Limit mounts for the next expansion(until map completion of the instance). Journey over Destination!

[Rhyse.8179]

> @"BlueJin.4127" said:

> If you stop using mounts, everything you said can be avoided for you.

 

No, it can't. It affects the design of the maps. That's the point.

 

> @"Opopanax.1803" said:

> I don't see why they couldn't male large regions of a map, say a whole meta area, non mount. Gives you the best of both worlds.

 

That's a good idea.

 

[Opopanax.1803]

> @"Rhyse.8179" said:

> > @"BlueJin.4127" said:

> > If you stop using mounts, everything you said can be avoided for you.

>

> No, it can't. It affects the design of the maps. That's the point.

>

> > @"Opopanax.1803" said:

> > I don't see why they couldn't male large regions of a map, say a whole meta area, non mount. Gives you the best of both worlds.

>

> That's a good idea.

>

 

Mounts greatly affect the design (depth, width, features) of the terrain; i couldn't agree more. It's impossible to not affect how the game is played and terrain is designed; not sure how anyone can argue with you on that one!

 

I hope anet can find a balance; I'm hoping that the pendulum gets to an even better balance of hot and pof on the next expac.

[Opopanax.1803]

> @"BlueJin.4127" said:

> Huh? Acknowledging what? Your OPINION that mounts cause problems is not a fact. They’re opinions that apply to players like you, in your own mind, because you make them into problems for yourselves, no disrespect. If you stop using mounts, everything you said can be avoided for you. To players like me, there is no problem with the existence of mounts, no matter how much you claim they are. Mounts enhance the game for players like me. If you prefer blondes because you like light colored hair but dislike dark colored hair, a partner with dark color hair may be a problem for you. But if I prefer dark hair over light hair, that “problem” you mention, is my boon. :) Your opinion is just an opinion that applies to you.

>

> It’s funny how you mention you say I’m changing your responsibility because of my preference. YOUR suggestion to gate mounts COMPLETELY PREVENTS players like me from using mounts during the gating period because of your preference. Your suggestion is the one forcing stuff on others because of your preference. But in the current system, you don’t have to use mounts if you don’t want to. And I can use my mounts because I want to. We can both play our way right now. I’m sorry if you feel that you can’t control your responsibility (not really sure why you’re calling it responsibility). Unfortunately, it is unreasonable for me to be penalized because you can’t control your free will.

>

> What I mean by making maps as if mounts don’t exist, but ensuring mounts don’t break maps is... Don’t create jumping puzzles that require mounts, for example. But ensure players can’t jump out of map boundaries with mounts, for example. If you think mounts make maps less fun and require specialized maps designed for mounts, that’s your opinion, and you’re welcome to it. But it’s not a fact. I want maps just as they are, so that having mounts creates advantages that I wouldn’t have, giving me more fun ways for me to play that would be impossible without mounts. Creating mounts then negating the advantage of mounts is pointless for me. That’s not why I play RPG’s.

>

> Sorry for the spam of edits. :tongue: I’m not great at getting my point across and I also like to proofread and edit to make sure I get my points across without sounding like a jerk.

 

Hey BluJin,

 

Would you be ok if anet made maps that they designed solely to be traveled on foot (very limited vertically and no need for mounts) but you could use mount a in them? Would you find them fun? I am genuinely interested.

[BlueJin.4127]

Hey, Opo. That’s what I’m saying (though not flat like a board). It's not a fact that if you have mounts, you HAVE to have maps designed for them. Some people believe you need maps designed for mounts since that’s their preference. As you mentioned above, I would like maps designed like normal, so that when I gain mounts, I can do things that I couldn’t before. It’s the kind of progression I look for in RPG’s. If Anet gives us mounts that allow us to do special things, then make maps that negate the specialness of mounts, then to me, that defeats the point of adding mounts. It’s like giving me a bite of my favorite food, then blending it with my least favorite food. I know, weird analogy, but I have to go soon.

 

If we get Core and HoT like maps, people who don’t enjoy mounts can enjoy them without mounts and people who enjoy mounts can take advantage of mounts. If we get maps that negate mounts’ advantage, people like me just lost what we paid and worked hard for. That’s why I’d like to see Anet cater to both, because it is possible to have both by having different types of maps, or have some sections of maps act different. I have issues with both HoT maps and PoF maps. But I love the variety of catering to different needs and letting players choose how they play, instead of forcing others’ style on me.

