Personnal Gyrocopter glider/chair combo

[Acinonyx Rex.8609]

Thank you so much for this !! I love it so much, i can't think anything better for my asura engineer.

Best item from Black Lion chest so far.

[Super Hayes.6890]

Is it only in the chests 😫 Been trying to figure out why I can't find it in the gem store.... Guess I'm saving statues again lol. For the record, I want to purchase it directly right now 😒

[ShadowKatt.6740]

I was a little disappointed that the 'copter can't go up, even a little bit. It can't even climb stairs but it's still a cool enough chair. At least it does move a little.

[Killthehealersffs.8940]

Now allow it  to drop a box of fun and whoever touches it on the LA ,   become stone and you can equip them as missiles .

Then the copter get a portal that transport it into LA outskirts  and they must traverse the mid  and aim a moving target or random player with a mark.

 

Or dead bodies into OW becomes stones , and you  drop them at boss or feed them into the turtles cannon tht the driver can use

Edited October 18, 2023 by Killthehealersffs.8940

[Nightcore.5621]

4 hours ago, Super Hayes.6890 said:

Is it only in the chests 😫 Been trying to figure out why I can't find it in the gem store.... Guess I'm saving statues again lol. For the record, I want to purchase it directly right now 😒

Whats the big deal if its gemstore or not u can buy the Black Lion Exclusives Chest for 600 gold or whatever on trading post and pick it get it that way .. however u might need to wait til next skin Drop from there before u can pick it

Edited October 18, 2023 by Nightcore.5621

[Gendalfs.7521]

Make that copter a skyscale skin

[Zebulous.2934]

eh, it doesn't look like a charr chopper, or an Asuran equivalent.   It does look like a helicopter with steam punk elements strapped to the underside.  Large gears and exhaust.
That stabilizer propeller on the back bothers me, it looks too modern.  

It feels quite strange: I like the giant stuffed cat pillow chair, I enjoyed the hover cycle skin for the skimmer, but this helicopter goes too far.  Something about the aesthetic, ah well.

[Super Hayes.6890]

6 hours ago, Nightcore.5621 said:

Whats the big deal if its gemstore or not u can buy the Black Lion Exclusives Chest for 600 gold or whatever on trading post and pick it get it that way .. however u might need to wait til next skin Drop from there before u can pick it

Good to know. Didn't realize that chest got updates

[TheNurgle.4825]

5 hours ago, Gendalfs.7521 said:

Make that copter a skyscale skin

Please do this.

[ShadowKatt.6740]

5 hours ago, Gendalfs.7521 said:

Make that copter a skyscale skin

Okay, I like it but....how does a helicopter wall grab?

That's the hard part of making a vehicle to replace a mount. The monowheel for the roller beetle just goes fast. The hover....thing for the skimmer just floats. I would love to see a teleporting motorcycle for the jackal. But the skyscale? That one's tougher than just make a helicopter.

[Randulf.7614]

5 minutes ago, ShadowKatt.6740 said:

Okay, I like it but....how does a helicopter wall grab?

That's the hard part of making a vehicle to replace a mount. The monowheel for the roller beetle just goes fast. The hover....thing for the skimmer just floats. I would love to see a teleporting motorcycle for the jackal. But the skyscale? That one's tougher than just make a helicopter.

Grapple hook maybe? Might be overdoing the animation though

[TheNurgle.4825]

1 hour ago, ShadowKatt.6740 said:

Okay, I like it but....how does a helicopter wall grab?

How skyscale do it? Skyscale use legs and they do not attach other assets. For Gyrocopter skin you can either have nothing instead of legs or since you are using skyscale model just add mechanical legs which work same way as skyscales ones.

[Kassablanca.5821]

make chair usable in WvW

[TheNecrosanct.4028]

8 hours ago, Gendalfs.7521 said:

Make that copter a skyscale skin

Yeah, no. Mounts are riding animals, not vehicles. It's bad enough they already gave 1 mount a non-mount skin (the Synergetics Gyrocycle Roller Beetle). Let's not make this a habit.

