Could a dev explain why the warclaw was created?

I just don't see how this benefits the gamemode more than it harms it. Mounts weren't added to any PvP format for a reason, so why make the warclaw? Especially if it's designed specifically to be strong in this format.

What was the thought process? How did you decide this was a good idea?

Warclaw is still underwhelming. We need the ability to waypoint straight to a Commander or any spot we like. I don't want to run to farm all the paper towers. I don't want to meet players cutting reinforcements to my Zerg. The warclaw is fast, but lately they've been close to dismounting me and I nearly had heart attacks. Why should I fight players in a mass player vs player mode? I just want to run to my super big blob as my other pve friends want to as well. I want to farm pips easily.

Oops, time to fight the next paper keep Lord.

??????????

@witcher.3197 said:I just don't see how this benefits the gamemode more than it harms it. Mounts weren't added to any PvP format for a reason, so why make the warclaw? Especially if it's designed specifically to be strong in this format.

What was the thought process? How did you decide this was a good idea?

My problem with Anet is not necessarily with their choose of designing the warclaw for wvw but for their choice of neglecting core problems with profession balancing to begin with on top of that adding warclaw.

For the past 6 years; Anet has neglected to turn the game into a healthy competitive game-balance wise. I would think after unfortunately their loss of staffs including their tremendous financial loss; that they would take balance seriously in resulting in a healthy competitive game--they didn't.

Instead they added a mount as a bamd-aid fix. To me, that was not warranted and unjust. Again, adding a mount is not the core problem here but adding a mount to a momental 6 years of repetitive toxic balancing is.

I could careless how Anet make money but continuously ignoring the community concerns about toxicity-power--condition creep, 1 shotting mechanics stealth, broken builds, toxic profession designs, toxic environment including of having any consideration to our concerns---Thief+Mesmer literally destroying every chance of fun and competitiveness that the game could have, only show more that Anet embraces and promotes toxicity by opposing the community healthy-best intersects

So, Anet created warclaw to increase sales and as a a temporary solution to wvw undermining repetitiveness problems.

(my respectful opinion)--correct me if i am wrong

After all is said and done a company has to survive. Maybe warclaw will help keep it alive until alliances get here.... ?

@"Balthazzarr.1349" said:After all is said and done a company has to survive. Maybe warclaw will help keep it alive until alliances get here.... ?

The most important thing Anet needed to do in this situation is not to drive any players from the game mode. Doing anything controversial to this game mode in such a fragile state was a bad move. If anything, they have lost a decent number of players from the game mode, and I doubt gained any. No one who wasnt playing WvW before is all of a sudden going to start playing because of a mount, but plenty who dont like the change have left. I cant see how they are going to make more money with less players just from mount skins that I doubt many WvW players will buy anyways and no PvE'ers will use because of the mounts shortcomings outside of WvW.

@jakt.9381 said:

I cant see how they are going to make more money with less players just from mount skins that I doubt many WvW players will buy anyways and no PvE'ers will use because of the mounts shortcomings outside of WvW.

It is pretty hilariously bad in PvE isn't it? xDBut I think they'll do fine by mount skins, the buzz about which skin people want is fairly constant.

Warclaw was probably brought in as it's easy, as all the basic coding for mounts is already in the game.

PoF was still Point of Failure as far as balance and this game was concerned.

Arenanet/Dev's does not need to explain itself, e.g. what it is about the warclaw or why it was integrated. If you can count more than 1 and 1 together, you can deduce the reasons yourself. And probably the question will still remain open.

Why deal with things or thematize things to whose question you don't get a real answer?

Rather, players should now make an effort to address current issues. Because the Warclaw, with its skills, is in some ways immature and in need of improvement. Another post in the forum already discusses this, see (click, it's a link that will redirect you): WARCLAW improvement - what is your opinion on ... ?

o/

@"Metzie.9083" said:Arenanet/Dev's does not need to explain itself, e.g. what it is about the warclaw or why it was integrated. If you can count more than 1 and 1 together, you can deduce the reasons yourself. And probably the question will still remain open.

Why deal with things or thematize things to whose question you don't get a real answer?

Rather, players should now make an effort to address current issues. Because the Warclaw, with its skills, is in some ways immature and in need of improvement. Another post in the forum already discusses this, see (click, it's a link that will redirect you): WARCLAW improvement - what is your opinion on ... ?

o/

Are we not allowed to question controversial choices?

If devs answered what the goal of the warclaw was, what did they want to solve/improve with it, why did they think it's okay to add, then we could provide better feedback to help them meet those goals and principles.

@witcher.3197 said:

@"Metzie.9083" said:Arenanet/Dev's does not need to explain itself, e.g. what it is about the warclaw or why it was integrated. If you can count more than 1 and 1 together, you can deduce the reasons yourself. And probably the question will still remain open.

Why deal with things or thematize things to whose question you don't get a real answer?

Rather, players should now make an effort to address current issues. Because the Warclaw, with its skills, is in some ways immature and in need of improvement. Another post in the forum already discusses this, see (click, it's a link that will redirect you):

WARCLAW improvement - what is your opinion on ... ?

o/

I'm not gonna go great on that because it's a rhetorical question.