[Opopanax.1803]

I like using mounts, and I also like times when I dont, hence my suggestion of a mix of "zoning". I think mixed zones would give everyone what they want. A place and time for all mounts, gliders, and potentially new mastery areas.

 

Personally, I'd love to see them give a climbing mastery that would add more to platforming. I want this because I want some "mountain-side" type maps where you are on edges, can slide/fall off, scale up in certain areas etcetera.... Far Shiverpeaks, please!

[milomilome.6837]

somehow this request feels like a WoW player who used to be 'mount nerfed' every expansion... in WoW you can't fly in the new expansion until you do some hilariously stupid achievement hunting...

 

no , mount is now part of the GW2 lore just like Gliding.. it will be available for those who have HoT and PoF , and only be disabled in Jumping Puzzle areas

 

unless the next expansion zones is a map wide jumping puzzle

[torakun.9638]

I played since the BETA, eventhough then I took a break 4 years ago and just came back recently. I am telling you guys that the pain of traversing Orr without mount is a nightmare. So is the Vista that requires you to go all the way back so that you can climb and jump all 1000x from all the way back (if you fall, repeat from way behind, mister), or circling the whole mountain only to find that the Vista is underwater far away from the marker, just to get to the vista (I know its fun for people that enjoys it, so this is just my opinion). Those times really made the journey time consuming, and eventually boring. Orr area for example, the respawn rate of Risen foes are super fast. So, if you're lost because you're trying to get away from the mob, and now checking your map, probably after you done orient yourself, the enemy you just killed is already respawned.

 

Anyway, my point is, I feel the pain back then when the game started and how, for me, the journey time x satisfaction during the journey =/= GW1's level. Came back after mount exist really made my whole stay in tyria really really much more enjoyable. I can hide creatively using mount when I want to afk, I can make map completion faster, I can "walk" faster, and another place for Fashion War 2 ;)

 

Taking it away after map completion is done is definitely a no-no for me. Yesterday I did Strait map completion and many times I was forced to walk due to unable to mount after getting attacked, AND I am telling you, one time, the walk lasted for almost 4 minutes because I cant keep the hostility aggro off because I kept meeting enemies on the way. **That was not enjoyable for me!** I just want to get to point A to Point B before logging off, but it created unnecessary time wasting (now that we have mount), and I dread if they take away/gating the mount.

[MokahTGS.7850]

Um...no...design the next expansion areas with mounts in mind. Much more creative and interesting areas that way. Mounts are a thing. L2R

[Ashen.2907]

> @"Opopanax.1803" said:

> > @"BlueJin.4127" said:

> > Huh? Acknowledging what? Your OPINION that mounts cause problems is not a fact. They’re opinions that apply to players like you, in your own mind, because you make them into problems for yourselves, no disrespect. If you stop using mounts, everything you said can be avoided for you. To players like me, there is no problem with the existence of mounts, no matter how much you claim they are. Mounts enhance the game for players like me. If you prefer blondes because you like light colored hair but dislike dark colored hair, a partner with dark color hair may be a problem for you. But if I prefer dark hair over light hair, that “problem” you mention, is my boon. :) Your opinion is just an opinion that applies to you.

> >

> > It’s funny how you mention you say I’m changing your responsibility because of my preference. YOUR suggestion to gate mounts COMPLETELY PREVENTS players like me from using mounts during the gating period because of your preference. Your suggestion is the one forcing stuff on others because of your preference. But in the current system, you don’t have to use mounts if you don’t want to. And I can use my mounts because I want to. We can both play our way right now. I’m sorry if you feel that you can’t control your responsibility (not really sure why you’re calling it responsibility). Unfortunately, it is unreasonable for me to be penalized because you can’t control your free will.

> >

> > What I mean by making maps as if mounts don’t exist, but ensuring mounts don’t break maps is... Don’t create jumping puzzles that require mounts, for example. But ensure players can’t jump out of map boundaries with mounts, for example. If you think mounts make maps less fun and require specialized maps designed for mounts, that’s your opinion, and you’re welcome to it. But it’s not a fact. I want maps just as they are, so that having mounts creates advantages that I wouldn’t have, giving me more fun ways for me to play that would be impossible without mounts. Creating mounts then negating the advantage of mounts is pointless for me. That’s not why I play RPG’s.

> >

> > Sorry for the spam of edits. :tongue: I’m not great at getting my point across and I also like to proofread and edit to make sure I get my points across without sounding like a jerk.

>

> Hey BluJin,

>

> Would you be ok if anet made maps that they designed solely to be traveled on foot (very limited vertically and no need for mounts) but you could use mount a in them? Would you find them fun? I am genuinely interested.