[Manpag.6421]

1 hour ago, TheNecrosanct.4028 said:

Yeah, no. Mounts are riding animals, not vehicles. It's bad enough they already gave 1 mount a non-mount skin (the Synergetics Gyrocycle Roller Beetle). Let's not make this a habit.

Two mounts, the Synergetics Hoverbike Skimmer. I own both, though my wallet has been safe because ironically I find the Synergetics Cyberscale too much of an animal despite being part of the Synergetics set.

The base mounts are animals, yes, but functionally they are vehicles. Strictly speaking, all mount skins break lore, because you get given a single animal when you unlock a mount (in the case of skyscale and siege turtle, literally raising them from an egg), so riding a different breed of the same animal shouldn’t be possible.

They don’t have to be to your taste, you don’t have to buy/use them, but please don’t try and deprive other people who do enjoy their in-game transport feeling like transport.

[Gendalfs.7521]

7 hours ago, ShadowKatt.6740 said:

Okay, I like it but....how does a helicopter wall grab?

It could be like extracting mechanical arm in the front that sticks to the wall. Animation could be boosters under the copter that pushes it up.

Edited October 18, 2023 by Gendalfs.7521
Added info

[TheNecrosanct.4028]

21 hours ago, Manpag.6421 said:

Two mounts, the Synergetics Hoverbike Skimmer. I own both, though my wallet has been safe because ironically I find the Synergetics Cyberscale too much of an animal despite being part of the Synergetics set.

The base mounts are animals, yes, but functionally they are vehicles. Strictly speaking, all mount skins break lore, because you get given a single animal when you unlock a mount (in the case of skyscale and siege turtle, literally raising them from an egg), so riding a different breed of the same animal shouldn’t be possible.

They don’t have to be to your taste, you don’t have to buy/use them, but please don’t try and deprive other people who do enjoy their in-game transport feeling like transport.

Not depriving people of anything. Just hoping ANet also realizes that mounts are not vehicles, not even functionally. They are a mode of transport, yes, just like vehicles. Then again, so are your legs and I doubt you refer to them as either a mount or a vehicle, or that you'd like a pair of legs as a mount skin. It's not even about lore for me. The definitions for mount and vehicle are just not the same at all.

I'm just hoping ANet will see this fact as well and not make more vehicle skins for mounts. If people want vehicles, petition ANet to introduce vehicles to the game. Also, you can't deprive people of something that doesn't exist yet. At least they are not the worst mount skins in the game. That honor goes to the plushy and SAB mount skins.

Edit: And yes, I forgot about the other one. "Thanks" for reminding me. 😉

Edited October 19, 2023 by TheNecrosanct.4028

[Manpag.6421]

53 minutes ago, TheNecrosanct.4028 said:

Not depriving people of anything

…

I'm just hoping ANet will see this fact as well and not make more vehicle skins for mounts.

…

Also, you can't deprive people of something that doesn't exist yet.

You absolutely can deprive people of something that doesn’t exist yet. If I petitioned that (as a random example) Rangers, specifically, shouldn’t get any more skills/weapons/specialisations for whatever reason, and then every other spec got new things added except them, then my wish for them not to have more new content would be depriving the players who enjoy that profession of new abilities in the future. If nothing else, if the whole concept is taken off the table, it deprives people who enjoy the aesthetic of the hope of getting a matching skin for their preferred mount(s).

To your suggestion that vehicles should be added as a separate thing, that’s kind of already been done once: skiffs, which were quite clunky in their implementation, but made sense because it was performing a new role which no existing mount worked for.

I don’t mind them adding vehicles as a dedicated thing where it’s doing something new that no existing mount does, and that wouldn’t make sense with any of the mounts’ rigs. If they wanted to add Charr cars or something, that wouldn’t really fit any mount’s movement, and could be another standalone vehicle. Both the beetle and skimmer Synergetics skins fit their movement perfectly, so it would have been a total waste of time, resources, and players’ mastery points to add standalone gyrocycles and hover bikes, not to mention meaning they wouldn’t benefit from the masteries that share abilities across all mounts.

I’m mostly excited to see if there are any other mounts they can execute cool concepts like that with. I live in hope of some sort of hover-tank Synergetics siege turtle skin or something like that.

