Mewcifer.5198

I like this idea.

> @"serialkicker.5274" said:

> > @"Mewcifer.5198" said:

>

> > And I, personally, don't feel like making whole new abilities for the warclaw is worth it.

> Big kitten LOL. Good thing Arenanet is not asking you if it's worth it. We give suggestions and they will decide if it's worth it.

>

> > I could suggest literally anything and use the argument that "well just because it isn't needed doesn't mean it shouldn't be added"

> Yes, I could also use your argument and say "Well, I don't personally feel - insert literally anything here - is needed." Funny how that works, right?

Yes, you have discovered how debate and conversation works. Good job.

>>Adding cosmetics to the game is a whole different ballpark than adding a new unique skill to a mount in a gamemode that it is only granted use in as a side benefit since it's place to shine is in another gamemode.

>Did you forget there are consmetics for warclaw? That could sell a lot more if anyone in PvE (you know, game mode with majority of palyerbase) would deem it worth using?

Yes, it would probably make marginally more money as a cosmetic sales point if it was more useful. But there is also the possibility of angering the playerbase if it is done wrong. Angry players do not spend money on games.

>>Also, one could argue that new cosmetics, maps, story, and expansions are needed because cosmetics fund the game and maps/expansions/story are what keep people playing in order to buy said cosmetics.

>You know what else is needed for buying cosmetics? Properly working feature you are buying said cosmetics for.

Yes. Great point. I suppose it is lucky that the warclaw is a properly working feature then.

> @"Taril.8619" said:

> > @"Mewcifer.5198" said:

> > > @"serialkicker.5274" said:

> > > > @"Mewcifer.5198" said:

> > > What part of mount already being in PvE is hard for you to understand? Mounts were exclusive to PvE at first, you forgot that? So, why can't a WvW exclusive mount come to PvE?

> > >

> >

> > I am not saying there is no reason for it not to be able to be used in PvE. I am saying that it does not need to be "balanced" for PvE.

> > "Balance" for mounts in GW2 is that each one has their niche use. It's "balance" is that it can be used in WvW while all the other's can't. That is it's niche.

> >

> > To paraphrase you: How is that so hard to understand?

>

> It does not "Need" to be balanced for PvE.

>

> But, it could be.

>

> There's even some actual differences in the PvE version that help it perform, such as having more endurance, more health and a 10 target cap on the engage skill.

>

> The qualm that people have is these improvements fall just short of making it comparable to other mounts in PvE that provide a similar level of movement (I.e. Raptor and Jackal)

>

> There's also a lot of potential to carve out a niche in PvE with the Warclaw by allowing utilization of its Mastery skills.

>

> Though, if the argument simply remains that it doesn't "Need" to have one, we get into the asinine cycle of we don't "Need" anything in the game. We don't "Need" new skins and outfits on the gem store. We don't "Need" new maps and expansions. We don't "Need" additional story.

>

> Does the lack of "Need" preclude things from happening? No. Hence why it's a terrible argument to rely on.

Yes, something being "needed" is not the only reason it can be added to the game. But whether or not it is needed does have some weight. And things generally should add something worthwhile. And I, personally, don't feel like making whole new abilities for the warclaw is worth it. In fact, if done wrong, it could just end up making more problems.

I could suggest literally anything and use the argument that "well just because it isn't needed doesn't mean it shouldn't be added"

Adding cosmetics to the game is a whole different ballpark than adding a new unique skill to a mount in a gamemode that it is only granted use in as a side benefit since it's place to shine is in another gamemode.

Also, one could argue that new cosmetics, maps, story, and expansions **are** needed because cosmetics fund the game and maps/expansions/story are what keep people playing in order to buy said cosmetics.

> @"serialkicker.5274" said:

> > @"Mewcifer.5198" said:

> What part of mount already being in PvE is hard for you to understand? Mounts were exclusive to PvE at first, you forgot that? So, why can't a WvW exclusive mount come to PvE?

>

I am not saying there is no reason for it not to be able to be used in PvE. I am saying that it does not need to be "balanced" for PvE.

"Balance" for mounts in GW2 is that each one has their niche use. It's "balance" is that it can be used in WvW while all the other's can't. That is it's niche.

