Bursting.1976

I still haven't played a guardian yet so I can only speak from my observations of why other people have played them. One popular reason seems to be because of their great survivability. Damage may be low compared to some other professions but I guess if you survive long enough you will eventually have enough time to kill the enemy in most cases.

Probably Thunderhead Peaks and Drizzlewood Coast. Both don't seem to have much events going on most of the time.

Where did you get this information from? Because according to the GW2 wiki it doesn't have the most damage out of all of the mounts in PvE even with the ravenous discipline mastery unlocked from the raptor.Yeah I just checked.They removed the bleeding in PvE too it seems. That was its edge. It does the same damage as raptor now. RIP warclaw. Wow I didn't even know that there used to bleeding damage in PvE before lol. Seems kind of silly to remove it in PvE since PvE is not competitive and I doubt that skill used to be overpowered in PvE. I wonder if the bleeding removal in PvE was intentional. It is a design change. They can’t separate design changes from one game mode to another. As for the topic at hand, please do not waste time making warclaw relevant in PvE. If it is going to be relevant, then it first needs to get its niche and with pretty much all movement skill abilities already covered by all the existing mounts, I personally don’t want the devs to scratch their head and waste time figuring out what the warclaw would do that no other mount can’t do.Another problem as well, is that, if it becomes relevant, then the majority of players will complain that they need to play WvW just to be able to perform in PvE. But Anet have already done many design changes that are specific to game modes. For example some skills work differently between PvE, WvW and PvP. Also the warclaw skill battle maul already does different damage in PvP than PvE due to a higher transformation damage coefficient according to the GW2 wiki. You don’t get my point. They can change how strong one skill performs from one game mode to another, but they cannot make the warclaw do bleeding in PvE and not inflict bleeding when players play in WvW. For example, if the warclaw was able to go underwater, it would be impossible for the devs to decide that in WvW, the warclaw would not be able swim. That is why it is pretty much impossible to buff the warclaw in PvE (outside of speed maybe because speed has an arithmetic value) because any change that would be introduced in PvE would affect WvW. And since the devs have been reducing the effectiveness of the warclaw in WvW, then they obviously have no intention of buffing it in any way, shape or form. My point is why wouldn't they be able to make the bleed from warclaw do different damage in PvE than in WvW since skills are already different between game modes? I guess they could. But is it worth the effort though ? Will it make it more popular just because it has an engage skill that applies two stacks of bleeds ? Don’t forget they cannot make it too strong as well because it makes the core experience of the game even more powercrept. Sounds like a waste of time imo. If they really want to make mounts more appealing in PvE, they’d better focus on the PvE only mounts. Oh wait, that is exactly what they are doing for the anniversary! More variety, more opportunities and the biggest advantage of being consistent with the recent updates without the risk of alienating the WvW invested players. Edit:typo Doing something simple like increasing the engage skill damage wouldn't take much effort. Something is better than nothing. I have seen updates to the game for more useless things. I imagine many WvW players also play PvE and vice versa, so I don't know why you are focusing so much on a perceived WvW/PvE player base division. Not everyone has all of the mounts unlocked. Should there be no changes made to the roller beetle or skyscale because some people haven't done the collections to unlock them too? Of course there is a division. The number of players engaged in WvW is quite small versus the number of players engaged in PvE. Ask any WvW invested players on forums, they all would tell you that there has been a consistent decrease of players over the last years. I really don’t understand why you bring up the other mounts. They are PvE related, tied with story and lore, so I will make an educated guess that there is obviously more players owning these mounts than there is players owning the warclaw. Therefore updating the PvE mounts makes more sense that updating a mount unobtainable in PvE. Updating the warclaw won’t make much difference in terms of how popular the warclaw is because for players to first be excited about warclaw update in PvE, they need to care about it in the first place imo. You can’t force players to care about it unless they find a way to make the warclaw obtainable in PvE with lore and story. And forcing players to go into WvW to get some benefit in PvE outside of legendary purposes is certainly not a good idea imo. Other than please don’t disregard the my point about strong engage skills. People have been been complaining about that in the past so it is obviously a bad idea now to buff it. tl:drAllow me to agree to disagree.I am bringing up other mounts because not everybody has unlocked every mount. Specifically, it was a response to this statement by you: "If they really want to make mounts more appealing in PvE, they’d better focus on the PvE only mounts." Not everyone has all the PvE mounts unlocked so does that mean some mounts that people may not have unlocked like the skyscale or roller beetle should not be changed to improve them if they required it? I think that there are just as few, if not less, people that have unlocked the skyscale because of the huge grind. I know I personally enjoyed unlocking the warclaw much more than the skyscale. Of course this is just speculation and you and I cannot know what the real numbers are - only Anet knows. I am not trying to force anyone to do any content. I can't force anyone to play WvW to unlock the warclaw, just like you can't force anyone that doesn't care about the story and lore to grind to unlock the skyscale. The engage skill doesn't have to be buffed up to ridiculous proportions. You make it sound like it's impossible to increase the damage of the engage skill without making it OP. This will obviously not be the case if there is a little testing done. The damage from mount engage skills isn't especially useful against mobs in PvE anyway. Sure you can disagree all you like, just like I am disagreeing with what you have said.

