Warclaw: An In-depth Review.

[Rex.3516]

Let's discuss this dog.

Summary: 5/10 - Overall, I like and dislike it, and how it has been implemented. I feel it can do better, but could do worse. I am pretty on the fence about it.

Design: 6/10 - Pretty bog standard, nothing particularly interesting. Skins are not taken into the equation, as I am judging the vanilla. Its simplicity could be complimented, for its minimalist approach can lessen server stress, which we suffer from in this game mode, though skins could counteract this in future.

---

Speed: 5/10 - This is a personal gripe I have: the Warclaw feels underwhelmingly slow in areas owned by the enemy, and overly fast in areas owned by yourself. This leads to you being outran by enemy mounts, and unable to catch anyone else fleeing. The same applies in reverse.

---

Application: 4/10 - Again, this is a solid split down the middle, but leans toward the negative.The Warclaw is fantastic for catching up to a tag. This is a big quality of life change for slow raid classes.If you are roaming in a small group, and require further supply for two catapults, let's say, it is perfect. It allows two to quickly return to the adjacent camp and resupply; this is good.

However, there are heavy flaws.If you are fighting a defending group that do not have a tag, they tend to cloud. There are people running everywhere, and if your zerg loses so much as one or two people, it can lead to an eventual wipe.This is a war of attrition; it always has been. The Warclaw has created a clear issue here in that you are fighting masses of people clouding around; when you are capping the ring, they flood one by one attempting to stop the cap. They die, they run back.In owned territory, the Warclaw is so fast that they are back within a minute or two. Their death hardly matters.There was a case on reset night where SFR were fighting Piken for their Garrison on the Desert Borderland for about fifteen to twenty minutes; they failed to cap it.Sure, it was a farm, many bags were received. But still losing the cap felt somewhat devastating after so much work. And this was because Piken's players were back almost as quickly as they died.This is one example, there are many more similar circumstances I am sure others could give.

As for its gimmick, the chain that latches onto doors, it is somewhat useless. Commanders actively ask on my server that you simply use the siege they throw down and save any supply to build.And rightfully so, the chain does not deal much damage and it ends up more cost effective to throw siege.This was always a difficult one - how do you balance it without making it blatantly better or worse than a ram? What kind of backlash would it produce from older, stoic players, who were alienated a couple of years back by the introduction of tactivators (admittedly you cannot please everyone with anything you do), if rams were made obsolete by such a gimmick? There is a lot to consider. If anything I would consider removing the necessary supply to pull the door, as only three can latch (if I'm not mistaken), and I personally think it makes no sense to spend supply on such a feature. What, do you feed the Warclaw your supply and it becomes Popeye? This would even enable players to take down objectives quicker in smaller groups.

As a final note here, many commanders do not use the mount, as it causes those who do not own it to fall behind and complain. Personally, I do not think this affects anything, as people often jump off cliffs to their deaths while mounted as it stands.People have complained that forcing people to pay for the Warclaw through an expansion purchase is bad, but I do not think failing to own a Warclaw omits you from World vs World. I do, however, sympathise with those left behind by commanders who use it all the time.

---

Roaming: 2/10: One could argue roaming is a niche compared with blobbing at this point, but regardless it is still sought by many. This is particularly apparent in off hours, when people have nothing to follow. And, oh, boy. We've all heard this before - this mount is so divisive when it comes to roaming. I will be giving my personal reasons why I think it is objectively bad, and suggest things that can help the stagnant block in the stream.

There are many issues, and not all need toned down or the dog will become useless. Be that as it may, I will list all of the issues I know of that have amalgamated into the mount being a massive menace.

