ROMANG.1903

_It's probably important to clarify right now that I am talking from a PvE perspective only._

I don't like using Lightning Bolt, it feels very... I don't know, clunky? I think the issue comes from the fact that it is both without any drawback or real gameplay, and without real decision making. It has no cast time and can be used during others skills, so you don't have to micro-manage it to make room for it in your rotation, and it doesn't have a delay or a ground target so you don't have to predict ennemy movement or try to hit multiple ennemies. It also has a very short cooldown which removes any idea of "finding the right opportunity".

I find that all of this makes it both very boring and stressful: It's just a thing that forces you to think about pressing it exactly every 4 seconds in order to maximize your DPS.

So to make it more fluid, I thought that perhaps simply giving it a second charge might be a good solution? The ability's cooldown could be **slightly** increased in compensation, if necessary. The reason I think it would be mutch more pleasant to use this way, is that you wouldn't have to think about it **exactly** every 4 seconds to make the most out of it. If you wait 1 or 2 seconds, it will keep charging and you won't loose any overall DPS. I think it would actually make for a pretty fun gameplay, irregularly unleashing your spent up charges every now and then like a thunderstorm! ^^

Before commenting, please remember that I am not saying this skill needs a buff or a nerf. It's just a very personnal feeling of clunkyness that I'd love to see adressed, because this alone is enough to keep me away from scepter (yea I know, I'm weird).

So, in your opinion, would it be fun to give Lightning Bolt a second charge in PvE?

Honnestly, I'd only like to be able to check the avalaibility of a name without having to end the character creation. I like noting several names before picking one and being unable to check which ones are avalaible makes this impossible...

Also, what if we had to pick a second name? Something that everyone had to pick, but you could then hide it if you wanted to. That way, people can get the same name without creating confusion?

> @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said:

> After the mixed reaction to raid legendary armor, I doubt ANet's going to ever again try to design another set.

What was that reaction?

> @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said:

> > @"SabreWolf.4537" said:

> > I'm a new player (level 50) and I don't have any Salvage-o-matics yet. The copper is 800 gems and the runecrafters is 600 gem.. which one should I get? I don't really understand this whole salvage thing yet.

>

> I'd advise not worrying about it right now. Once you've put in a few dozen hours, you'll get a sense of the sort of things you like and dislike doing in the game. Right now, it's viable to collect the unID gear over time (from L80 characters) and sell it all, without worrying about salvaging. For under L80, you can make do with salvage kits from vendors.

>

> Later, there are numerous guides out there for extracting the most coin possible from drops, if you decide that's a good way to spend your time.

Agreed. Don't spend your time on that until you reached lvl 80, at least. I actually spent most of my lvl 80 time without these items, and did perfectly ok. They are convenience, not necessities. :)

> @"Tanner Blackfeather.6509" said:

> > @"ROMANG.1903" said:

> >

> > Finally, I'll allow myself to tell you that this question should probably have been posted as a new topic, since this thread is not really about that and is 3 months old... ;)

>

> It was its own topic, forum mods (apparently) merged it.

Oh? That's weird. Okay then, nevermind ^^

> @"SabreWolf.4537" said:

> I'm a new player (level 50) and I don't have any Salvage-o-matics yet. The copper is 800 gems and the runecrafters is 600 gem.. which one should I get? I don't really understand this whole salvage thing yet.

Depending on the rarity of an item, you'll want to use a better salvage kit. For example, using an expensive rare salvage kit on a blue item wouldn't be very interesting, because the materials that you'll get from this item won't be great anyway. You'll get more overall value by using a cheap salvage kit and getting a little bit fewer materials. If your item is rare, it then becomes interesting to use an expensive salvage kit, in order to extract every bit of rare (and valuable) material that this item has to offer.