Maybe they could mention the increase in difficulty in HoT expansion content and add some tips and strategies in the new player guide, so players are aware before entering. Might also be useful to mention that mounts can be unlocked account wide by doing the PoF expansion content first.

As long as it's optional, I support it if there are players interested.

Great focus on skins doesn't make this a good change. If there is any mount that is the LEAST useful to introduce new skins to ... it's the Warclaw because statistically it has the lowest ownership (or near the bottom at least). We certainly don't need it to be more useful in PVE for Anet to release a skin for it, so that justification doesn't actually make a whole lots of sense to begin with. It's true that the warclaw mount ownership may not be high. But the roller beetle or especially the skyscale (which requires a lot of grind) ownership may also be low and recently there have been new skins added for these. I don't think changing it only for skins would be worth it, but this may just be one benefit Anet can get if they decide to change the warclaw to be more useful in PvE.

It was always clear and I never made an assumption of where it would sit in the priorities. I can only assume you're making this an issue because you think it's a good path to discredit me and what I'm saying. Not going to happen. What I do know is this (and none it requires knowledge about being a dev at Anet just to be clear)Maintaining the status quo requires NOTHINGChanging it requires SOMETHINGAnet doesn't employ people that don't have work to do The sum of those things is this ... proponents need to justify the change in a way that makes it appealing for Anet to do it. So far the best reason here is some very speculative claims about skin revenue ... which don't make sense considering the relative number of mount owners and the ability for Anet to develop any skin they want. I don't think this idea has much merit and actually goes against the intent of the game and would likely delay some other development if 'prioritized' (word of the day I guess) .... so I'm going to argue against the reasons (especially the silly ones) I see that people propose to make the change. That's what the forum is here for. And yes to be clear ... I believe if you think changing Warclaw to be useful in PVE just to sell some skins is worth 'prioritizing' it so it gets done ... you're just not paying attention to how this game works for the last 8 years. Your assumption would be totally wrong. I'm not trying to discredit anyone and I don't know why you feel so personally involved in this discussion. Just pointing out things that I have observed for pros and cons of this idea for both sides of the discussion. Suggestions like the OP's one are also what the forums are for. The game has changed a lot over the last 8 years and I think it will continue to do so. Recently I have seen a much greater focus on skins (you can decide for yourselves whether that's a good or bad thing).

These would be pretty interesting.