The biggest issue, in my opinion, is its ability to create stalemates. You see a Ranger in the distance; you know they can burst you really hard if you aren't careful. You wish to get an opening strike on them.They see you; they mount. What do you do? You have two clear choices.You similarly mount up, and stare them down, and hope they dismount to attack you first, or you attempt to not waste half of your cooldowns dismounting them while they dodge you with the evasive jump.If you are not careful, they will easily just escape, or be ready to burst you down when you have little left. If you are unfortunate, you will have to waste a dodge to avoid the 4-5k dismount damage, or face tank it, giving them momentum behind their burst.

It gives roaming a sour taste. Whoever attacks the mount rather than staying mounted, is at an immediate disadvantage; therefore, there is no incentive to get off it at all. Ready a stunbreak, allow them to waste their burst, and off you go. No one wants this, so people end up just staring each other down. It discourages fighting in a PvP game mode; that is awful design.

This could be potentially improved upon by adding a dismount feature to the dismount skill. That here means if you land the dismount skill it automatically dismounts the opponent. But this would require certain other changes to be made. For example, I don't think it would be particularly fair if a player is chased down by enemy Warclaws in an unowned area, and forcefully dismounted so easily. But this depends how you look at it, because would a player about to be ganked by three have a chance before the mount's introduction? Probably not unless a fast class with innate escapism. Also, if this were to be implemented, the consequential CC should be removed, to stop the player who got dismounted from immediately dying. This is simply an attempt at incentivising dismounts, so people are eager to get into the fray, rather than this extremely passive gameplay.

Another idea if things were left as they are right now, particularly with how hard it can be to kill the mount, is to cause the dismount to impact the opposing player's max HP. Somewhere between 25 and 50% HP loss might be acceptable to make things balanced, though this may require extensive testing. This is to combat the amount of unearned momentum a player can gain simply by refusing to dismount until it suits them, while the opposition wastes necessary damaging abilities to take it down.

Next, along with its speed in owned areas, as mentioned: the mount is too tanky. With the ability to dodge attacks three times whilst gaining substantial distance and an extremely lenient endurance refill rate, it can be almost impossible for a melee class to take it down alone.Or, you must expend half of your cooldowns. Not only that, but classes like Guardian, who have random Aegis procs, are allowed to keep these passive benefits on the mount. This should be addressed.Also, I am not sure if this is still the case, but Ranger could / can use 'Sic 'em' and Attack of Opportunity, and it allows the dismount skill to hit up to three targets like a truck (upwards of 20k).While we're on the subject, I might also add that runes giving "+10% max HP" such as Balthazar, or Durability, also give the mount increased health.I assume this is an oversight, as it does not stack with the Herald's increased HP passive. The standard health of the mount is 10,972, but with these runes you can increase it to 12,069.

From the standpoint of an expedient player, this mount is a god-send. It allows you to manipulate circumstances to favour you without any effort. But to those who just want an honest fight, perhaps roaming is no longer for you. Come to think of it, with the recent state of balance, was it in the first place?

To sum up, I believe one or more changes are required:Normalise speed. It makes little sense from an immersion stand point that the Warclaw can hit its stride only in owned portions of the map, and it can tell whenever this is not the case, causing it to slow down;Reduce its HP;Reduce its endurance regeneration (though this would impact its speed overall, also, making it less favourable than other options), or remove / nerf the combined evasion;Add an enemy dismount feature to our own dismount skill. Similarly remove the CC caused by mount loss only in these circumstances. This would need to go hand-in-hand with the speed noramlisation to be favourable;Decrease a player's starting HP upon being forcefully dismounted by a player's skills. This could advocate ganking even further, but it is already out of control. Still, I would call this a less than ideal solution, especially with the player's ability to time their dismount; it's just an idea. Another, potentially better option, is to give the mount the player's stats and HP pool, and if the mount dies, then the player is downed.

I do not agree with the Warclaw's ability to instantly finish those who are downed. This allows people to sit behind and wait for someone to get downed before finishing them in team fights, making classes that are based around small-scale resurrection (Necromancer, Druid, or just support in general) feel way less useful.