[TheNecrosanct.4028]

15 minutes ago, Manpag.6421 said:

You absolutely can deprive people of something that doesn’t exist yet. If I petitioned that (as a random example) Rangers, specifically, shouldn’t get any more skills/weapons/specialisations for whatever reason, and then every other spec got new things added except them, then my wish for them not to have more new content would be depriving the players who enjoy that profession of new abilities in the future. If nothing else, if the whole concept is taken off the table, it deprives people who enjoy the aesthetic of the hope of getting a matching skin for their preferred mount(s).

To your suggestion that vehicles should be added as a separate thing, that’s kind of already been done once: skiffs, which were quite clunky in their implementation, but made sense because it was performing a new role which no existing mount worked for.

I don’t mind them adding vehicles as a dedicated thing where it’s doing something new that no existing mount does, and that wouldn’t make sense with any of the mounts’ rigs. If they wanted to add Charr cars or something, that wouldn’t really fit any mount’s movement, and could be another standalone vehicle. Both the beetle and skimmer Synergetics skins fit their movement perfectly, so it would have been a total waste of time, resources, and players’ mastery points to add standalone gyrocycles and hover bikes, not to mention meaning they wouldn’t benefit from the masteries that share abilities across all mounts.

I’m mostly excited to see if there are any other mounts they can execute cool concepts like that with. I live in hope of some sort of hover-tank Synergetics siege turtle skin or something like that.

No, you can't. You can't take from someone or keep from someone something that doesn't exist. A petition is a request for or against something. It's not the act of taking anything away, nor is it blocking anything. You could certainly petition that Rangers get no more skills/weapons/specializations. Nobody will be deprived of anything if you do that. Not until ANet actually does something like that will people be deprived of something. You might want to check your definitions again, since you had the definitions of mount and vehicle wrong as well.

Skills are horrible as a method of transportation. It makes sense because they're boats, but really their only function is for fishing (ANet can put all the skiff races in the game they want, it's still a horrible thing). And since the game sees skiffs as mounts they could have just as well let us fish from the backs of our skimmers. They are faster and more agile and in a lot of cases would be better for maintaining fishing stacks when moving from one body of water to another, because the skimmer can go on land where the skiff can't. What I find even more disgraceful is that they've ignored the skimmer since the release of EoD, in favor of skiffs, as if skiffs are any sort of viable alternative to skimmers. I hope they'll start releasing skimmer skins again soon.

In theory I wouldn't mind them introducing vehicles in the game, but it wasn't a serious suggestion. I agree that it would have to serve a specific function that isn't already in the game and I don't see that happening. There's nothing a vehicle can do that we can't already do with mounts. Flying, underwater transport, water surface transport, fast transport on land, scaling heights. Vehicles wouldn't add anything new to the game, except skins. Well, there's burrowing, but since there are already mounts in the game it would make much more sense to create a new mount than to suddenly implement a vehicle for that. Not that burrowing makes any sense, though. There's nothing to do in GW2 underground outside of tunnels. And if it's to avoid combat (which no self-respecting game studio should ever encourage or cater to) we can already fly over everything if we want to, or speed by on our Beetles.

It just irks me that they've introduced mount skins that are, by definition, not mounts. It's nothing major, as in it doesn't spoil my enjoyment of the game nor do I get annoyed when I see one of them. They are just factually not mounts. But, money over logic. 😉

[Manpag.6421]

I do so enjoy a good pedantic debate over semantics, so we clearly have that in common even if our transport tastes differ! 😜

51 minutes ago, TheNecrosanct.4028 said:

You can't take from someone or keep from someone something that doesn't exist. A petition is a request for or against something. It's not the act of taking anything away, nor is it blocking anything. You could certainly petition that Rangers get no more skills/weapons/specializations. Nobody will be deprived of anything if you do that. Not until ANet actually does something like that will people be deprived of something.

That was my original point; that a request (not to make certain mount skins) was an attempt to deprive people of those skins (the first definition that came up after Googling “deprive” was “prevent (a person or place) from having or using something”), but I acknowledge that many other definitions specify taking something away, so I don’t want to dwell too much on hypothetical deprivation.