There are many reasons to avoid enemies, for example running back to teammates, particularly if you're running as a support build. Fighting in a group is something even non-twitchy players can do, which means you don't need to be the best player in the world, which means that it's an option available to normal/bad players which allows them to have fun with other players - so that's why the people running from spawn don't want to mess about with some gank-built 1v1 specialist. Or, as is more frequent recently, a group of five people who only jump on smaller numbers. I doubt Anet designed an entire mode involving players killing each other so that people could rack up points. Funny .. the evidence is that WvW exists to prove it. We can debate all we want why it was added ... but the real discussion is what Warclaw allows a player to do in WvW. You seem to have missed my point. Killing players also gets points so this was obviously meant to happen... That was never in question to begin with. This shouldn't cast doubt in your mind that Anet designed an entire mode involving players killing each other so that people could rack up points because that's exactly what WvW is. Warclaw is a WvW development that favours 'racking up points' in WvW ... I'm not against Warclaw getting some more focus in PVE ... but not without good reason. I certainly don't consider WvW to be a mode that involves only scoring points. Neither does anyone else ... no one said it was ONLY about that. What would a good reason be to me to make Warclaw useful in PVE? I don't have one, at least nothing that would justify diverting Anet from whatever else they were working on to do so ... that's why I don't support the suggestion. Of course no one said that. Then why are you talking about how you don't consider WvW to be a mode that involves only scoring points if no one is saying it? I mean ... YOU are the using the language ONLY ... no one else did. No, I didn't. Go back to what I posted earlier and read it properly without your own interpretations. The point I made is part of WvW is killing players, and this will undoubtedly happen. Well, no, you actually did ... you can actually SEE it in the text I quoted from you ... but whatever. You say you didn't. Again, my point with that text that you PARTIALLY quoted was "Killing players also gets points so this was obviously meant to happen." I was saying that killing players is a part of WvW. Is that clear enough now for you? If you still want to interpret it as whatever you like, then go ahead I can't stop you. Actually i do have a suggestion ... to NOT make Warclaw more useful in PVE for the reason I gave as well as others. And there is no need to repeat that over and over again. Your reasoning was quite poor imo since you don't even know what other things Anet could spend resources on or how much effort this would actually take since you are not a dev. You don't need to be a dev to know Anet would have to interrupt other work to implement this idea. I do also know it's more work than NOT doing it ... you don't need to know much to understand that ... You seem to have a very poor understanding of game development. There are things called priorities. Do I? Because you think making Warclaw useful for PVE users is top priority? Oh ok then :+1: You really don't get how this works. We don't have to justify the status quo ... because it's already an investment in the game Anet made based on whatever reasoning they had at the time. Here are two things that you don't need to be a dev to understand, so pay attention:Maintaining the status quo requires NOTHINGChanging it requires SOMETHING These are facts> OK ... here is the part we can start mulling over, since you want to mansplain to me 'priorities'. I can assure you RIGHT NOW ... that Anet has priorities for what devs are working on, whatever it is, for whatever reasons. not only right now ... but also in the future. So if you and your friends what to push a suggestion, you need to make that suggestion seem WAY BETTER than any of the things (remember, priorities?) they devs are working on or have plans to work on because I can also assure you that they don't have a pool of devs just sitting around waiting for bad player suggestions to implement. lol. What a bunch of nonsense text. You are just repeating what you said earlier again. No one has said that this must be top priority. I guess when you run out of valid arguments you resort to extreme hyperbole... Right ... again ... nonsense to think Anet has NOTHING better to work on than PVE improvements for Warclaw. :+1: And who has said that this must be done soon over the so-called more important things? Well, when is it going to get done then? By this imaginary pool of devs that don't have anything to do? I don't pretend to know things that only developers can like you do... Again ... I don't need to be a developer to know Anet doesn't employ people to sit around and do nothing. But you need to be a developer to understand where this suggestion would sit in their list of priorities if it was done. Is that clear now?

There are many reasons to avoid enemies, for example running back to teammates, particularly if you're running as a support build. Fighting in a group is something even non-twitchy players can do, which means you don't need to be the best player in the world, which means that it's an option available to normal/bad players which allows them to have fun with other players - so that's why the people running from spawn don't want to mess about with some gank-built 1v1 specialist. Or, as is more frequent recently, a group of five people who only jump on smaller numbers. I doubt Anet designed an entire mode involving players killing each other so that people could rack up points. Funny .. the evidence is that WvW exists to prove it. We can debate all we want why it was added ... but the real discussion is what Warclaw allows a player to do in WvW. You seem to have missed my point. Killing players also gets points so this was obviously meant to happen... That was never in question to begin with. This shouldn't cast doubt in your mind that Anet designed an entire mode involving players killing each other so that people could rack up points because that's exactly what WvW is. Warclaw is a WvW development that favours 'racking up points' in WvW ... I'm not against Warclaw getting some more focus in PVE ... but not without good reason. I certainly don't consider WvW to be a mode that involves only scoring points. Neither does anyone else ... no one said it was ONLY about that. What would a good reason be to me to make Warclaw useful in PVE? I don't have one, at least nothing that would justify diverting Anet from whatever else they were working on to do so ... that's why I don't support the suggestion. Of course no one said that. Then why are you talking about how you don't consider WvW to be a mode that involves only scoring points if no one is saying it? I mean ... YOU are the using the language ONLY ... no one else did. No, I didn't. Go back to what I posted earlier and read it properly without your own interpretations. The point I made is part of WvW is killing players, and this will undoubtedly happen. Well, no, you actually did ... you can actually SEE it in the text I quoted from you ... but whatever. You say you didn't. Again, my point with that text that you PARTIALLY quoted was "Killing players also gets points so this was obviously meant to happen." I was saying that killing players is a part of WvW. Is that clear enough now for you? If you still want to interpret it as whatever you like, then go ahead I can't stop you. Actually i do have a suggestion ... to NOT make Warclaw more useful in PVE for the reason I gave as well as others. And there is no need to repeat that over and over again. Your reasoning was quite poor imo since you don't even know what other things Anet could spend resources on or how much effort this would actually take since you are not a dev. You don't need to be a dev to know Anet would have to interrupt other work to implement this idea. I do also know it's more work than NOT doing it ... you don't need to know much to understand that ... You seem to have a very poor understanding of game development. There are things called priorities. Do I? Because you think making Warclaw useful for PVE users is top priority? Oh ok then :+1: You really don't get how this works. We don't have to justify the status quo ... because it's already an investment in the game Anet made based on whatever reasoning they had at the time. Here are two things that you don't need to be a dev to understand, so pay attention:Maintaining the status quo requires NOTHINGChanging it requires SOMETHING These are facts> OK ... here is the part we can start mulling over, since you want to mansplain to me 'priorities'. I can assure you RIGHT NOW ... that Anet has priorities for what devs are working on, whatever it is, for whatever reasons. not only right now ... but also in the future. So if you and your friends what to push a suggestion, you need to make that suggestion seem WAY BETTER than any of the things (remember, priorities?) they devs are working on or have plans to work on because I can also assure you that they don't have a pool of devs just sitting around waiting for bad player suggestions to implement. lol. What a bunch of nonsense text. You are just repeating what you said earlier again. No one has said that this must be top priority. I guess when you run out of valid arguments you resort to extreme hyperbole... Right ... again ... nonsense to think Anet has NOTHING better to work on than PVE improvements for Warclaw. :+1: And who has said that this must be done soon over the so-called more important things? Well, when is it going to get done then? By this imaginary pool of devs that don't have anything to do?I don't pretend to know things that only developers can like you do... You still don't seem to get what priorites mean...