I am aware some would compliment the Warclaw's ability to allow them avoidance of combat with these bloated abilities when they simply wish to roam and perform PvE-esque tasks. But for many of us, WvW is and will always be a PvP game-mode. Asking that you never die in such a mode is facile. As people have stated in the past, MMOs are becoming a hand-held business, and the Warclaw is no exception.

---

To conclude, I think there are advantages and disadvantages to the Warclaw, but overall it has had a negative impact on the game-mode. This may change over time, but while I can think of few negatives to the implementation of gliding, there certainly are many here.

Many may disagree with the points I have made, and that is fine. I would encourage anyone to leave their thoughts, experiences, and suggestions either in this thread or in one of their own. That is the cornerstone of potential improvement, after all.

[Creaitov.6328]

@"Scorp.6152" said:Roaming: 2/10:...The biggest issue, in my opinion, is its ability to create stalemates. You see a Ranger in the distance; you know they can burst you really hard if you aren't careful. You wish to get an opening strike on them.They see you; they mount. What do you do? You have two clear choices.You similarly mount up, and stare them down, and hope they dismount to attack you first, or you attempt to not waste half of your cooldowns dismounting them while they dodge you with the evasive jump.If you are not careful, they will easily just escape, or be ready to burst you down when you have little left. If you are unfortunate, you will have to waste a dodge to avoid the 4-5k dismount damage, or face tank it, giving them momentum behind their burst.

It gives roaming a sour taste. Whoever attacks the mount rather than staying mounted, is at an immediate disadvantage; therefore, there is no incentive to get off it at all. Ready a stunbreak, allow them to waste their burst, and off you go. No one wants this, so people end up just staring each other down. It discourages fighting in a PvP game mode; that is awful design....

Hahah the other day I was literally in this situation. Me and a ranger staring at each other while in the warkitty, both of us not wanting to dismount. After a while I whispered them "well this is awkward", we chatted a little bit and in the end we had a duel so they could get their daily done.

Roaming is such a joke right now D:

[Dawdler.8521]

No, I agree its 5/10.

Because at the end of the day, nothing has changed. Zergs still zerg. And despite what people keep ranting on in threads, roamers still roam. Every advantage and disadvantage there is for you... is the same advantages and disadvantages there is for the enemy. Skill, build, patience, experience and most of all numbers still win fights. Mounts is as much part of the game now as gliding has been for years, yet people dont to have daily hissyfits over the fact people can just jump off cliffs in owned territories and totally evade enemies. Because it didnt really change anything either.

[reddie.5861]

@"Dawdler.8521" said:No, I agree its 5/10.

Because at the end of the day, nothing has changed. Zergs still zerg. And despite what people keep ranting on in threads, roamers still roam. Every advantage and disadvantage there is for you... is the same advantages and disadvantages there is for the enemy. Skill, build, patience, experience and most of all numbers still win fights. Mounts is as much part of the game now as gliding has been for years, yet people dont to have daily hissyfits over the fact people can just jump off cliffs in owned territories and totally evade enemies. Because it didnt really change anything either.

but what if im a ganker?

now its not an advantage for "me" but only for "you"!personally i dont care how people dislike gankers or roamers or blobbers.every1 has his own play style and does what suits him, its WvW if one wants to camp spawn he can do it.WvW has no rules, i fucking love to get ganked (yes it sounds wrong) but in my eyes most gankers are far more skilled then avarage WvW players.i just keep going back to where i got ganked

also i prefer gankers over roaming or duelers because in duel u can pretty much guess the rotations u just gotta counter.gankers surprise u and u gotta react to situation at that point more fun for me :).

anyway warclaw needs be toned down on all points in my eyes, and yes i dont like the insta stomp also even tho i use it alot when i see blobbers going into each other just because i can

[KrHome.1920]

Since everone has to dismount to prevent captures I don't see how the mount does affect roaming.

When I roam my prime objective is flipping stuff and killing players crossing my way and trying to kill me while doing this.

