes. I'm actually really excited. If anything it may make some people become a little more competitive when going out and collecting.

[Stabya]

In the end, im pretty confident PET SCORE will still be primarily geared to the collector, not the battler.

A collector might have to battle a few Wild Pets to upgrade their quality, but grinding Tamers and powelevelling pets to 25 will contribute a rather insignificant amount toward the pet score. (4-100 points)

For those of us who take pride in Battling and Levelling, the best way right now, is to compare in game achievement points

[Oceanaia]

I would ask that both pet score and total number lists be posted.

I second this! I enjoy collecting more than I do pet battles and since this is/was a collecting site I really really hope Warcraftpets doesn't forget about us collectors....

[NathKnave]

Personally I'm looking forward to where I might be once we're all ranked by Pet Score instead of number of unique pets. I think it's great that even though there are quite a few pets that I'll never have, I could still have a collection that can be the envy of many. I've spent a lot of time hunting down rare versions of nearly all of the available wild pets and I like that all of that work will mean something here. I don't see a whole lot of difference between battling Jungle Grubs in Krasarang Wilds for days trying to find a rare and fishing for weeks in the Dalaran Sewers for the Giant Sewer Rat.

Basically, the minigame of collecting vanity pets in World of Warcraft has changed, and I'm glad Warcraft Pets is changing along with it.

[Mastr]

I think the best way to do it is treat us collectors like they do the pets now on the stats page.

Have columns you can click on to get your ranking. That way you could go for most pets, most at 25, most rares, best pet score, whatever floats your boat. That way you could work on whatever ranking scale you wanted to use.

Heck you could even go for most grey pets or most at level one.

[Drudatz]

I think if you make a pet ranking it should include your pet battle archy points to be a serious score...

[Livingdeath]

I like the proposed ranking system, but I will agree with others here who have asked that you could also sort the ranking on total unique pets as well. There are both trainees and collectors in the game and it would nice to appeal to both groups. I fall into both categories and would like to be able to sort based on both.

[Avarre]

I am MAINLY a pet collector and i like to pet battle too .I am a completionist so i have that urge to get all my pets to lvl 25. i think too they should have 2 rankings, one based on petscore and one based on total collection.

[Verdigris]

I think the best way to do it is treat us collectors like they do the pets now on the stats page.

Have columns you can click on to get your ranking. That way you could go for most pets, most at 25, most rares, best pet score, whatever floats your boat. That way you could work on whatever ranking scale you wanted to use.

Heck you could even go for most grey pets or most at level one.

Heartily, absolutely seconded.

[Breehit]

Since I am one of the people who can never catch up on sheer numbers (since I cannot afford the "unobtainable" event pets on ebay), I welcome the change that introduces rarity and leveling into the mix. Now I feel a real incentive to hunt those rares (I was just going for numbers before) and to complete my level 25 collection. This is great... and it feels like a renewal of the fun in collecting.

[Ysabell]

As a longtime collector with a large number of pets who also took the time to get rares of most of the new ones, I like this system. I do wish different breeds of the same pets weren't considered duplicates, but that's picking nits.