There are many reasons to avoid enemies, for example running back to teammates, particularly if you're running as a support build. Fighting in a group is something even non-twitchy players can do, which means you don't need to be the best player in the world, which means that it's an option available to normal/bad players which allows them to have fun with other players - so that's why the people running from spawn don't want to mess about with some gank-built 1v1 specialist. Or, as is more frequent recently, a group of five people who only jump on smaller numbers. I doubt Anet designed an entire mode involving players killing each other so that people could rack up points. Funny .. the evidence is that WvW exists to prove it. We can debate all we want why it was added ... but the real discussion is what Warclaw allows a player to do in WvW. You seem to have missed my point. Killing players also gets points so this was obviously meant to happen... That was never in question to begin with. This shouldn't cast doubt in your mind that Anet designed an entire mode involving players killing each other so that people could rack up points because that's exactly what WvW is. Warclaw is a WvW development that favours 'racking up points' in WvW ... I'm not against Warclaw getting some more focus in PVE ... but not without good reason. I certainly don't consider WvW to be a mode that involves only scoring points. Neither does anyone else ... no one said it was ONLY about that. What would a good reason be to me to make Warclaw useful in PVE? I don't have one, at least nothing that would justify diverting Anet from whatever else they were working on to do so ... that's why I don't support the suggestion. Of course no one said that. Then why are you talking about how you don't consider WvW to be a mode that involves only scoring points if no one is saying it? I mean ... YOU are the using the language ONLY ... no one else did. No, I didn't. Go back to what I posted earlier and read it properly without your own interpretations. The point I made is part of WvW is killing players, and this will undoubtedly happen. Well, no, you actually did ... you can actually SEE it in the text I quoted from you ... but whatever. You say you didn't. Again, my point with that text that you PARTIALLY quoted was "Killing players also gets points so this was obviously meant to happen." I was saying that killing players is a part of WvW. Is that clear enough now for you? If you still want to interpret it as whatever you like, then go ahead I can't stop you. Actually i do have a suggestion ... to NOT make Warclaw more useful in PVE for the reason I gave as well as others. And there is no need to repeat that over and over again. Your reasoning was quite poor imo since you don't even know what other things Anet could spend resources on or how much effort this would actually take since you are not a dev. You don't need to be a dev to know Anet would have to interrupt other work to implement this idea. I do also know it's more work than NOT doing it ... you don't need to know much to understand that ... You seem to have a very poor understanding of game development. There are things called priorities. Do I? Because you think making Warclaw useful for PVE users is top priority? Oh ok then :+1: You really don't get how this works. We don't have to justify the status quo ... because it's already an investment in the game Anet made based on whatever reasoning they had at the time. Here are two things that you don't need to be a dev to understand, so pay attention:Maintaining the status quo requires NOTHINGChanging it requires SOMETHING These are facts> OK ... here is the part we can start mulling over, since you want to mansplain to me 'priorities'. I can assure you RIGHT NOW ... that Anet has priorities for what devs are working on, whatever it is, for whatever reasons. not only right now ... but also in the future. So if you and your friends what to push a suggestion, you need to make that suggestion seem WAY BETTER than any of the things (remember, priorities?) they devs are working on or have plans to work on because I can also assure you that they don't have a pool of devs just sitting around waiting for bad player suggestions to implement. lol. What a bunch of nonsense text. You are just repeating what you said earlier again. No one has said that this must be top priority. I guess when you run out of valid arguments you resort to extreme hyperbole... Right ... again ... nonsense to think Anet has NOTHING better to work on than PVE improvements for Warclaw. :+1: And who has said that this must be done soon over the so-called more important things? There are things called priorities (remember?). :+1:

