THE WARCLAW - Announcement

[OtakuModeEngage.8679]

I dont understand why so many people hate this mount and they have yet to even fully learn how it is obtained and works, much less try it. Its like when gliding was announced for wvw, every commander and his mother was crying about it, but they all happily use them now. Case it point, it may not be as bad as you're expecting it to be, at least give it a chance before you lay down judgement.

Those bitching about how it will kill roaming, please explain in what way? It gives you speed and an evasive skill, both extremely useful in roaming. Not to mention, potentially allows you to pull down a gate without supply, which should take roaming to the next lvl.

Does it make supply useless? I dont believe so, its a paradigm shift, simply supply will be used more defensively(arrow carts and balista) instead of offensively(catapults and rams). But even if thats the case, i believe catapults and rams will still be used, because mounts have low health bars and die quickly. Even if the health bar sharing skill from pve mounts carry over, that still comes with great risk, cause if your mount is killed, its instant downed stage for you. Thus a well defended fort could easily destroy a mount led offensive imo, and this change won't drastically affect or change wvw that much.

[Cerioth.7062]

@OtakuModeEngage.8679 said:I dont understand why so many people hate this mount and they have yet to even fully learn how it is obtained and works, much less try it. Its like when gliding was announced for wvw, every commander and his mother was crying about it, but they all happily use them now. Case it point, it may not be as bad as you're expecting it to be, at least give it a chance before you lay down judgement.

Those kitten about how it will kill roaming, please explain in what way? It gives you speed and an evasive skill, both extremely useful in roaming. Not to mention, potentially allows you to pull down a gate without supply, which should take roaming to the next lvl.

Does it make supply useless? I dont believe so, its a paradigm shift, simply supply will be used more defensively(arrow carts and balista) instead of offensively(catapults and rams). But even if thats the case, i believe catapults and rams will still be used, because mounts have low health bars and die quickly. Even if the health bar sharing skill from pve mounts carry over, that still comes with great risk, cause if your mount is killed, its instant downed stage for you. Thus a well defended fort could easily destroy a mount led offensive imo, and this change won't drastically affect or change wvw that much.

Yeah I agree with this. I am welcoming the change and want to see how it will impact WvW. It sounds like it would be a fun addition. I always found the pace of WvW a bit slow for my tastes, compared to PVP at least.

[Dawdler.8521]

@"Dragonzhunter.8506" said:Maybe ANet will introduce in WvW a new Trap. A trap who can CC/knockdown the mount so in a sec you go through the trap you get dismounted. Such kind of trap should cost 10 supplies as the cost of any WvW trap.That called "profession skills", they already exist (ranger, dh, thief) and they are even free to use.

Either way I guess that 60-80% of those ranting like its the end of the world will probably like the mount, lol.

[Dragonzhunter.8506]

@Dawdler.8521 said:

@"Dragonzhunter.8506" said:Maybe ANet will introduce in WvW a new Trap. A trap who can CC/knockdown the mount so in a sec you go through the trap you get dismounted. Such kind of trap should cost 10 supplies as the cost of any WvW trap.That called "profession skills", they already exist (ranger, dh, thief) and they are even free to use.

Either way I guess that 60-80% of those ranting like its the end of the world will probably like the mount, lol.

I said about a new trap, just because only a few professions have it. If you read carefully you'll see that I mentioned already this. I understand that you want to prove you are smart, still keep it for you, or just don't subtract only a portion of a comment, but look on the whole picture.

[Gorani.7205]

IMO, a lot of "mount impact" on the game will be determined of the integration with the WvW supply mechanic. Here are my thoughts on that:

Will the mount/dismount skill cost supply? - I think not. Accidental or foolish draining of structures would be a big issue, if you add a supply cost to it.Will "killing the mount" cost supply? - Perhaps it should, because otherwise mounts could be used as a fail safe to get out of situations that would kill you, especially when taking falling damage (e.g. you attack Hills outer west wall and you use the mount to flee from defenders by falling down the slopes or into the valley below. The mount will take falling damage, be killed and you are safely at the bottom of the valley, far away from the defenders. Now, because of territory rules, you can't glide away and fall to your death). Losing 10 supply for a killed mount seems to be OK to me.Will the engage skill #1 cost supply? - It probably should cost a small amount (up to 5?), because that would limit the current super evasive and mobile roaming classes to augment their abilities even further (easy disengage, mount up, engage skill and return to fight). it would also limit and control the "dismount food" currently under scrutiny as well as the Cavalier rune.Will the evade skill #3 cost supply? - It probably should cost a small amount too, depending on how long the evade frame will be, that is granted with the skill. A lot of its power will be dependent on "range", "leap" or duration of the evade frame.Will the siege skill #2 (chain pull) cost supply? - I think it would be absolutely careless not to tie this skill to a supply cost, even if the damage is relatively low, compared to a ram / superior ram. The amount of players pulling on a gate - PvD on steroids - mindlessly blobbing a gate could be very high. Just imagine a zerg of 30 players pulling for free at a gate. As a rule of thumb I would say that six veteran players (supply mastery/capacity) with 120 Supply, building two superior rams, should be significantly faster than the same amount of players just utilizing the chain pull. The ability could be balanced by both the supply cost of the skill and the skill's cool down timer.

[Arcaedus.7290]

@PookieDaWombat.6209 said:

@Arcaedus.7290 said:This is something that could be controlled or balanced for in a wvw-only mount. Imagine if the wvw mount had very little health (6-10k), was susceptible to CC and conditions (unlike pve counterparts), had no mobility skills, save for maybe a 600-range leap engage attack (no CC attached, just mediocre damage), and base run speed was equivalent to out of combat + swiftness (which is the current cap of movement speed that a player can achieve in either pvp or wvw). If the mount worked like this, would that really be such a bad thing? If so, why?