To paraphrase you: How is that so hard to understand?

> @"serialkicker.5274" said:

> > @"kharmin.7683" said:

> > > @"serialkicker.5274" said:

> > > > @"kharmin.7683" said:

> > > He still can't explain how we got two more mounts that took kitten tons of work to implement, while Anet could simply make skins for already existing mounts. But reworking a single skill on warclaw is somehow way too much of a work and not justified.

> >

> > Obtena never said it wasn't justified. Have you been reading the thread? S/He has been asking the OP to justify the change requested for the warclaw that was asked for in the first post. The question couldn't be any more simple, but it seems that some people (not targeting anyone specific) want to lash out at Obtena and not even address the point.

> >

> > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > Again, let's be clear .. just because some individuals in this thread want to steer the discussion into making it appear like I don't think Anet should change the game, I never said anything of the sort. I am saying there needs to be some reason to do it. I can assure you that Warclaw 'being useless' in WvW isn't one and I'm challenging the proposals from these same people that skin revenues is a strong reason for that to happen either.

> >

>

> Since they put it in PvE it doesn't make sense for it to not be balanced for it. That's all it takes.

Except it does make sense because it is a WvW mount, not a PvE one.

> @"Kodama.6453" said:

> > @"HotDelirium.7984" said:

> > I foresee us weaning away from legendaries and getting more skins,infusions with "legendary-like" (aka otter infusion, that Phoenix torch) that will just take their place. Not exactly legendary if everyone in the game is running around with a legendary lol. They were a cute idea but there isn't exactly anything very legendary about those weapons with unique skins, some don't even have projectile effects, HOT had the very unique scavenger hunt where you went in-depth into making them and I LOVED the creativity that went into that but now? Just a ton of work and mats and splat you made a legendary- that doesn't scream its namesake.

>

> Really a shame that they stopped doing the scavenger hunts because of the work load.

>

> Crafting H.O.P.E. was so much fun. I love the alchemy thematic of my engineer and then they gave me a weapon I had to explore the alchemy of Hylek in the lore. It was a great experience and I really hoped that I could get the same with the rifle, but no luck.

Making Chuka and Champawat was such a fun experience. I understand why they scaled back the collections for later legendaries but that doesn't mean I am not saddened that they aren't all like the earlier ones.

Imagine how much fun a real journey for Claw of the Khan-Ur could have been.

> @"Yggranya.5201" said:

> > @"saerni.2584" said:

> > > @"Yggranya.5201" said:

> > > So, it is just your anecdotal evidence? In other words:

> > > > @"saerni.2584" said:

> > > > This just seems like a really poor justification because it isn’t backed up by data but just a “community feeling” that comes from a vocal minority of the player base.

> > >

> > >

> >

> > The forum tends to exaggerate a lot. The feeling that “gw2 is a dead game” or “xyz killed the game” is generally not born out by the people playing it.

> >

> > Roaming was always tough. There are big disparities between the server links (and often you may end up severely outnumbered) in WvW.

> >

> > Basically, you have one person saying “WvW is dead I don’t see people” and another saying “WvW has plenty of people I see them all the time. If both are not lying, then the conclusion is that there is a mixed range of population experiences and the game isn’t, in fact, dead. Due to server relinks this experience isn’t permanent either.

> >

> > You say anecdotal. I say data point that disproves an absolute statement. The burden is on the person claiming all is vain and the game is dead. Meanwhile, I’ll be actually playing and ignoring the periodic doom and gloom on these forums.

>

> I couldn't care less if any and every form of PvP would gain an ephiphany in unison and crawled to their grave, where they belong.

> But since PvP is popular, according to you and people are playing it, according to you, why do people so desperately want to ruin PvE with it? Maybe it isn't what you want, but since this topic keeps popping up... Is it's some PvP community joke or something?

It's impossible to know the thought process of everyone. But to many people PvP is such an important thing to them that they want it everywhere. They want to be able to PvP at any place at any time. They want to be able to drop of a hat stop gathering mats and attack another player. These types of people can't understand why others would not want the same thing. They see PvP as an added spice to the game. "I think PvP is fun. I also think PvE is fun. Why not put PvP into PvE? Two fun things put together is like double the fun!"