There are many reasons to avoid enemies, for example running back to teammates, particularly if you're running as a support build. Fighting in a group is something even non-twitchy players can do, which means you don't need to be the best player in the world, which means that it's an option available to normal/bad players which allows them to have fun with other players - so that's why the people running from spawn don't want to mess about with some gank-built 1v1 specialist. Or, as is more frequent recently, a group of five people who only jump on smaller numbers. I doubt Anet designed an entire mode involving players killing each other so that people could rack up points. Funny .. the evidence is that WvW exists to prove it. We can debate all we want why it was added ... but the real discussion is what Warclaw allows a player to do in WvW. You seem to have missed my point. Killing players also gets points so this was obviously meant to happen... That was never in question to begin with. This shouldn't cast doubt in your mind that Anet designed an entire mode involving players killing each other so that people could rack up points because that's exactly what WvW is. Warclaw is a WvW development that favours 'racking up points' in WvW ... I'm not against Warclaw getting some more focus in PVE ... but not without good reason. I certainly don't consider WvW to be a mode that involves only scoring points. Neither does anyone else ... no one said it was ONLY about that. What would a good reason be to me to make Warclaw useful in PVE? I don't have one, at least nothing that would justify diverting Anet from whatever else they were working on to do so ... that's why I don't support the suggestion. Of course no one said that. Then why are you talking about how you don't consider WvW to be a mode that involves only scoring points if no one is saying it? I mean ... YOU are the using the language ONLY ... no one else did. No, I didn't. Go back to what I posted earlier and read it properly without your own interpretations. The point I made is part of WvW is killing players, and this will undoubtedly happen. Well, no, you actually did ... you can actually SEE it in the text I quoted from you ... but whatever. You say you didn't. Again, my point with that text that you PARTIALLY quoted was "Killing players also gets points so this was obviously meant to happen." I was saying that killing players is a part of WvW. Is that clear enough now for you? If you still want to interpret it as whatever you like, then go ahead I can't stop you. Actually i do have a suggestion ... to NOT make Warclaw more useful in PVE for the reason I gave as well as others. And there is no need to repeat that over and over again. Your reasoning was quite poor imo since you don't even know what other things Anet could spend resources on or how much effort this would actually take since you are not a dev. You don't need to be a dev to know Anet would have to interrupt other work to implement this idea. I do also know it's more work than NOT doing it ... you don't need to know much to understand that ... You seem to have a very poor understanding of game development. There are things called priorities. Do I? Because you think making Warclaw useful for PVE users is top priority? Oh ok then :+1: You really don't get how this works. We don't have to justify the status quo ... because it's already an investment in the game Anet made based on whatever reasoning they had at the time. Here are two things that you don't need to be a dev to understand, so pay attention:Maintaining the status quo requires NOTHINGChanging it requires SOMETHING These are facts> OK ... here is the part we can start mulling over, since you want to mansplain to me 'priorities'. I can assure you RIGHT NOW ... that Anet has priorities for what devs are working on, whatever it is, for whatever reasons. not only right now ... but also in the future. So if you and your friends what to push a suggestion, you need to make that suggestion seem WAY BETTER than any of the things (remember, priorities?) they devs are working on or have plans to work on because I can also assure you that they don't have a pool of devs just sitting around waiting for bad player suggestions to implement. lol. What a bunch of nonsense text. You are just repeating what you said earlier again. No one has said that this must be top priority. I guess when you run out of valid arguments you resort to extreme hyperbole...