 

This describes the majority of the maps in the game and has given them new life for some.

[LucianDK.8615]

OP, i think you are confused. Theres already no mount and no gliding zones around jumping puzzles.

[Opopanax.1803]

> @"Ashen.2907" said:

> > @"Opopanax.1803" said:

> > > @"BlueJin.4127" said:

> > > Huh? Acknowledging what? Your OPINION that mounts cause problems is not a fact. They’re opinions that apply to players like you, in your own mind, because you make them into problems for yourselves, no disrespect. If you stop using mounts, everything you said can be avoided for you. To players like me, there is no problem with the existence of mounts, no matter how much you claim they are. Mounts enhance the game for players like me. If you prefer blondes because you like light colored hair but dislike dark colored hair, a partner with dark color hair may be a problem for you. But if I prefer dark hair over light hair, that “problem” you mention, is my boon. :) Your opinion is just an opinion that applies to you.

> > >

> > > It’s funny how you mention you say I’m changing your responsibility because of my preference. YOUR suggestion to gate mounts COMPLETELY PREVENTS players like me from using mounts during the gating period because of your preference. Your suggestion is the one forcing stuff on others because of your preference. But in the current system, you don’t have to use mounts if you don’t want to. And I can use my mounts because I want to. We can both play our way right now. I’m sorry if you feel that you can’t control your responsibility (not really sure why you’re calling it responsibility). Unfortunately, it is unreasonable for me to be penalized because you can’t control your free will.

> > >

> > > What I mean by making maps as if mounts don’t exist, but ensuring mounts don’t break maps is... Don’t create jumping puzzles that require mounts, for example. But ensure players can’t jump out of map boundaries with mounts, for example. If you think mounts make maps less fun and require specialized maps designed for mounts, that’s your opinion, and you’re welcome to it. But it’s not a fact. I want maps just as they are, so that having mounts creates advantages that I wouldn’t have, giving me more fun ways for me to play that would be impossible without mounts. Creating mounts then negating the advantage of mounts is pointless for me. That’s not why I play RPG’s.

> > >

> > > Sorry for the spam of edits. :tongue: I’m not great at getting my point across and I also like to proofread and edit to make sure I get my points across without sounding like a jerk.

> >

> > Hey BluJin,

> >

> > Would you be ok if anet made maps that they designed solely to be traveled on foot (very limited vertically and no need for mounts) but you could use mount a in them? Would you find them fun? I am genuinely interested.

>

> This describes the majority of the maps in the game and has given them new life for some.

 

True. And for others it makes them meaningless and inconsequential.

 

I hope anet has some glider only sections/maps, some mount maps, etc, etc.

[Ashen.2907]

> @"Opopanax.1803" said:

> > @"Ashen.2907" said:

> > > @"Opopanax.1803" said:

> > > > @"BlueJin.4127" said:

> > > > Huh? Acknowledging what? Your OPINION that mounts cause problems is not a fact. They’re opinions that apply to players like you, in your own mind, because you make them into problems for yourselves, no disrespect. If you stop using mounts, everything you said can be avoided for you. To players like me, there is no problem with the existence of mounts, no matter how much you claim they are. Mounts enhance the game for players like me. If you prefer blondes because you like light colored hair but dislike dark colored hair, a partner with dark color hair may be a problem for you. But if I prefer dark hair over light hair, that “problem” you mention, is my boon. :) Your opinion is just an opinion that applies to you.

> > > >

> > > > It’s funny how you mention you say I’m changing your responsibility because of my preference. YOUR suggestion to gate mounts COMPLETELY PREVENTS players like me from using mounts during the gating period because of your preference. Your suggestion is the one forcing stuff on others because of your preference. But in the current system, you don’t have to use mounts if you don’t want to. And I can use my mounts because I want to. We can both play our way right now. I’m sorry if you feel that you can’t control your responsibility (not really sure why you’re calling it responsibility). Unfortunately, it is unreasonable for me to be penalized because you can’t control your free will.

> > > >

> > > > What I mean by making maps as if mounts don’t exist, but ensuring mounts don’t break maps is... Don’t create jumping puzzles that require mounts, for example. But ensure players can’t jump out of map boundaries with mounts, for example. If you think mounts make maps less fun and require specialized maps designed for mounts, that’s your opinion, and you’re welcome to it. But it’s not a fact. I want maps just as they are, so that having mounts creates advantages that I wouldn’t have, giving me more fun ways for me to play that would be impossible without mounts. Creating mounts then negating the advantage of mounts is pointless for me. That’s not why I play RPG’s.