My personnal solution is to use the silver-fed salvage-o-matic on every rare or exotic item (though it is important to note that I never had to actually use it on an exotic item, since I loot fewer exotic items than I loot Black Lion salvage kits, which I find are better for them because they have a higher chance of extracting upgrades), and to use the copper-fed salvage-o-matic on every other item. Note that ascended items can't be salvaged by any of these and require a specific ascended salvage kit, which can be obtained via a NPC in the Fractals of the Mists hub, which itself is accessible through the central portal, south of Lion's Arch.

You should also know that the silver and copper fed salvage-o-matics have the exact same salvage chances as their equivalents sold by almost any merchant in the game. The only appeal of purchasing these items is for the convenience of never having to worry about buying new limitted-use salvage kits to the merchant. The Runecrafter's samvage-o-matic is a different case, but I think it's only really useful if you intend to specificly craft runes, though I don't know of any consensus on that.

Finally, I'll allow myself to tell you that this question should probably have been posted as a new topic, since this thread is not really about that and is 3 months old... ;)

> @"sorudo.9054" said:

> if you want to satisfy everyone, here is an idea for a skin:

> 

>

What is this Nope you have unleashed upon this innocent page?

> @"zealex.9410" said:

> Kinda sad tbh they reused the griffon model a third time. Would rather see a diff model entirely for another mount, at this point is the griffon but breathes fire.

>

> If the mount was more akin to a wyvern it would be more exciting imo.

Yea, it really looks like they reused the griffon model again. A wyvern would've been original and distinguishable from the others mounts...

I hope it's not just a reskinned griffon, otherwise they might as well just... Update the griffon xd

Also the roller beetle was a bit annoying to get, I hope this unlock will be more interesting

I must say, new mounts are waaaaay better than masteries that give you clunky mount skills...

I'd like to see the Durmand Priory instance become an open world area, where your character can store the books they acquired through their adventures. I love lore and everytime I complete a book I have to destroy it because I need the inventory space...

I'd also like that, when we get in a low-level area, or damage is reduced even more, but crit chance isn't. As a Fresh Air weaver I really feel it when my character almost never crits...

> @"BlueJin.4127" said:

> Before old maps, I would like to see Anet reduce enemy aggro range of all PoF maps (including LWS4) from 900 to 600 like the rest of the game. This alone would make me actually play in PoF maps. Currently, the aggro range is so infuriatingly annoying I just don‘t do PoF stuff except when I have no choice (such as needing to upgrade mounts, which can only be done in PoF maps).

Personally I like it when I'm walking past an ennemy and they don't just stand there looking at me. The desert is huge, so it kind of makes sense to have an increased aggro range because you have so mutch more room to avoid them (and mounts that help you get past quicker).

> For core Tyria maps, the old Ascalon maps are often the most barren from my experience. I’ve done several map completions without hardly ever seeing another player. Also, reducing the total number of hearts for all core Tyrian maps would be great for world completion.

I wouldn't like reducing the number of hearts, why would you remove content? However I'd like it if once you hit lvl 80, all hearts become repeatable. That would bring back a little bit of life in the core maps, and would make veterans players more keen to come and help lower level players.

> For HoT, I’d like to see Anet change all main day/outpost event chains for VB, AB, and TD into solo events. People rarely do these, so it’s hard to find groups to complete them.

When the entire map is one single meta event it's pretty easy to find people if you get there soon enough. Now for Verdant Brink I agree that there are some events that are just never done (though you can bring some people if you have mentor/commander tag). I would like to see a mechanic that benefits everyone if all the events on the map are done.

> @"Solvar.7953" said:

> More generally, I'd just like all no glide/no mount areas removed, except in cases where the JP is isolated (some are in caverns or otherwise areas one does not normally visit). Pretty annoying to be going around a map and get thrown off your mount because you are too close to some jumping puzzle.

This never happened to me. I don't see where you'd need to go through a jumping puzzle to get from point A to point B with a mount. Jumping puzzles are as mutch part of the game as anything else, removing them by allowing mounts to bypass them would be a terrible idea. And yes, I am also against mesmer portals. The puzzle in Lion's Arch was amazing, I'd like to see it come back.