The mount/vehicle definition thing is interesting though, because I’d argue that all mounts are vehicles, but not all vehicles are mounts. In a general sense, by dictionary definition, “mount” exclusively refers to a horse, and that remained consistent across a variety of definitions. So no GW2 mounts, even as animals, adhere to the standard use of the word “mount” as a noun. “Vehicle”, however, encompasses any means by which people or goods are carried, and would be a more suitable catch-all term for the role mounts play in the game. It might typically be used for machines, because they are the standard modes of transport in modern society, but it doesn’t solely refer to inorganic things.

”Steed” might be another good alternative term, because although mostly used for horses, it can also be used figuratively for bikes etc 😉

[ShadowKatt.6740]

2 hours ago, TheNecrosanct.4028 said:

Skills are horrible as a method of transportation. It makes sense because they're boats, but really their only function is for "fishing"

You misspelled "Skyscale Launchpad".

[TheNecrosanct.4028]

34 minutes ago, Manpag.6421 said:

I do so enjoy a good pedantic debate over semantics, so we clearly have that in common even if our transport tastes differ! 😜

That was my original point; that a request (not to make certain mount skins) was an attempt to deprive people of those skins (the first definition that came up after Googling “deprive” was “prevent (a person or place) from having or using something”), but I acknowledge that many other definitions specify taking something away, so I don’t want to dwell too much on hypothetical deprivation.

The mount/vehicle definition thing is interesting though, because I’d argue that all mounts are vehicles, but not all vehicles are mounts. In a general sense, by dictionary definition, “mount” exclusively refers to a horse, and that remained consistent across a variety of definitions. So no GW2 mounts, even as animals, adhere to the standard use of the word “mount” as a noun. “Vehicle”, however, encompasses any means by which people or goods are carried, and would be a more suitable catch-all term for the role mounts play in the game. It might typically be used for machines, because they are the standard modes of transport in modern society, but it doesn’t solely refer to inorganic things.

”Steed” might be another good alternative term, because although mostly used for horses, it can also be used figuratively for bikes etc 😉

Good to hear you enjoy a semantics debate, because there's no negative intent behind my comments. If I'm being too upfront, just blame it on me being Dutch. Apparently we are known for it. 😜

You're right about everything you say about "deprive". My point of contention was the non-existing aspect of the thing people were supposedly deprived of. You can't deprive, or grant, a thing that does not exist. I think it would be affording me entirely too much power, namely me making ANet do or not do something. Other than that, yes, enough about that.

If you look at examples and synonyms of "vehicle" you will find they all focus on mechanical means of transport. Nowhere will you see "vehicle" as a synonym for "mount", though, or "mount" as an example of a vehicle. It isn't just typically used for machines; they are machines (within the context of transportation, at least). Only in the broadest terms are they both methods of transport, but then again there are more methods of transport than just mounts and vehicles. Since your argument for equating mounts with vehicles is that they are both modes of transport, that would mean legs and wings are vehicles as well, because those are both modes of transport too. A reason why the horse is mostly mentioned as a mount is because it's the only animal you can find almost anywhere on the planet and is used as a riding animal everywhere. Another reason is it's a very west-centric definition, because in other parts of the world other animals are used as mounts, like dromedary camels and elephants, to name a few. The western world only has horses. A more accurate definition for "mount" would be "riding animal".

Alright, enough pedantry. I don't think either of us have any new arguments to add (I don't, at least) so we'd just be repeating ourselves. Can't wait for the confused emoji's to appear. 😂

[quake.9023]

a skyscale is often described to move to like a copter.......should have been skyscale skin

[Zebulous.2934]

If we get a skyscale skin that is a helicopter I would prefer that it be Iron legion asthetic, Asura glyphic asthetic, or the human watchwork style.  This one is too generic, it looks like a toy I would have played with when I was ten years old.

Just my preference, simply listing the type of mount skins I would buy.

[Quench.7091]

I wish I could use a different glider and mount skins per equipment slot. I love technology based gliders! However, I can only use one. The jetpack is really cool on engineers, especially if you use Rocket Boots and the flames from the backpack fly out. I would love to use this glider skin on another transmog set!