For others it can be a sense of superiority. They know that PvE people are far less likely to know how to fight back against or even want to encounter PvP. This makes adding PvP to PvE zones an area ripe for them to harvest that easy confidence boost of killing someone who didn't even want to fight them to begin with. "Haha I win!"

This also goes hand in hand with the people who just like being a nuisance and ruining the day of other people. Being able to go around and kill people in PvE, especially in a game that did not have any PvP in PvE before, is a very good way to troll other users. "Haha you want to buy that collection item from this npc? I'm going to repeatedly kill you so you can't"

> @"Ototo.3214" said:

> > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > @"Taril.8619" said:

> > > Just... Actually question their ideas.

> >

> > I did ... and that question is still open ... why is this needed? Why is THIS the solution to warclaw being 'useless' in WvW? Even the idea that Warclaw is useless in WvW is questionable in the first place ...

>

> Eh, you could say a lot of QoL changes that have been made to the game in the past which were requested by players weren't necessarily "needed." I don't think a simple suggestion for a potential change has to specify why it's so important and integral that is must be added to the game. People have a mount meant for WvW, it can be used in PvE, they want to have at least some niche reason to use it in PvE. That's enough of a suggestion, it's ultimately up to Anet to decide if the suggestion is good enough for the game. But that doesn't change the fact that some people would be interested in a change like this.

>

> And I don't think most people are really arguing that a change to the PvE Warclaw really has anything to do with making the warclaw more inherently useful in WvW. Sure a change to make it more useful in PvE might give it more attention from PvE players that are now interested in getting it but that's about it, if anything. Though I also don't think the Warclaw is useless in WvW either.

>

> I will reiterate though, I don't think the Warclaw _needs_ to be changed in PvE. It would just be cool if it got some niche use that doesn't invalidate an already existing mount.

The problem with giving it any kind of useful niche in PvE means it will then become something in game that people have to play WvW for a benefit that only happens in PvE. The gift of battle is already a point of contention among players, but at least using legendaries is not limited to one game mode and they also require map completion in PvE so there is a mixed requirement (not to mention legendaries are 90% cosmetics anyways). But if the warclaw was made to have a use in PvE besides being cosmetic, then you now have something that is only in PvE but requires WvW to obtain. (Worth adding in here, that I think it would be fine to give it a small speed boost, no reason for it to be slower than a grounded griffon. And moving some of it's WvW abilities over to PvE would probably be fine too as they wouldn't be unique to PvE)

If the warclaw was useful in PvE you would have people complain that they should have a PvE way to obtain it because they don't want to have to spend the time in WvW. Since it is more difficult to obtain than just a gift of battle with requiring capturing all the way up to a keep (so can't just mindlessly take camps and slap dolyaks while waiting on a reward track). And if anet caved and granted a way to obtain it in PvE (not that I think they would, but the forum would get regular complainers asking them for it) it would greatly upset the WvW crowd.

> @"Fenom.9457" said:

> I don’t hate any map personally - they’re all beautiful to varying degrees and they’re all fun to vary degrees, though some certainly annoy me much more than others. I suppose some of the ones that annoy me most and/or interest me least thematically would be:

>

> Dry top - difficulty to navigate, mainly due to invisible walls nowadays so mounts don’t help much

>

> Domain of vabbi - origins of the annoying brand lightning, plus desert is personally the least interesting biome to me and this one doesn’t have anything else like the river or highlands to the north, and the branded part is kind of ruined by the storm.

>

> Domain of kourna - nothing too bad, it’s just again I find desert least interesting and this doesn’t have much else.

>

> Any one Ascalon core map (except fields of ruin) - the reason being the region overall feels a bit too.. indistinguishable? Maybe it’s just me but for every other region I remember each map by something like “oh, that’s the map with the swamp and shadow monsters”, “oh, that’s the map with the Kodan sanctuaries” or “that’s the map with the skull volcanoes”. Besides ebonhawke in FoR, I find myself weirdly unable to do that for Ascalon.