What if puzzles had a specific "entry point" to their non-gliding/mounting areas? Going specificly through that point would disable mounts, gliding, and teleportations. Entering the puzzle by any other point would give you a debuff that wouldn't dismount you, but would teleport you away if you tried to get any of the rewards or if you tried to get through specific checkpoints placed throughout the puzzle. That way you can get _past_ a puzzle with a mount or a glider, but if you try to _do_ it from there, you'll be kicked out.

I think the game needs a 3rd elite spec per class to be healthy and diverse. Wether that comes with expansions or living world does not matter to me, though I tend to prefer expansions when it comes to the structure of storytelling...

> 3)The new Warclaw mount changes Weaver's mix skill (skill 3). I usually prepare my skillbar before engaging in a fight by attuning to the proper elements. This problem will essentially give you every skill except the mix skill from one attunement and the mix skill will be a mix of the two you're supposed to have equipped.

Hahaha, you mean you're only experiencing this just **now**? Lucky you...

I've had that bug for absolutely evey mechanic that replaces the skillbar. Toys, mounts (all of them, though it does appear to occur more often with the warclaw), event items... If you attuned to Fire(1), Air(2), you'll have skills 1,2,4,5 as if you were fully attuned to Fire and your skill 3 will be Fire/Air dual attunement. To get back to your desired configuration (the one you would've had without the bug), you have to get back into Air, then into Fire. That's loosing 4 full seconds in the rotation, 8 seconds if you're counting the fact that you still won't be able to swap right away. Even in PvE, that is a huge time, which even if you're lucky enough not to be impared by it remains very frustrating.

> 1) When in downstate, the skill Vapor Form simply does not work.

I'll add that in fractals, even when the skill _does_ work as intended, it is **still** bugged: As soon as you leave Mist Form, a new fractal avenger spawns to try and finish you. That makes it so that the only way to get rid of fractal avengers is to use that AOE knockback that you get in a living world episode...

> Conjureds need very simple changes: ammo/kit system and no cast time.

Precisely. That's literally all we need to make summoned weapons enjoyable, engaging and fluid to use. Still don't understand why ANet isn't adressing this when it's been asked for years now...

> @"Dami.5046" said:

> Well the people who wanted less new maps got their own way. Good for you.

> No cantha. Maybe is i shout loud enough i'll get *my* way.

>

Creating more and more maps all the time spreads the playerbase thinner and thinner through all these maps. It is not a good thing... It would work better if you didn't have a loading screen to get from one map to the next, but this is not the case.

The warclaw's model looks weird, very bulky for a feline. The armor kind of hides this, but the outrider skin reveals the weird proportions. I just wanted to suggest, for future warclaw skins, to perhaps make their stature less like the base skin, and a bit more like the grand lion griffon skin? With thinner legs and body, and head. The grand lion griffon looks more like an actual feline than the outrider warclaw...

> @"IndigoSundown.5419" said:

> Nothing prevents you from rolling Daredevil or Deadeye and using core weapons. Thus, nothing happened to Dual Wield.

That's not the issue, stop acting like you don't understand. The OP wants new dual weild skills because we didn't get any new one since launch.

> @"Spamwagon.1972" said:

> Honestly - I HATE the requirements to acquire the griffon mount. I don't want to do them, and frankly - I won't, EVER do them. However, I would like the advantages of a griffon mount, and would be happy to pay real money to get them. Please offer the griffon mount on the real money transaction store for whatever you feel is an appropriate price. I am certain that many people would appreciate it. Let me reiterate - I will NEVER..... NEVER do the current requirements for the griffon mount.

>

> NEVER. It actually makes me angry.

>

What you are suggesting is a pay-to-win mechanic which is against the core philosophy of Guild Wars 2. I'm not asking for raid rewards without having to do the raid. If you want a griffon, play the required content. If you really want to pay real money for it, buy gems and exchange them for gold to use for the different items required.