Yes, because at that point the point of the mount as a useful thing becomes moot and is simply a vanity item in a game mode that doesn't need it and therefore adds nothing to the game mode other than it being a potential skin revenue stream for Anet. So the other option is it has way too much mobility which breaks engagements, evades to allow it to break through enemy lines that might be trying to slow defenders down at a gate, and can perform big hit opening moves that could throw off the balance of a fight too much. Either way you slice it, this is bad for WvW and was never wanted by a vast majority of long time WvW players. All it does it exacerbate some long time problems and introduces more power creep while trivializing the game mode even more than gliding ever did.

You're forgetting the fact that it has siege capabilities so it does add to the game mode, plus it will really help backliners keep up with a zerg and also help players from spawn traverse where they need to since many times they don't have access to swiftness or mobility skills.

If the mount's engage skill does very minimal damage, it's going to end up being suicide for a mounted zerg to leap into a grounded zerg that knows when to bomb since there is usually a short period of time between dismounting and being able to act once again that they could get slammed by CC, boon rip, etc.

The main concern now is actually that #3 skill on mount which gives an evade for a period of time since this will really change up fights and negate a ranged advantage. Arguably this is good though since it provides a counter to pirateship

[Etterwyn.5263]

I don't like the idea of a dismount trap that costs supply, because using supply just to dismount one person becomes really wasteful long term. For it to be at all effective, it would have to dismount anyone within a large radius as well as prevent re-mounting for 5-10 seconds. For that, the supply cost could be justified.

I predict that the leap/evade skill will drain all of your endurance bar, and maybe even be like the beetle's where it starts at 0 when you mount and you can't use it right away. And the gate pull will use supply.

[PookieDaWombat.6209]

@"Arcaedus.7290" said:You're forgetting the fact that it has siege capabilities so it does add to the game mode, plus it will really help backliners keep up with a zerg and also help players from spawn traverse where they need to since many times they don't have access to swiftness or mobility skills.

If the mount's engage skill does very minimal damage, it's going to end up being suicide for a mounted zerg to leap into a grounded zerg that knows when to bomb since there is usually a short period of time between dismounting and being able to act once again that they could get slammed by CC, boon rip, etc.

The main concern now is actually that #3 skill on mount which gives an evade for a period of time since this will really change up fights and negate a ranged advantage. Arguably this is good though since it provides a counter to pirateship

It having siege abilities breaks the need for the siege play if its too over powered and makes the skill useless if under powered. Unless siege disablers will work on it it further breaks the dynamic of siege and siege placement. Every class has something to make them more mobile and it is with learning to either juggle those skills or pair up with people that can provide speed bursts that is literally part of the "get back to the fight" safely game play of WvW. Adding mounts that negate the problem to be solved by learning how to play the game mode once again breaks the game mode. Its not just about the big fights, its about surviving in them and battlefield control, etc. Frankly this just means there is going to be a tweaked PS meta instead of mounted people hanging back to not engage until necessary, which doesn't seem fun to me, nor will it work because people won't want to play that way.

[Arcaedus.7290]

@PookieDaWombat.6209 said:

@"Arcaedus.7290" said:You're forgetting the fact that it has siege capabilities so it does add to the game mode, plus it will really help backliners keep up with a zerg and also help players from spawn traverse where they need to since many times they don't have access to swiftness or mobility skills.

If the mount's engage skill does very minimal damage, it's going to end up being suicide for a mounted zerg to leap into a grounded zerg that knows when to bomb since there is usually a short period of time between dismounting and being able to act once again that they could get slammed by CC, boon rip, etc.

The main concern now is actually that #3 skill on mount which gives an evade for a period of time since this will really change up fights and negate a ranged advantage. Arguably this is good though since it provides a counter to pirateship

It having siege abilities breaks the need for the siege play if its too over powered and makes the skill useless if under powered. Unless siege disablers will work on it it further breaks the dynamic of siege and siege placement. Every class has something to make them more mobile and it is with learning to either juggle those skills or pair up with people that can provide speed bursts that is literally part of the "get back to the fight" safely game play of WvW. Adding mounts that negate the problem to be solved by learning how to play the game mode once again breaks the game mode. Its not just about the big fights, its about surviving in them and battlefield control, etc. Frankly this just means there is going to be a tweaked PS meta instead of mounted people hanging back to not engage until necessary, which doesn't seem fun to me, nor will it work because people won't want to play that way.

I agree - the mount's siege capabilities better be inferior to even the most unoptimal way to siege down structures (basic catapult attacking a door). It should purely be supplementary - you know, once you have 3-4 rams and excess supply, players could then hop on their mounts and just add some minor damage. I imagine they could also add some form of balance to the game where either T2 and above or T3 structures are completely immune to siege from mounts. As for siege disablers, I imagine that there will be (or at least that there should be) some new countermeasure to mounts such as a trap that dismounts players, stuns them for 2 seconds and locks them out of a mount for 20 seconds.

Don't necessarily agree with your statement about every class having something to make them more mobile. It often times just doesn't cut it. Many DO use those methods (such as swapping to GS for a leap before swapping back to main set) which leaves behind the players that don't have those methods such as the entire necromancer class.

It remains to be seen how this will play out since we don't know for sure the details surrounding dismounting/mount's health being drained, but I'm not sure the PS meta will become more prevalent with the introduction of mounts. If it works anything like in pve, a mounted zerg could use their mounts to act as bullet sponges for closing the distance to a PSing zerg, or do things like use their mount skill 3 to completely bypass a chokepoint laden with aoe