>

>

> But every map in this game is gorgeous from start to finish, I feel bad to criticize them so just lemme reiterate; every map is awesome

I agree for the most part but when it comes to Ascalon do you never think "Oh that's the map with Shatterer/Giant brand line down the middle"?

And I wish they would remove the invisible walls in drytop. They are really frustrating.

> @"Mil.3562" said:

> > @"Ashen.2907" said:

> > > @"Mil.3562" said:

> > > Now that the kitty is near to useless in WvW

> >

> > The entire argument is based on an inaccurate assumption.

> >

>

> Two points :

>

> 1. The entire argument in this topic is whether to make the Warclaw more useful or not, in PVE. Not WvW.

> 2. Please google for Warclaw Nerfs to get an update on what has happened to the kitty over the past one and a half year.

>

> I'll summarize it here and these nerfs are in WvW and I don't know why WvW is brought up here when we are talking about PVE.

>

> 1. Battle Maul: Reduced target cap from 5 to 3 to 1 (nerfed twice)

> 2. Superior Battle Maul: Reduced target cap from 5 to 3 to 1 (nerfed twice)

> 3. Jump distance reduced

> 4. Jumping at dismount removed

> 5. Remount speed reduced

> 6. Remount speed added a 3 sec ICD

> 7. Running speed reduced (2 nerfs) to such an extent that some professions can run faster that the mount lol

> 8. No longer cap the ring when mounted

> 9. The warclaw's base endurance has been reduced from 100 to 50

> 10. The warclaw's base health has been reduced from 10972 to 8779

> 11. Warclaw Mastery 4: This mastery no longer causes Superior Battle Maul to finish downed enemies. Instead it causes Superior Battle Maul to deal 20% bonus damage to downed enemies.

> 12. Fatal Fangs: This achievement will now progress when striking a downed enemy with Superior Battle Maul instead of when finishing a downed enemy. This does not affect existing achievement progress.

>

> There are probably more which I missed out. But these nerfs are real, not assumptions. If you have been playing WvW actively from the launch of the Warclaw in March 2019 till today, you will know how much damage has been done to the poor kitty. Please show some love.

Your opening line was literally "Now that the kitty is near to useless in WvW, at least buff it in PVE mode."

Which is false. No longer being so OP that it was ruining the experience of some players is not "near to useless". But I guess anytime any game aspect gets nerfed in order to be more balanced there will be people complaining that it is now useless in their eyes.

It is useful in WvW.

> @"Nokomis.5076" said:

> Everyone should start with the same prerequisites, so I would say it's a good change.

I mean, it was still a thing everyone could do, it didn't require a specific class or anything.

> @"Cynder.2509" said:

> I could make a poll but it would be too long and everyone has different opinions and reasons. I'm just interested and a bit bored.

> However I love almost everything in this game there's one particular map that I always hated even to this date. I simply hate multi level maps because I lose orientation so easily in those so mine would be Tangled Depths. Despite all that I think the map design overall is very beautiful but it's just the navigation that has been a thorn in my eye (heart) even to this day.

> I'm sure there are a few maps as well for me but this one has stood out for me the most.

> Tell me what's yours.

I am with you on this one. The map is beautiful and I love the idea of a bunch of underground tunnels but it is the *worst* to navigate. The map is basically useless.

You would be correct. They changed it so you can't get an orange crystal before the race starts.

About a karma system and BDO: I have seen the BDO forums and it has not made fighting other players any less toxic. Granted BDO has people fighting over resources. But it does prove that a karma system won't deter much if people really want to kill others.

They could place an arena in a new map like how the guild hall has one.

Talk to an npc. Teleport in. Fight.

Completely optional. Doesn't get people spammed for duels. No need for a nonfunctional karma system.

My one stipulation would be: be very careful about rewards if they require winning. PvE is not balanced to PvP **at all.** So it would be kind of a dick move to have a major game reward locked behind something like that.

Map wide pvp would be a mistake. Not only would it invite toxicity, but it most likely would not attract very many participants outside of people who want to troll/grief. Meaning it would end up as a gimmick that never gets any further attention from the devs. This would just annoy the small number of players who wanted or like it. Meanwhile everyone else who doesn't care for it would be glad it wasn't done again while simultaneously lamenting the waste of dev work that went into putting it into the game when they could have been working on something else.