There are many reasons to avoid enemies, for example running back to teammates, particularly if you're running as a support build. Fighting in a group is something even non-twitchy players can do, which means you don't need to be the best player in the world, which means that it's an option available to normal/bad players which allows them to have fun with other players - so that's why the people running from spawn don't want to mess about with some gank-built 1v1 specialist. Or, as is more frequent recently, a group of five people who only jump on smaller numbers. I doubt Anet designed an entire mode involving players killing each other so that people could rack up points. Funny .. the evidence is that WvW exists to prove it. We can debate all we want why it was added ... but the real discussion is what Warclaw allows a player to do in WvW. You seem to have missed my point. Killing players also gets points so this was obviously meant to happen... That was never in question to begin with. This shouldn't cast doubt in your mind that Anet designed an entire mode involving players killing each other so that people could rack up points because that's exactly what WvW is. Warclaw is a WvW development that favours 'racking up points' in WvW ... I'm not against Warclaw getting some more focus in PVE ... but not without good reason. I certainly don't consider WvW to be a mode that involves only scoring points. Neither does anyone else ... no one said it was ONLY about that. What would a good reason be to me to make Warclaw useful in PVE? I don't have one, at least nothing that would justify diverting Anet from whatever else they were working on to do so ... that's why I don't support the suggestion. Of course no one said that. Then why are you talking about how you don't consider WvW to be a mode that involves only scoring points if no one is saying it? I mean ... YOU are the using the language ONLY ... no one else did. No, I didn't. Go back to what I posted earlier and read it properly without your own interpretations. The point I made is part of WvW is killing players, and this will undoubtedly happen. Well, no, you actually did ... you can actually SEE it in the text I quoted from you ... but whatever. You say you didn't. Again, my point with that text that you PARTIALLY quoted was "Killing players also gets points so this was obviously meant to happen." I was saying that killing players is a part of WvW. Is that clear enough now for you? If you still want to interpret it as whatever you like, then go ahead I can't stop you. Actually i do have a suggestion ... to NOT make Warclaw more useful in PVE for the reason I gave as well as others. And there is no need to repeat that over and over again. Your reasoning was quite poor imo since you don't even know what other things Anet could spend resources on or how much effort this would actually take since you are not a dev. You don't need to be a dev to know Anet would have to interrupt other work to implement this idea. I do also know it's more work than NOT doing it ... you don't need to know much to understand that ... You seem to have a very poor understanding of game development. There are things called priorities. This may get low priority from devs since it is a quality of life improvement. Since you are not a dev you have no idea where this suggestion would sit in their priorities if they do decide to change the warclaw (and I don't either). So don't pretend like you know something useful would be interrupted because of doing work on this. It could simply be they make some changes to the warclaw and delay producing some new skins a bit. Edit: The same thing that I said above applies to the additional text you seem to have added later on...

There are many reasons to avoid enemies, for example running back to teammates, particularly if you're running as a support build. Fighting in a group is something even non-twitchy players can do, which means you don't need to be the best player in the world, which means that it's an option available to normal/bad players which allows them to have fun with other players - so that's why the people running from spawn don't want to mess about with some gank-built 1v1 specialist. Or, as is more frequent recently, a group of five people who only jump on smaller numbers. I doubt Anet designed an entire mode involving players killing each other so that people could rack up points. Funny .. the evidence is that WvW exists to prove it. We can debate all we want why it was added ... but the real discussion is what Warclaw allows a player to do in WvW. You seem to have missed my point. Killing players also gets points so this was obviously meant to happen... That was never in question to begin with. This shouldn't cast doubt in your mind that Anet designed an entire mode involving players killing each other so that people could rack up points because that's exactly what WvW is. Warclaw is a WvW development that favours 'racking up points' in WvW ... I'm not against Warclaw getting some more focus in PVE ... but not without good reason. I certainly don't consider WvW to be a mode that involves only scoring points. Neither does anyone else ... no one said it was ONLY about that. What would a good reason be to me to make Warclaw useful in PVE? I don't have one, at least nothing that would justify diverting Anet from whatever else they were working on to do so ... that's why I don't support the suggestion. Of course no one said that. Then why are you talking about how you don't consider WvW to be a mode that involves only scoring points if no one is saying it? I mean ... YOU are the using the language ONLY ... no one else did.No, I didn't. Go back to what I posted earlier and read it properly without your own interpretations. The point I made is part of WvW is killing players, and this will undoubtedly happen. Actually i do have a suggestion ... to NOT make Warclaw more useful in PVE for the reason I gave as well as others. And there is no need to repeat that over and over again. Your reasoning was quite poor imo since you don't even know what other things Anet could spend resources on or how much effort this would actually take since you are not a dev.