> > > >

> > > > Sorry for the spam of edits. :tongue: I’m not great at getting my point across and I also like to proofread and edit to make sure I get my points across without sounding like a jerk.

> > >

> > > Hey BluJin,

> > >

> > > Would you be ok if anet made maps that they designed solely to be traveled on foot (very limited vertically and no need for mounts) but you could use mount a in them? Would you find them fun? I am genuinely interested.

> >

> > This describes the majority of the maps in the game and has given them new life for some.

>

> True. And for others it makes them meaningless and inconsequential.

>

> I hope anet has some glider only sections/maps, some mount maps, etc, etc.

 

I would imagine that those who think that mounts render core maps meaningless and inconsequential held that view of those maps before mounts. After all core maps, for the most part, are not designed to be difficult to traverse and can be more easily bypassed without mounts than with.

[Rhyse.8179]

> @"Opopanax.1803" said:

> I hope anet has some glider only sections/maps, some mount maps, etc, etc.

 

This would be ideal to me.

 

> @"Ashen.2907" said:

> I would imagine that those who think that mounts render core maps meaningless and inconsequential held that view of those maps before mounts. After all core maps, for the most part, are not designed to be difficult to traverse and can be more easily bypassed without mounts than with.

 

Anet originally said they were not going to add mounts, ever, specifically because of the design problems they caused. Waypoints were specifically designed to make mounts unnecessary. Look how far apart and remote WP's are in POF compared to Core. As everyone predicted though, they succumbed to customer pressure. At least they made the mounts engaging and not just Go Faster buffs.

[Ashen.2907]

> @"Rhyse.8179" said:

> > @"Opopanax.1803" said:

> > I hope anet has some glider only sections/maps, some mount maps, etc, etc.

>

> This would be ideal to me.

>

> > @"Ashen.2907" said:

> > I would imagine that those who think that mounts render core maps meaningless and inconsequential held that view of those maps before mounts. After all core maps, for the most part, are not designed to be difficult to traverse and can be more easily bypassed without mounts than with.

>

> Anet originally said they were not going to add mounts, ever, specifically because of the design problems they caused. Waypoints were specifically designed to make mounts unnecessary. Look how far apart and remote WP's are in POF compared to Core. As everyone predicted though, they succumbed to customer pressure. At least they made the mounts engaging and not just Go Faster buffs.

 

I would be delighted to see a source for the claim that Anet said not ever to mounts. It goes against my, perhaps faulty, memory of the subject and against Anet's tendency to avoid statements of absolutes such as "never" in favor of keeping their options open with "not at this time."

[Rhyse.8179]

I tried much googling and can't find the original. It looks like it may have been on Reddit, which is a language I don't speak. I did find several references of other people talking about them having said it.

[Egrimm Van Horstmann.7921]

Unless you plan to minimize aggressive mob saturation, that's a firm no from me. Anyone who tried to explore PoF without a mount can tell of the horror stories endless combat that plagued the game at the start. Even now walking on foot in PoF zones is just asking for combat, how can one even enjoy the exploration when there's no end to mobs?

[Opopanax.1803]

> @"Egrimm Van Horstmann.7921" said:

> Unless you plan to minimize aggressive mob saturation, that's a firm no from me. Anyone who tried to explore PoF without a mount can tell of the horror stories endless combat that plagued the game at the start. Even now walking on foot in PoF zones is just asking for combat, how can one even enjoy the exploration when there's no end to mobs?

 

You literally can't explore PoF without a mount. You have to get the raptor before the rest of it opens up.

 

Did you mean something else?

[Opopanax.1803]

> @"Ashen.2907" said:

> > @"Opopanax.1803" said:

> > > @"Ashen.2907" said:

> > > > @"Opopanax.1803" said:

> > > > > @"BlueJin.4127" said:

> > > > > Huh? Acknowledging what? Your OPINION that mounts cause problems is not a fact. They’re opinions that apply to players like you, in your own mind, because you make them into problems for yourselves, no disrespect. If you stop using mounts, everything you said can be avoided for you. To players like me, there is no problem with the existence of mounts, no matter how much you claim they are. Mounts enhance the game for players like me. If you prefer blondes because you like light colored hair but dislike dark colored hair, a partner with dark color hair may be a problem for you. But if I prefer dark hair over light hair, that “problem” you mention, is my boon. :) Your opinion is just an opinion that applies to you.