I remember playing WoW and was trying to turn in a quest but a high level player was waiting near the NPC and would run over and kill me and the NPC the moment they saw me. They just sat there for hours waiting for low level questers to show up just to kill them over and over.

> @"Jagblade.4627" said:

> > @"Mewcifer.5198" said:

> > > @"Substance E.4852" said:

> > > > @"Jagblade.4627" said:

> > > > > @"Substance E.4852" said:

> > > > > > @"Jagblade.4627" said:

> > > > > > > @"Mewcifer.5198" said:

> > > > > > > > @"LucianDK.8615" said:

> > > > > > > > I am glad they did not add a dedicated swimming mount. We got enough mounts as it is already.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > I respect your opinion even if I disagree with you on it.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > What Mewcifer said, personally I would like to see more mount variety even if just for flavor's sake. Moa, Dolyak, Karka etc. There are so many pre-existing creatures that could be utilized for it.

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > They could but there's a slim chance that people are going to actually use them if they aren't better than the skyscale, especially for navigating ravine and cliff filled maps that Anet seems addicted to these days

> > > > >

> > > > > Trying to even do the north drizzlewood meta and keeping up with the zerg without a dragon is difficult, substantially more so if you don't even have the griffon

> > > > >

> > > > > Anet painted themselves into a corner when they made aerial mounts

> > > > >

> > > > > They'd be far better off simply making parallel mounts that work the same as existing ones but have wholly new rigs, ideally not simply as $30 gemstore unlocks

> > > >

> > > > Fair points all. I suppose I'm in the minority that tends to just use the mount I like the look of or whatever I'm in the mood for most days but I can see why most people would just stick to what performs the best if given the choice.

> > >

> > > Oh I mean i'd love more gimmicky mounts but when you just see everyone camping the skyscale 24/7 it does make it look like an uphill battle to design something that people will want to use without just going full WoW flying mount

> >

> > I am sure part of people camping on them is a love of dragons. It is an objectively popular creature, especially in fans of fantasy.

>

> Also true and I definitely get it. I'm just the oddball who has a fondness for the basic and things more grounded in reality even in a fantasy game like this. I'd love to see more basic mounts, and hell, more realistic looking swords, sabers, muskets, and pistols. It all has a charm to it in a high fantasy environment like this. That's just my opinion though! I'd be more inclined to trot around on a horse than fly around on a wyvern most times.

I love making some of my characters all glowing and wispy with electric pink and blinding white colour.

I also love making fashion that could be mistaken for an NPC and having natural, more gritty colours.

So I am with you on wanting some more classic designs in the game. But I think this is getting a little off-topic

> @"Substance E.4852" said:

> > @"Jagblade.4627" said:

> > > @"Substance E.4852" said:

> > > > @"Jagblade.4627" said:

> > > > > @"Mewcifer.5198" said:

> > > > > > @"LucianDK.8615" said:

> > > > > > I am glad they did not add a dedicated swimming mount. We got enough mounts as it is already.

> > > > >

> > > > > I respect your opinion even if I disagree with you on it.

> > > >

> > > > What Mewcifer said, personally I would like to see more mount variety even if just for flavor's sake. Moa, Dolyak, Karka etc. There are so many pre-existing creatures that could be utilized for it.

> > > >

> > >

> > > They could but there's a slim chance that people are going to actually use them if they aren't better than the skyscale, especially for navigating ravine and cliff filled maps that Anet seems addicted to these days

> > >

> > > Trying to even do the north drizzlewood meta and keeping up with the zerg without a dragon is difficult, substantially more so if you don't even have the griffon

> > >

> > > Anet painted themselves into a corner when they made aerial mounts

> > >

> > > They'd be far better off simply making parallel mounts that work the same as existing ones but have wholly new rigs, ideally not simply as $30 gemstore unlocks

> >

> > Fair points all. I suppose I'm in the minority that tends to just use the mount I like the look of or whatever I'm in the mood for most days but I can see why most people would just stick to what performs the best if given the choice.