There are many reasons to avoid enemies, for example running back to teammates, particularly if you're running as a support build. Fighting in a group is something even non-twitchy players can do, which means you don't need to be the best player in the world, which means that it's an option available to normal/bad players which allows them to have fun with other players - so that's why the people running from spawn don't want to mess about with some gank-built 1v1 specialist. Or, as is more frequent recently, a group of five people who only jump on smaller numbers. I doubt Anet designed an entire mode involving players killing each other so that people could rack up points. Funny .. the evidence is that WvW exists to prove it. We can debate all we want why it was added ... but the real discussion is what Warclaw allows a player to do in WvW. You seem to have missed my point. Killing players also gets points so this was obviously meant to happen... That was never in question to begin with. This shouldn't cast doubt in your mind that Anet designed an entire mode involving players killing each other so that people could rack up points because that's exactly what WvW is. Warclaw is a WvW development that favours 'racking up points' in WvW ... I'm not against Warclaw getting some more focus in PVE ... but not without good reason. I certainly don't consider WvW to be a mode that involves only scoring points. Neither does anyone else ... no one said it was ONLY about that. What would a good reason be to me to make Warclaw useful in PVE? I don't have one, at least nothing that would justify diverting Anet from whatever else they were working on to do so ... that's why I don't support the suggestion. Of course no one said that. We were discussing what the point of WvW is and I said part of the point is fighting other players... You don't have any suggestions so please stop dismissing other player's suggestions. I'm sure Anet is capable of doing this on their own if they feel like it, without needing hundreds of other players saying that it's a bad suggestion for no reason.

There are many reasons to avoid enemies, for example running back to teammates, particularly if you're running as a support build. Fighting in a group is something even non-twitchy players can do, which means you don't need to be the best player in the world, which means that it's an option available to normal/bad players which allows them to have fun with other players - so that's why the people running from spawn don't want to mess about with some gank-built 1v1 specialist. Or, as is more frequent recently, a group of five people who only jump on smaller numbers. I doubt Anet designed an entire mode involving players killing each other so that people could rack up points. Funny .. the evidence is that WvW exists to prove it. We can debate all we want why it was added ... but the real discussion is what Warclaw allows a player to do in WvW. You seem to have missed my point. Killing players also gets points so this was obviously meant to happen... That was never in question to begin with. This shouldn't cast doubt in your mind that Anet designed an entire mode involving players killing each other so that people could rack up points because that's exactly what WvW is. Warclaw is a WvW development that favours 'racking up points' in WvW ... I'm not against Warclaw getting some more focus in PVE ... but not without good reason. I certainly don't consider WvW to be a mode that involves only scoring points. It's clear that the mode was designed to facilitate fighting other players since you get points for that, and if they wanted a mode exclusively for scoring points they could have simply not had fighting players involved. If you choose to avoid fighting players then that's your choice (and extremely boring imo). Either way, the addition of the warclaw in WvW doesn't help this because of the reasons I stated earlier. I'm curious, what would be a good reason to you?

lol. I approve.

That would be a great simple change since the warclaw is pretty useless in pve anyway. True. However, mount HP is pretty negligent in PvE now anyway since the skyscale allows you to avoid most enemies and you can use the bond of life mastery to gain a ton of health on all the mounts when you are in danger.

There are many reasons to avoid enemies, for example running back to teammates, particularly if you're running as a support build. Fighting in a group is something even non-twitchy players can do, which means you don't need to be the best player in the world, which means that it's an option available to normal/bad players which allows them to have fun with other players - so that's why the people running from spawn don't want to mess about with some gank-built 1v1 specialist. Or, as is more frequent recently, a group of five people who only jump on smaller numbers. I doubt Anet designed an entire mode involving players killing each other so that people could rack up points. Funny .. the evidence is that WvW exists to prove it. We can debate all we want why it was added ... but the real discussion is what Warclaw allows a player to do in WvW.You seem to have missed my point. Killing players also gets points so this was obviously meant to happen... Of course that's the real discussion, and we are discussing it lol.