> > > > >

> > > > > It’s funny how you mention you say I’m changing your responsibility because of my preference. YOUR suggestion to gate mounts COMPLETELY PREVENTS players like me from using mounts during the gating period because of your preference. Your suggestion is the one forcing stuff on others because of your preference. But in the current system, you don’t have to use mounts if you don’t want to. And I can use my mounts because I want to. We can both play our way right now. I’m sorry if you feel that you can’t control your responsibility (not really sure why you’re calling it responsibility). Unfortunately, it is unreasonable for me to be penalized because you can’t control your free will.

> > > > >

> > > > > What I mean by making maps as if mounts don’t exist, but ensuring mounts don’t break maps is... Don’t create jumping puzzles that require mounts, for example. But ensure players can’t jump out of map boundaries with mounts, for example. If you think mounts make maps less fun and require specialized maps designed for mounts, that’s your opinion, and you’re welcome to it. But it’s not a fact. I want maps just as they are, so that having mounts creates advantages that I wouldn’t have, giving me more fun ways for me to play that would be impossible without mounts. Creating mounts then negating the advantage of mounts is pointless for me. That’s not why I play RPG’s.

> > > > >

> > > > > Sorry for the spam of edits. :tongue: I’m not great at getting my point across and I also like to proofread and edit to make sure I get my points across without sounding like a jerk.

> > > >

> > > > Hey BluJin,

> > > >

> > > > Would you be ok if anet made maps that they designed solely to be traveled on foot (very limited vertically and no need for mounts) but you could use mount a in them? Would you find them fun? I am genuinely interested.

> > >

> > > This describes the majority of the maps in the game and has given them new life for some.

> >

> > True. And for others it makes them meaningless and inconsequential.

> >

> > I hope anet has some glider only sections/maps, some mount maps, etc, etc.

>

> I would imagine that those who think that mounts render core maps meaningless and inconsequential held that view of those maps before mounts. After all core maps, for the most part, are not designed to be difficult to traverse and can be more easily bypassed without mounts than with.

 

I was indifferent before they added them.

 

I do like how they implemented mounts, with the exception of Griffin which I despise. Way to much content skipping with how they have flight out. Had they kept it as a gliding mount, I could have supported. Griffin was an extremely poor choice to add. It will make the game much harder to design from here on out.

 

I don't want mounts in every zone from here on out, blowing past everything unless you get dismounted. Selective zoning would be much preferred.

[Egrimm Van Horstmann.7921]

> @"Opopanax.1803" said:

> > @"Egrimm Van Horstmann.7921" said:

> > Unless you plan to minimize aggressive mob saturation, that's a firm no from me. Anyone who tried to explore PoF without a mount can tell of the horror stories endless combat that plagued the game at the start. Even now walking on foot in PoF zones is just asking for combat, how can one even enjoy the exploration when there's no end to mobs?

>

> You literally can't explore PoF without a mount. You have to get the raptor before the rest of it opens up.

>

> Did you mean something else?

 

There is no requirement to have the Raptor, I started not finishing that part of the story and yes you can move beyond the starting area without picking up the raptor. I did that along with several others just wanting to explore. Second you may have missed initial aggro problem of PoF were permacombat was common when you were knocked off the mount. Basically I couldn't imagine trying to traverse the massive PoF maps without a mount. And new maps are designed with the mount being necessary to traverse them. Even basic things like POIs and Vistas need mounts on all the newer maps.

[Briareos.1865]

I personally love HoT maps mostly VB. Exploring it with or without mount is fun. Even if u decide to use mounts some of the places aren't so straightforward to reach either. I think it's got the balance for both.

[juhani.5361]

> @"Opopanax.1803" said:

> > @"Ashen.2907" said:

> > > @"Opopanax.1803" said:

> > > > @"BlueJin.4127" said:

> > > > Huh? Acknowledging what? Your OPINION that mounts cause problems is not a fact. They’re opinions that apply to players like you, in your own mind, because you make them into problems for yourselves, no disrespect. If you stop using mounts, everything you said can be avoided for you. To players like me, there is no problem with the existence of mounts, no matter how much you claim they are. Mounts enhance the game for players like me. If you prefer blondes because you like light colored hair but dislike dark colored hair, a partner with dark color hair may be a problem for you. But if I prefer dark hair over light hair, that “problem” you mention, is my boon. :) Your opinion is just an opinion that applies to you.