>

> Oh I mean i'd love more gimmicky mounts but when you just see everyone camping the skyscale 24/7 it does make it look like an uphill battle to design something that people will want to use without just going full WoW flying mount

I am sure part of people camping on them is a love of dragons. It is an objectively popular creature, especially in fans of fantasy.

> @"LucianDK.8615" said:

> I am glad they did not add a dedicated swimming mount. We got enough mounts as it is already.

I respect your opinion even if I disagree with you on it.

> @"Substance E.4852" said:

> > @"Mewcifer.5198" said:

> > Wanting the warclaw to be a little better in PvE is not a *need* it is purely a *personal desire*. If you wanna ask anet to buff it because you want to ride around on a big cat in PvE without feeling like you are wasting too much time, sure, ask for that. But don't also ask them to code in a bunch of PvE unique abilities for it as well.

> >

> > And do not present it as if it is something the game *needs*.

>

> They just spent magnitudes more time to make the skimmer work underwater, a feature that nearly no one asked for, will probably use, or was meant for the mount in the first place yet "Make the warclaw leap value 2-3 times longer in pve" is a bridge too far for reasons

You say no one asked for but I saw **a lot** of people asking for an underwater mount. Personally I feel like they should have made it separate from skimmer, but the end result is what people wanted: a mount that can help you travel faster under the water's surface.

> @"Croc.1978" said:

> > @"Taril.8619" said:

> > If you add in gear treadmill... Still no different. Everyone still wears the same stuff. They just have to re-obtain the new "Best" stuff at set intervals for... Reasons. Even more so is the lack of choice when progressing between "Bests" due to how much work it is to implement bunches of armour (You can see it in standard gear treadmill MMO's. New expansions drop that powercreeps everything released before, everyone replaces their shiny end game loot with quest rewards that are better, then gets to the new max level and grinds out their shiny end game loot again. Rinse and repeat ad nauseum)

> > ...

> > It's where skins is actually one of the best ways to keep loot meaningful. Since skins are timeless, they don't get outdated by new content (In fact, more content means more items to combine with them to make cool outfits), they're always relevant and there's never a "Best" skin that everyone will want to be using as its all based on subjectivity (What **you** think looks best with **your** outfit)

>

> Amen to that!

>

> I initially played GW2 from Open Beta to a couple of months after release. During development, Anet had made the promise that they would not ever introduce gear better than Exotic (similar to how it was in GW1).

>

> But then they suddenly gave in to the whiners and introduced Ascended gear. Upon reading the corresponding patch notes, I felt so cheated that I stopped playing immediately and didn't touch the game for more than 7 years. Only recently did I come back when I noticed Ascended was still the top tier stat-wise and indeed no further tiers had been introduced.

>

> So thx but no thx, the gear system is fine as it is. And BTW, I still think Ascended was a big mistake.

Yeah ascended gear was a massive debacle. I hope anet doesn't make the same mistake again.

We also have to keep in mind that if this suggestion was added with an expansion you would have new expansion players.

Meaning you have a bunch of people who just bought the game and level 80 boosted and are running around trying to learn the game in the new zones.

Pvp and getting ganked is not a good new player experience.

> @"kharmin.7683" said:

> > @"Scrambles.2604" said:

> > I'm returning to this game after being absent for 6 years and it baffles me that dueling and open world pvp are still a point of contention.

> >

> > I'm guess i shouldn't be surprised. Some people simply cannot separate pvp and toxicity. They just think they're the same thing.

> >

> > This could be a consequence of spvp being it's own game. PvE players are so isolated from the pvp community that they assume everyone is toxic.

> >

>

> Or, it could be based on experience in other games that have open world PvP. I know that is true for me. I hated it elsewhere and am glad that GW2 has it's own mode for it.

Same here. Also played gw2 pvp enough to know it has plenty of toxicity. Not as bad as many other games but it still has plenty of negativity.

> @"frareanselm.1925" said:

> > @"Mewcifer.5198" said:

> > Wanting the warclaw to be a little better in PvE is not a *need* it is purely a *personal desire*. If you wanna ask anet to buff it because you want to ride around on a big cat in PvE without feeling like you are wasting too much time, sure, ask for that. But don't also ask them to code in a bunch of PvE unique abilities for it as well.