When roaming for you does not include playing the game mechanics then this is definitely not the right game mode for you.

I don't even need a dismount skill so far. I actually find more encounters since the mount was added as everyone can now move faster to objectves - defenders and attackers.

[nativity.3057]

IMO I think the mount 1 skill should be revised.

Instead of stomping a downed enemy, it should apply a short (0.5-1 sec) knockback/knockdown. Then add a small breakbar for mounts so mount 1 will dismount the enemy if you land it. (I can see an issue with long ranged CC such as Ranger LB 3, but the way I see it, there is very little drawback to being mounted, so it could use a bit more counterplay).

[Zephyra.4709]

Say it again... mount should've just been a movespeed bonus from the get go nothing else; fair for everyone, get to pick ideal runes over movespeed/swiftness runes.

The mount's not going away that much is sure, in fact I'll be somewhat content if they just add a dismount skill already so I can go back to playing melee classes more often. Good luck dismounting warkitty as melee... dismount skill when?

[coro.3176]

I generally agree with OP here.

• Speed: This is absolutely a thing. Basically, no one ever engages in a fight unless they're sure they can win. There's no non-consensual pvp any more. You may call that ganking, but I roam solo, so I'm always engaging at MINIMUM 1v1, but often 1v2 or 1v3. People still run away on mounts. It's boring. At minimum, I'd support removing the speed boost in owned territory.
• Finishing downs: yeah, this happens. IMO, it's not good design because it favours the larger group which can usually spare more players not fighting and waiting to jump on an easy finish. That zerg of 40 is going to have 5-10 players not dismounted yet and able to jump on any down they see. That smaller group of 15 fighting them is going to have every member engaged in combat and not able to instantly finish downs. I think the skill was supposed to be a compromise for the people who wanted no downstate. However, it only ends up benefiting the larger group, which is the opposite of what the no-downstate people wanted.
• Stalemates: yeah. this is a thing too. To engage another player on a mount, you need to hit them with a lot of burst, usually at range because they're running away, usually multiple tries because they have 3 dodges that recharge really quick. Then you have to burn a lot of your mobility because by the time they're dismounted, they're going to be 1200-1500 range away from you. If they're smart, they'll dismount manually before the mount is killed so they avoid the CC. So now you've wasted most of your burst and probably all of your mobility and they get to start the fight fresh with all of their burst + mobility up. They can either turn and fight you and probably win assuming equal skill, or just run away because their mobility is up and yours isn't. Then they just remount once they break combat and flee.

[Arcaedus.7290]

@"Scorp.6152"

I disagree with your overall evaluation. Mount is overall 5.5/10 for me. I think it has brought a little bit more good than bad to the game mode as a whole. Two really big improvements I can name right off the bat are the back-line players/necros now more able to catch up and keep up with zergs, and also, the mounts giving them and anyone else a buffer stopping them from getting 1-shot by gankers. These are both good things for the game mode and reducing things like this always helps bringing in new players.

I agree with many of your criticisms though. One of the worst things about mounts are that in a 1v1 or small-scale scenario, the one who dismounts first is at a disadvantage.... that's really bad design since it encourages non-conflict and a fix could easily be applied in the form of a dismounting skill like you mentioned.

Another huge sourspot like you said is the movement speed disparity. In my opinion, defenders already had the bigger advantage compared to offensive siegers. All this mount did was favor defenders even more which is not a good move. This once again leads to a situation of non-conflict. This is a huge minus in my opinion, but I would rather they address the power of defensive siege than nerf mounts since that's what's at the core of the problem here.

If I had to suggest some changes (mount-specific) I would suggest the following:

1. Add a dismount skill. It would be a frontal cleaving melee-range attack, come out slowly (1 second cast time) and lock you into a non-cancelable animation, but could be casted while moving, and have virtually no cooldown. How it would work is that if you strike any target, you are dismounted. If you strike a player, you deal a small amount of damage, and you get dismounted. If you strike a mounted player, you dismount them, stun for 2 seconds, and are dismounted yourself.