There are many reasons to avoid enemies, for example running back to teammates, particularly if you're running as a support build. Fighting in a group is something even non-twitchy players can do, which means you don't need to be the best player in the world, which means that it's an option available to normal/bad players which allows them to have fun with other players - so that's why the people running from spawn don't want to mess about with some gank-built 1v1 specialist. Or, as is more frequent recently, a group of five people who only jump on smaller numbers. I doubt Anet designed an entire mode involving players killing each other so that people could rack up points. Like you said killing enemies gets points so I see no problem with people dying in WvW. Is it so upsetting to be killed in a game? Sure there are many reasons to run from a fight. But that's why I don't think the warclaw should have been added. Because when someone tries to run from a fight I could simply mount my warclaw and chase them down if I wanted to. The warclaw has made it even easier for everyone to engage in one massive fight in a single location, since everyone can quickly get there even after being killed and respawning.

The lag was so bad it took several years to reach us. ? Hahaha. The irony. =)

The only people who think this are the ones who ganked people who didn't want to fight them. I see much more ganks and zergs in WvW now after the warclaw was introduced than before. Everyone can just ride quickly to their teammates side to help them zerg. But why wouldn't you want to fight players in WvW anyway? Isn't that the whole point of the mode? At this point I would be happy if they removed the warclaw from WvW completely and made it a useful PvE mount. But then people might complain about its removal, since Anet already introduced the warclaw in WvW.

Indeed, the skyscale would fit perfectly for WvW. Imagine the amazing effects and lag that would be created from everyone using the blast engage skill all the time.

Obviously the warclaw was introduced as a WvW mount. I can't understand the logic that this means it must be useless for PvE. Why can't a mount be useful in more than a single game mode? It seems like people are just afraid of this happening for no real reason, other than that they may personally not desire to ever play WvW no matter what. In my opinion the warclaw should never have been made even for WvW. It created more problems for that game mode than benefits, which is why warclaw's blessing effect was introduced and the mount nerfed.

Where did you get this information from? Because according to the GW2 wiki it doesn't have the most damage out of all of the mounts in PvE even with the ravenous discipline mastery unlocked from the raptor.Yeah I just checked.They removed the bleeding in PvE too it seems. That was its edge. It does the same damage as raptor now. RIP warclaw. Wow I didn't even know that there used to bleeding damage in PvE before lol. Seems kind of silly to remove it in PvE since PvE is not competitive and I doubt that skill used to be overpowered in PvE. I wonder if the bleeding removal in PvE was intentional. It is a design change. They can’t separate design changes from one game mode to another. As for the topic at hand, please do not waste time making warclaw relevant in PvE. If it is going to be relevant, then it first needs to get its niche and with pretty much all movement skill abilities already covered by all the existing mounts, I personally don’t want the devs to scratch their head and waste time figuring out what the warclaw would do that no other mount can’t do.Another problem as well, is that, if it becomes relevant, then the majority of players will complain that they need to play WvW just to be able to perform in PvE. But Anet have already done many design changes that are specific to game modes. For example some skills work differently between PvE, WvW and PvP. Also the warclaw skill battle maul already does different damage in PvP than PvE due to a higher transformation damage coefficient according to the GW2 wiki. You don’t get my point. They can change how strong one skill performs from one game mode to another, but they cannot make the warclaw do bleeding in PvE and not inflict bleeding when players play in WvW. For example, if the warclaw was able to go underwater, it would be impossible for the devs to decide that in WvW, the warclaw would not be able swim. That is why it is pretty much impossible to buff the warclaw in PvE (outside of speed maybe because speed has an arithmetic value) because any change that would be introduced in PvE would affect WvW. And since the devs have been reducing the effectiveness of the warclaw in WvW, then they obviously have no intention of buffing it in any way, shape or form. My point is why wouldn't they be able to make the bleed from warclaw do different damage in PvE than in WvW since skills are already different between game modes? I guess they could. But is it worth the effort though ? Will it make it more popular just because it has an engage skill that applies two stacks of bleeds ? Don’t forget they cannot make it too strong as well because it makes the core experience of the game even more powercrept. Sounds like a waste of time imo. If they really want to make mounts more appealing in PvE, they’d better focus on the PvE only mounts. Oh wait, that is exactly what they are doing for the anniversary! More variety, more opportunities and the biggest advantage of being consistent with the recent updates without the risk of alienating the WvW invested players. Edit:typoDoing something simple like increasing the engage skill damage wouldn't take much effort. Something is better than nothing. I have seen updates to the game for more useless things. I imagine many WvW players also play PvE and vice versa, so I don't know why you are focusing so much on a perceived WvW/PvE player base division. Not everyone has all of the mounts unlocked. Should there be no changes made to the roller beetle or skyscale because some people haven't done the collections to unlock them too?