> >

> > And do not present it as if it is something the game *needs*.

>

> Wanting the warclaw to be better is not a desire its balance according to the other mounts. Every mount has a little situational advantage over others. Warclaw is jus a slow obese cat that cannot even jump properly.

Warclaw already has it's situational advantage. It is called WvW.

> @"Fat Disgrace.4275" said:

> > @"Friday.7864" said:

> > The gender discrimination is horrible :(

> > The same outfits often strip the females while they cover every bit of skin on male characters...

> > 

> >

> >

>

> Is it really classed as "discrimination" though? It's not as if their clothing is all scruffy or rugged, sure it reveals a bit but I'd hardly call this discrimination at all. There are many nude male armors, but yes not as many as female...I guess it's more of their fashion/culture type thing I dunno lol (after all, inquest are rat society. go check out "red scarlet" game if you want to witness sexism/discrimination.

Depending on which definition is being used it can count as discrimination. Discrimination doesn't have to be treating people badly, making them wear rags, etc.

A lot of discrimination is based on treating a person different based on an arbitrary distinction such as age, skin colour, or gender. So this counts. Is it a strong word to use? Yeah, a little bit. Also another game doing something to a greater extreme doesn't negate smaller instances of it in this game.

> @"Atomos.7593" said:

> > @"flog.3485" said:

> > > @"Atomos.7593" said:

> > > > @"flog.3485" said:

> > > > > @"Atomos.7593" said:

> > > > > > @"borgs.6103" said:

> > > > > > > @"Atomos.7593" said:

> > > > > > > > @"borgs.6103" said:

> > > > > > > > Warclaw has the highest disengage damage out of all the mounts in PvE. That's its distinction from the others and in my opinion is on point, with the mount being called _Warclaw_ and all that.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Where did you get this information from? Because according to the GW2 wiki it doesn't have the most damage out of all of the mounts in PvE even with the ravenous discipline mastery unlocked from the raptor.

> > > > > > Yeah I just checked.

> > > > > > They removed the bleeding in PvE too it seems. That was its edge. It does the same damage as raptor now. RIP warclaw.

> > > > >

> > > > > Wow I didn't even know that there used to bleeding damage in PvE before lol. Seems kind of silly to remove it in PvE since PvE is not competitive and I doubt that skill used to be overpowered in PvE. I wonder if the bleeding removal in PvE was intentional.

> > > >

> > > > It is a design change. They can’t separate design changes from one game mode to another.

> > > >

> > > > As for the topic at hand, please do not waste time making warclaw relevant in PvE. If it is going to be relevant, then it first needs to get its niche and with pretty much all movement skill abilities already covered by all the existing mounts, I personally don’t want the devs to scratch their head and waste time figuring out what the warclaw would do that no other mount can’t do.

> > > > Another problem as well, is that, if it becomes relevant, then the majority of players will complain that they need to play WvW just to be able to perform in PvE.

> > >

> > > But Anet have already done many design changes that are specific to game modes. For example some skills work differently between PvE, WvW and PvP. Also the warclaw skill battle maul already does different damage in PvP than PvE due to a higher transformation damage coefficient according to the GW2 wiki.

> >

> > You don’t get my point. They can change how strong one skill performs from one game mode to another, but they cannot make the warclaw do bleeding in PvE and not inflict bleeding when players play in WvW.

> >

> > For example, if the warclaw was able to go underwater, it would be impossible for the devs to decide that in WvW, the warclaw would not be able swim.

> >

> > That is why it is pretty much impossible to buff the warclaw in PvE (outside of speed maybe because speed has an arithmetic value) because any change that would be introduced in PvE would affect WvW. And since the devs have been reducing the effectiveness of the warclaw in WvW, then they obviously have no intention of buffing it in any way, shape or form.

>

> My point is why wouldn't they be able to make the bleed from warclaw do different damage in PvE than in WvW since skills are already different between game modes?

I think it would be possible. And it would require a lot less coding than adding a completely unique ability.

I don't see anything wrong with anet restoring the original engage skill in PvE along with potentially increasing its speed to match maybe the griffon (I don't see any need for it to be "fast" like the raptor or jackal, but being faster than the skimmer makes some sense)