> @"robertthebard.8150" said:

> > @"Ulyssean.1709" said:

> > > @"gateless gate.8406" said:

> > > I'm surprised yet unsurprised at the apologists in this thread. What if the jackal, griffon, and raptor all had the same run animations? That would make them much less interesting, and would certainly not impart the sense of quality that those mounts currently do. Animations are extremely important in infusing a creature/character with its unique personality. Additionally, re-using animations for something as "in your face" as a mount (ie, a creature you're going to be staring at for hours) indicates corner cutting/a lack of investment from the studio. And we haven't even touched on the poorly "clipped" animation loop in the warclaw's run (there's a very obvious and jarring cut or jump in its run cycle).

> > >

> > > This problem exists on a sliding scale. The more corners that are cut when developing content, the cheaper the game begins to feel. No, this specific corner cutting on the warclaw will not be the death of GW2, **obviously**, but over time, all the little ways that the studio cut corners begin to add up. There is no reason to defend this practice.

> >

> > It's good to see someone else that has standards. It's not a Norn or a Skelk or a Reef Drake, it's a mount. It should have it's own persona at the very least and not just be a wingless griffon.

> > "Just reskin the griffon we are too busy making mobile games that are about to get canned."

> > "hi-5s all round those suckers will love it and then pay for extra dye channels."

>

> This is especially funny when you consider that this practice isn't unusual in MMOs, or any other games, for that matter. It's absolutely terrible that two feline mounts share a feline skeletal system, isn't it? You want to know what's even worse? How dare actual felines, regardless of size, actually share similar skeletal structures. It's almost like art is imitating life, for some reason. I won't have the warclaw, because a mount isn't enough incentive to get me into WvW to have to deal with some of the people in the mode, you know, like people that call others suckers for getting the mount, and maybe trying to customize it a bit? Did you get the mount? How many dye channels have you purchased, so far?

Exept it's not a feline, it's a griffon. Wings were taken in account (with a very "light foot" animation), and even though the body kind-of does the work, it is still too large and the head and tail don't do the work. To take your (terrible) example, real-life felines share similar bone structures, but there are still noticable differences in their proportions and movements. A tiger is mutch more bulky than a panther.

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > @"HisElysium.9721" said:

> > > @"Blocki.4931" said:

> > > So what? Where's the issue? Saving work to remodel the exact same thing so what gives

> >

> > The issue is its marketed as it being a unique mount when its not and then releasing a 2000 recolor skin pack a week later.

>

> That makes no sense ... it is a mount with it's own skins. I don't really see what the issue is here. It's certainly unique in WvW and BTW ... you didn't pay for it, it was free, so complaining they recycled some things to deliver it to us is pretty petty.

>

> I really don't see what being 'unique' has to do with buying a skin. We get armor skins, weapon skins, outfits etc ... all the time. Buying skins is about the look. It's completely irrelevant if it's for something 'unique'. I have dozens of skins for a sword ... is Anet being dishonest when they make more and I like them and get them? Not at all and this is the same thing.

A content being "free" (even though we still need PoF to be able to get it, but whatever...) shouldn't be an excuse for poor quality. The game exists as a whole and its income should be spent depending on how mutch the thing you spend it on will interest and be used by the players (and thus how mutch it will keep the players into the game, spending their money in the gemstore and others new contents), not depending on wether it's free or not.

As for its supposed uniqueness in WvW, you miss the point entirely. The issue here is that the model (or rig, whatever) wasn't originally created to fit the Warclaw. Thus, even with all the good will in the world to polish it, it will always be unperfect (I consider the others mounts to be near-perfect).

Now for your sword example, your comparison is bad. You are comparing the griffon reskin into warclaw as a sword reskin for... a sword. A better comparison would be having a sword, and then reskining to fit a dagger. Sure it kind of does the work, but chances are that the size, shape, thickness of the blade... Will feel odd because they all will be scaled down (I kind of have that feeling with Scion's Claw, I wonder if it wasn't originally supposed to be a Greatsword?).