Reasoning: in the case you have a small-scale encounter where players really don't want to get off their mounts, you could force them off, but even then, there is counterplay since you can dodge the Dismount Attack. Counterplay is limited though since the Dismount Attack has no cooldown, whereas the dodge does (endurance).

2. Add a CC-bar to the mounts. The magnitude of the bar (how many CCs it takes) would be up to the balance teams.

Reasoning: This stops mounted players from being able to just plow through large enemy forces using their evades, since wards (necro and guard) cannot be dodged through. This could also integrate with the Dismount Attack, since that Dismount Attack could count as a CC against mounted players that completely depletes their breakbar when mounted.

3. Let the siege ability of a mount only cost initial supply to deploy (maybe 3 supply), but allow a player to continue to siege down a gate without any additional supply needed.

Reasoning: This would actually encourage players to use the ability since even if the ability was free, it sieges down gates much slower than even a basic catapult. This would also give offensive siege a much needed buff in the face of the massive advantage defenders already have.

[coro.3176]

@Jayden Reese.9542 said:Nice novel that adds nothing new to the 100 threads written prior. You get the mount as well. Learn when to engage or bait out their leaps to burst them down and yeah you don't have to fight every one you see and if someone runs oh well learn to deal or watch and see where they go and catch them at a sentry or camp. The mode is based around objectives and team play as well not just for 1 vs 1 fights in the middle of nowhere over nothing that does little to help your team. If you chose to waste cd's to fight a guy who doesn't want to fight or a guy is smart enough to bait you burst to start the fight at an advantage that's your fault.

1v1's in the middle of nowhere is how you win when you don't have numbers. You intercept players and kill them before they can group up and run you over with 5x the players.

• You're attacking a camp and there are 2 defenders but separated by some distance. You want to kill them separately because you'll lose a 2v1, but you can win 2 1v1's.
• You want to intercept a player and kill them before they can get to their keep and throw siege disablers and spam arrow carts at your team's catapults.
• You want to kill a player before they can get to their camp and fight with the advantage of NPCs around them.
• You want to feel the excitement of testing your skill against another real human rather than a Veteran Sentry Guard. Like, sure maybe you take the objective and your opponent runs away. That's still boring.

[Dawdler.8521]

@"Jayden Reese.9542" said:Yeah keep telling yourself that because you intercepted that 1 guy otw to the zerg you turned the tide. Wandering around for 5 min looking for solo guys much more valuable then being with your zerg fighting the entire time.Intercepting isnt "wandering around".

Or are you trying to argue that using a 50 man zerg to hunt down 1 roamer going for a T3 camp supplying a drained garrison is better than sending 1-2 roamers on it?

Or that a 50 man zerg standing in a tower scouting for enemies is better use of their time than 1 person doing it?

Or that a 50 man zerg should totally abort their garrison assault on inner because a sentry spotted 1 enemy across the map?

[Hitman.5829]

Warclaw does not need and "in-dept review" just by looking at it one can immediately conclude that the warclaw has no place in WvW.Warclaw was an early April fools joke that has lasted for too long and it needs to stop NOW.

[Dawdler.8521]

@"Hitman.5829" said:Warclaw does not need and "in-dept review" just by looking at it one can immediately conclude that the warclaw has no place in WvW.Warclaw was an early April fools joke that has lasted for too long and it needs to stop NOW.But dont the weak warrior need it to be viable? Mount stomp must do more damage than berserker arc divider now with all the nerfs.

[L A T I O N.8923]

@Dawdler.8521 said:

@"Hitman.5829" said:Warclaw does not need and "in-dept review" just by looking at it one can immediately conclude that the warclaw has no place in WvW.Warclaw was an early April fools joke that has lasted for too long and it needs to stop NOW.But dont the weak warrior need it to be viable? Mount stomp must do more damage than berserker arc divider now with all the nerfs.