It's the way the title was chosen or the way it looks. I replied to that. Don't make it more than it is or complicate it.

Once again, although I have already written it: "ANet" will certainly not give you any information about the question asked in the title. ;-)

I dont know why any of you didnt see it comming, when gliders made it to wvw, it was only a question of mounts doing it too.. simpy incentives to buy the expacks to be competitive. Nothing more, nothing less.

Why complain for no good reason. Let it be. Warclaw is fine. Good work Anet.

@BadMed.3846 said:Why complain for no good reason. Let it be. Warclaw is fine. Good work Anet.

Also laughed heartily at this joke. Thanks for that. I don't want to know what or how you play (can imagine it) without judging it.

I wear pink glasses and wonder why everything looks pink? What could be the reason?

@Metzie.9083 said:

@BadMed.3846 said:Why complain for no good reason. Let it be. Warclaw is fine. Good work Anet.

Your imagination can't be nearly as wild as mine. But then, you might enjoy being a joke yourself. Yet, i can't laugh at such bad jokes.

Try brown glasses next time. Will show you the right colours.

@Metzie.9083 said:

@BadMed.3846 said:Why complain for no good reason. Let it be. Warclaw is fine. Good work Anet.

Well said, I dont know why people are tell to WvW community player " why arent you happy with mount" or " Mount is completly fine"without taking our point of view and what we had endure for so long.

@BadMed.3846 said:Why complain for no good reason. Let it be. Warclaw is fine. Good work Anet.

Before telling this, try to take point of view of a old regular WvW player, it might be useful to try to understand other PoV.

We complain because the core gamemode hasnt be design for the mount or at least not have been rework to take in account this mount.

@Redponey.8352 said:

@Metzie.9083 said:

@BadMed.3846 said:Why complain for no good reason. Let it be. Warclaw is fine. Good work Anet.

@BadMed.3846 said:Why complain for no good reason. Let it be. Warclaw is fine. Good work Anet.

I'm an old regular WvW player. Your pointless argument is irrelevant to me.

@BadMed.3846 said:

@Metzie.9083 said:

@BadMed.3846 said:Why complain for no good reason. Let it be. Warclaw is fine. Good work Anet.

I notice you understood a lot (ironically meant) ... you must be a genius?! Let it be good, because it leads to nothing constructive, especially that it would be worth wasting (my) time about it. Nice that there is you (player like you). Have fun "Fanboy". :-)

Addition: If you really want to "talk" more, or want to contribute something productive, take the chance, here, see: WARCLAW improvement - what is your opinion on ... ?

@Burnfall.9573 said:

@witcher.3197 said:I just don't see how this benefits the gamemode more than it harms it. Mounts weren't added to any PvP format for a reason, so why make the warclaw? Especially if it's designed specifically to be strong in this format.

What was the thought process? How did you decide this was a good idea?

What 'tremendous financial loss' are you referring to? I'm not sure I've seen any financial info referenced outside the quarterly calls.

@Metzie.9083 said:

@BadMed.3846 said:

@Metzie.9083 said:

@BadMed.3846 said:Why complain for no good reason. Let it be. Warclaw is fine. Good work Anet.

I notice you're very determined. Just like me. Yet you fail to impress. I can also see your constructive arguments.

I can tell you what it has done for me. I have been playing this game since beta and up till the warclaw release I was like rank 15. My main problem is I hated running everywhere so I just gave up on the game mode that was frustrating me. Yes I know in every area of the game we had to run but in pve I would not encounter a zerg that would drop me in 3 seconds and then I have to start the journey all over again.

Since the release I have now achieved rank 120 and am enjoying it a lot more than I thought I would have. I am not sure if I will keep playing as much after the xp boost is gone because that is also a big draw for me. But I will keep coming back to play it from time to time for sure. I can not speak to what it was like before the warclaw like the vets of the game mode but I can tell you from my perspective it helps me want to play the game mode more.

Since I doubt you will get your answer OP , I will attempt to give you one even though it's more like an assumption. WvW purists didn't buy mountskins because they didn't have much use for them. Anet wanted WvW purists buying mountskins so they created the Warclaw but also made it available outside WvW. This causes an influx of PVEers temporarily revitalizing one of the most neglected modes. Some of them may even stick around now that maps are easier to traverse at the same speeds they are used to in PVE.

They already did, in twitch streams and last weeks guild chat.

@Kolisch.4691 said:Warclaw is still underwhelming. We need the ability to waypoint straight to a Commander or any spot we like. I don't want to run to farm all the paper towers. I don't want to meet players cutting reinforcements to my Zerg. The warclaw is fast, but lately they've been close to dismounting me and I nearly had heart attacks. Why should I fight players in a mass player vs player mode? I just want to run to my super big blob as my other pve friends want to as well. I want to farm pips easily.

Oops, time to fight the next paper keep Lord.

Nobody addressing the elephant in the room? :+1:

@Tinnel.4369 said:They already did, in twitch streams and last weeks guild chat.

I missed it, could you give me a TL;DR?