And in this example it would still not be mutch of a problem, because well, it's just a sword. It doesn't have animations, and we can still make the blade thicker to suit a dagger. But we can't do such things to hide the warclaw's model's origins. Mounts are so complex that any asset re-use becomes absolutely obvious in mere minutes.

> @"TheAgedGnome.7520" said:

> > @"Turkeyspit.3965" said:

> > > @"gateless gate.8406" said:

> > > I'm surprised yet unsurprised at the apologists in this thread. What if the jackal, griffon, and raptor all had the same run animations? That would make them much less interesting, and would certainly not impart the sense of quality that those mounts currently do. Animations are extremely important in infusing a creature/character with its unique personality. Additionally, re-using animations for something as "in your face" as a mount (ie, a creature you're going to be staring at for hours) indicates corner cutting/a lack of investment from the studio. And we haven't even touched on the poorly "clipped" animation loop in the warclaw's run (there's a very obvious and jarring cut or jump in its run cycle).

> > >

> > > This problem exists on a sliding scale. The more corners that are cut when developing content, the cheaper the game begins to feel. No, this specific corner cutting on the warclaw will not be the death of GW2, **obviously**, but over time, all the little ways that the studio cut corners begin to add up. There is no reason to defend this practice.

> >

> > "The cheaper the game begins to feel".

> > So you're saying that riding on the Raptor, Jackal and Griffon feel the same to you? Because honestly, they don't to me. Let's forget that the reason you are using a particular mount is because of it's abilities (brilliant design move by ANET btw), but when I'm on a Raptor it feels way different than Jackal or Griffon.

> >

> > Am I surprised to hear that the Warclaw uses the same rig as Griffon? Nope. ** Does it feel that way when I'm riding it? Nope, at least not to me.** So why does it matter that they are recycling tech to produce it?

> >

>

> Agreed - they don't feel the same. The Warclaw has the feel of a strong, pondering beast. The subtle things, like the footfall sounds, the deep resonating growl, the splayed paws when it pounces, all contribute to the Warclaw's uniqueness.

If by "uniqueness" you mean that the griffon has the exact same proportions and animations... To me they feel pretty mutch the same. Excpet the Warclaw feels like a cheap version of it, slower, without flight, without any face animation making the mount look alive, without even the decensy of moving like a feline.

> @"nosleepdemon.1368" said:

> > @"gateless gate.8406" said:

> > I'm surprised yet unsurprised at the apologists in this thread. What if the jackal, griffon, and raptor all had the same run animations? That would make them much less interesting, and would certainly not impart the sense of quality that those mounts currently do. Animations are extremely important in infusing a creature/character with its unique personality. Additionally, re-using animations for something as "in your face" as a mount (ie, a creature you're going to be staring at for hours) indicates corner cutting/a lack of investment from the studio. And we haven't even touched on the poorly "clipped" animation loop in the warclaw's run (there's a very obvious and jarring cut or jump in its run cycle).

> >

> > This problem exists on a sliding scale. The more corners that are cut when developing content, the cheaper the game begins to feel. No, this specific corner cutting on the warclaw will not be the death of GW2, **obviously**, but over time, all the little ways that the studio cut corners begin to add up. There is no reason to defend this practice.

>

> Game developer here, not affiliated with ANet. It would be utterly ridiculous to *not* use an existing rig for a model with similar characteristics! It is certainly not corner cutting. Would you for example, expect the internal components of a car to be completely rebuilt from scratch on a piece by piece basis with each new yearly model? Of course not. The body work looks different, but the engine/transmission/4 wheels etc will be similar. That's a good analogy for modelling in games - the basic skeleton and animations to which the skin is attached is the same for models sharing similar characteristics. There may be occasional differences, but to rebuild a rig and its animations for each model is a waste of time and absolutely not befitting a triple A game developer, or any developer for that matter.