He's killshot

So hé ain't bothered

[ProtoGunner.4953]

@"Hitman.5829" said:Warclaw does not need and "in-dept review" just by looking at it one can immediately conclude that the warclaw has no place in WvW.Warclaw was an early April fools joke that has lasted for too long and it needs to stop NOW.

Why not? It sucks to be so slow on foot. I like to have a speed boost. Be open minded, open your heart and your soul!

[Alystene.2418]

We only need a dismount skill to force entering combat. Dodge or be dismounted by this one !

[b k.1648]

The vast majority of the fights I get while solo roaming are not 1v1s, so this rings a bit hollow to me. Even if you start off with a stalemate, it turns into a 5v1 before too long. Or occasionally a more balanced larger fight, but usually it's the 5v1.

[Widmo.3186]

Overall:negative

Mounts in WvW are okayish and fine, thats what id say if they managed to balance it in time and listen to public opinion (opinion of kitten WvW players, not the weekend-PvEers that only join karma trains or abuse mounts for easier fights, avoiding enemies and faster dailies).Want to keep 3 dodges and 10k+ hp? Fine, but make it also vulnearable to CCs. Or at least add dismounting function to 1 Warclaw skill or to ranged utility (like Target Painter) Current state is just hillarious and pls tell me how long does it take to spend two days and rewrite code of o n e mount? I assume too long because its mainly part of off-meta game territory (or non-PvE in other words).

Btw roaming in 2019, off-meta of off-meta, omegalul.

[spectrito.8513]

@"Ben K.6238" said:The vast majority of the fights I get while solo roaming are not 1v1s, so this rings a bit hollow to me. Even if you start off with a stalemate, it turns into a 5v1 before too long. Or occasionally a more balanced larger fight, but usually it's the 5v1.

Solo roaming is impossible now, people are "roaming" in packs of soulbeasts + FB + scrappers, even if you manage to down one, they just need to press a stab button + f and voilá.People have been complaining that ganking is the reason they didnt played before, but ganking in groups is whats left from roaming, pretty sad to see so many players left WvW because of this.People who enjoyed to do open world PvP were replaced by pve whiners who flee from every fight and engage when they have more people(aka ganking).

But i guess i need to "adapt" and i will.27th August is coming with a proper open world PvP MMO.

[zengara.8301]

Maybe I just play different than people. But there is 2 things I kinda disagree heavily on.

1: Firstly speed: defenders advantage is pretty important. Sneaking or speeding to cap a keep with 50+vs 3 really is the most PvE thing in WvW (I obviously want a somewhat fair fight), so I do encourage that the mounts have speed in their own field specifically since it encourages fighting (defenders advantage) rather than flat out Karma Train (run to keep, take it fast and then leave, while being 50vs3 for like 3-5 minutes).

2: Maybe I am the only one not playing a full on burst zerker build, but I don't understand how people believe that the first one jumping off mount is at an disadvantage, I almost always dis-mount first rather than using number 1 skill, since it creates an easy way to locate where to CC the person or put an AOE, the animation is so amazingly long and damage so low that I always get ahead from first attacks (CC, damage for a while, person basically uses all form for stab/teleport utilities=Gg)

[Dawdler.8521]

@"Jayden Reese.9542" said:No and just terrible illogical scenarios there. My point is the roamers that just look for 1 vs 1s and do nothing but that aren't helping at all.The post you originally quoted clearly wasnt talking about "just looking for 1v1" for the sake of a duel.

[coro.3176]

@zengara.8301 said:2: Maybe I am the only one not playing a full on burst zerker build, but I don't understand how people believe that the first one jumping off mount is at an disadvantage, I almost always dis-mount first rather than using number 1 skill, since it creates an easy way to locate where to CC the person or put an AOE, the animation is so amazingly long and damage so low that I always get ahead from first attacks (CC, damage for a while, person basically uses all form for stab/teleport utilities=Gg)

Imagine this: You and your opponent are 600 range away from each other, both mounted. You want to kill them. They want to kill you. You're both running a generic unspecified build (has damage, CC, sustain, mobility).