Except the Warclaw is not a car. It takes a few minutes only to see that the model is off. The animations aren't natural, the feline isn't gracious. The jump animation is just the griffon's jump animation sped up, which is blatantly obvious because the whole thing was animated with a certain speed in mind. The armor isn't there to make it look cool, it's there to hide the body of the mount, because without it the poor quality would become obvious even in the trailer (again, look at the face of the Outrider. It screams "kill me"). I am totally okay for reusing models, but not for something as present and permanent as a mount (hence why I am okay with Aurene using the Griffon's rig or dwarves using the norn's). Mounts need their own models and animations.

> @"MithranArkanere.8957" said:

> No. They share a base model rig, but they definitely must have different sets of animations. Warclaw do not have flying animations, they do not need them, so they probably do not have them.

> So they basically just share their 'bones' and several animatios, but everything else is different.

>

> This is pretty common. For example:

> * Krait and wraiths have the same base rig and share most animations.

> * Kodan share lots of animations with male norn, but when we used the koran tonic initially, it was missing many animations, showing that they are not the same exact animations, but a copy of the male norn animations with the animations kodan won't use stripped from it.

> * Treants, minotaurs and gorillas have the same animations too.

> * Spark elementals, cavern scuttles and young karka are a pretty obvious rig share too.

>

> You'll see it in tons of other games too, it's a pretty common trick to save time and resources.

But all these are random mobs in open world. ANet used us to having near perfect quality and original models when it comes to mounts that players will use every day, and the way it looks just shows how off this model is for a feline mount (which as I said, is even more obvious on the Outrider skin).

> @"gateless gate.8406" said:

> I'm surprised yet unsurprised at the apologists in this thread. What if the jackal, griffon, and raptor all had the same run animations? That would make them much less interesting, and would certainly not impart the sense of quality that those mounts currently do. Animations are extremely important in infusing a creature/character with its unique personality. Additionally, re-using animations for something as "in your face" as a mount (ie, a creature you're going to be staring at for hours) indicates corner cutting/a lack of investment from the studio. And we haven't even touched on the poorly "clipped" animation loop in the warclaw's run (there's a very obvious and jarring cut or jump in its run cycle).

>

> This problem exists on a sliding scale. The more corners that are cut when developing content, the cheaper the game begins to feel. No, this specific corner cutting on the warclaw will not be the death of GW2, **obviously**, but over time, all the little ways that the studio cut corners begin to add up. There is no reason to defend this practice.

You sum it up perfectly.

I just had the same reflexion. It's obvious after a few minutes messing around with the mount. I'm gonna be harsh but that release has been disappointing on almost every aspect compared to what ANet used us to. When I first saw the raptor, I was absolutely amazed at how real it felt, with its movements. This had remained true for every new mount, until now...

The Warclaw is a re-used model (It's way too bulky to make a beautiful feline, which is hidden by the armor but is absolutely obvious on the Outrider skin. A real new model crafted from scratch would've looked so mutch better...), it has poor animations (it's not nearly on the same level as any other mount, the head doesn't move at all except for the eyes, making any unarmored skin ugly).

On the utlity side of things, the mount does nothing except making WvW unbalanced for people who don't own PoF.

Seriously, it is usually obvious that ANet puts all their hearts and efforts into a big release like a mount, but this one? It looks very poorly crafted and once you've seen that it's a reskined griffon, you can't unsee it, making it look even worse.

Yup, not buying it. Since I can't use two skins at the same time that's basically 2k gems for a single skin that's usually worth 400... Also integrating the branded skin was a terrible mistake. They could've done a "mount pack expansion" for each existing mount pack and add branded beetle and warclaw. That was the occasion, and they missed it.

200 gems isn't a lot and isn't actually that bad of a deal. You take half a week at max to get it, we had to wat 2 to 3 months each time back when it came out.