Whoever initiates is at a disadvantage because you need to dismount yourself to start attacking them. This means you are throwing away 10k of health, 3 dodges, and a ton of mobility. Your opponent can now kite and dodge while you waste your damage and mobility skills trying to dismount them. When you get close to dismounting them, they dismount themselves and start the fight fresh, while your skills are on cooldown having not done any damage to their actual health.

[SoV.5139]

@reddie.5861 said:

@"Dawdler.8521" said:No, I agree its 5/10.

Because at the end of the day, nothing has changed. Zergs still zerg. And despite what people keep ranting on in threads, roamers still roam. Every advantage and disadvantage there is for

you

... is the same advantages and disadvantages there is for the enemy. Skill, build, patience, experience and most of all numbers still win fights. Mounts is as much part of the game now as gliding has been for years, yet people dont to have daily hissyfits over the fact people can just jump off cliffs in owned territories and totally evade enemies. Because it didnt really change anything either.

but what if im a ganker?

now its not an advantage for "me" but only for "you"!personally i dont care how people dislike gankers or roamers or blobbers.every1 has his own play style and does what suits him, its WvW if one wants to camp spawn he can do it.WvW has no rules, i kitten love to get ganked (yes it sounds wrong) but in my eyes most gankers are far more skilled then avarage WvW players.i just keep going back to where i got ganked

also i prefer gankers over roaming or duelers because in duel u can pretty much guess the rotations u just gotta counter.gankers surprise u and u gotta react to situation at that point more fun for me :).

anyway warclaw needs be toned down on all points in my eyes, and yes i dont like the insta stomp also even tho i use it alot when i see blobbers going into each other just because i can

I dont see gankers as being more skilled. I see them playing PVP optimized builds and chasing down folks on group support builds who are trying to make it back to their zerg, rather than seeking a real challenge. If they were more skilled they would be in PVP playing against other PVP optimized builds, against folks who actually want 1v1s and more iso-play.

Its kind of ironic as folks who lobby daily/weekly for no-downstate WvW also use the "higher skill" argument rather than blobbing because it favors numbers, which is what the mount indirectly provides (as it can instant kill downed characters).

There has been so much power creep in the past few years that bursting down a mounted player is not difficult, and any player who could escape you afterward for long enough to mount back up would have escaped you in pre-mount WvW anyhow.

[SoV.5139]

@coro.3176 said:

@zengara.8301 said:2: Maybe I am the only one not playing a full on burst zerker build, but I don't understand how people believe that the first one jumping off mount is at an disadvantage, I almost always dis-mount first rather than using number 1 skill, since it creates an easy way to locate where to CC the person or put an AOE, the animation is so amazingly long and damage so low that I always get ahead from first attacks (CC, damage for a while, person basically uses all form for stab/teleport utilities=Gg)

Imagine this: You and your opponent are 600 range away from each other, both mounted. You want to kill them. They want to kill you. You're both running a generic unspecified build (has damage, CC, sustain, mobility).

Whoever initiates is at a disadvantage because you need to dismount yourself to start attacking them. This means you are throwing away 10k of health, 3 dodges, and a ton of mobility. Your opponent can now kite and dodge while you waste your damage and mobility skills trying to dismount them. When you get close to dismounting them, they dismount themselves and start the fight fresh, while your skills are on cooldown having not done any damage to their actual health.

The one who stayed on their mount is playing the mode correctly.

When they give us the ability to dismount other players from our own mount the gankers will have their daddys records back.

When I want fair isolated 1v1s I play PVP.

[Jaruselka.5943]

It's a gimmick designed to juice expansion sales nothing more.