> > > >

> > > > It’s funny how you mention you say I’m changing your responsibility because of my preference. YOUR suggestion to gate mounts COMPLETELY PREVENTS players like me from using mounts during the gating period because of your preference. Your suggestion is the one forcing stuff on others because of your preference. But in the current system, you don’t have to use mounts if you don’t want to. And I can use my mounts because I want to. We can both play our way right now. I’m sorry if you feel that you can’t control your responsibility (not really sure why you’re calling it responsibility). Unfortunately, it is unreasonable for me to be penalized because you can’t control your free will.

> > > >

> > > > What I mean by making maps as if mounts don’t exist, but ensuring mounts don’t break maps is... Don’t create jumping puzzles that require mounts, for example. But ensure players can’t jump out of map boundaries with mounts, for example. If you think mounts make maps less fun and require specialized maps designed for mounts, that’s your opinion, and you’re welcome to it. But it’s not a fact. I want maps just as they are, so that having mounts creates advantages that I wouldn’t have, giving me more fun ways for me to play that would be impossible without mounts. Creating mounts then negating the advantage of mounts is pointless for me. That’s not why I play RPG’s.

> > > >

> > > > Sorry for the spam of edits. :tongue: I’m not great at getting my point across and I also like to proofread and edit to make sure I get my points across without sounding like a jerk.

> > >

> > > Hey BluJin,

> > >

> > > Would you be ok if anet made maps that they designed solely to be traveled on foot (very limited vertically and no need for mounts) but you could use mount a in them? Would you find them fun? I am genuinely interested.

> >

> > This describes the majority of the maps in the game and has given them new life for some.

>

> True. And for others it makes them meaningless and inconsequential.

>

> I hope anet has some glider only sections/maps, some mount maps, etc, etc.

 

That would pretty much be a no-buy for me. If I can't use or access half the maps or if travel is a long, boring, painful slog like pre-mount Orr, I'd never play on those maps. A total waste of my money.

[Opopanax.1803]

> @"juhani.5361" said:

> > @"Opopanax.1803" said:

> > > @"Ashen.2907" said:

> > > > @"Opopanax.1803" said:

> > > > > @"BlueJin.4127" said:

> > > > > Huh? Acknowledging what? Your OPINION that mounts cause problems is not a fact. They’re opinions that apply to players like you, in your own mind, because you make them into problems for yourselves, no disrespect. If you stop using mounts, everything you said can be avoided for you. To players like me, there is no problem with the existence of mounts, no matter how much you claim they are. Mounts enhance the game for players like me. If you prefer blondes because you like light colored hair but dislike dark colored hair, a partner with dark color hair may be a problem for you. But if I prefer dark hair over light hair, that “problem” you mention, is my boon. :) Your opinion is just an opinion that applies to you.

> > > > >

> > > > > It’s funny how you mention you say I’m changing your responsibility because of my preference. YOUR suggestion to gate mounts COMPLETELY PREVENTS players like me from using mounts during the gating period because of your preference. Your suggestion is the one forcing stuff on others because of your preference. But in the current system, you don’t have to use mounts if you don’t want to. And I can use my mounts because I want to. We can both play our way right now. I’m sorry if you feel that you can’t control your responsibility (not really sure why you’re calling it responsibility). Unfortunately, it is unreasonable for me to be penalized because you can’t control your free will.

> > > > >

> > > > > What I mean by making maps as if mounts don’t exist, but ensuring mounts don’t break maps is... Don’t create jumping puzzles that require mounts, for example. But ensure players can’t jump out of map boundaries with mounts, for example. If you think mounts make maps less fun and require specialized maps designed for mounts, that’s your opinion, and you’re welcome to it. But it’s not a fact. I want maps just as they are, so that having mounts creates advantages that I wouldn’t have, giving me more fun ways for me to play that would be impossible without mounts. Creating mounts then negating the advantage of mounts is pointless for me. That’s not why I play RPG’s.

> > > > >

> > > > > Sorry for the spam of edits. :tongue: I’m not great at getting my point across and I also like to proofread and edit to make sure I get my points across without sounding like a jerk.

> > > >

> > > > Hey BluJin,

> > > >

> > > > Would you be ok if anet made maps that they designed solely to be traveled on foot (very limited vertically and no need for mounts) but you could use mount a in them? Would you find them fun? I am genuinely interested.

> > >

> > > This describes the majority of the maps in the game and has given them new life for some.

> >

> > True. And for others it makes them meaningless and inconsequential.

> >

> > I hope anet has some glider only sections/maps, some mount maps, etc, etc.

>

> That would pretty much be a no-buy for me. If I can't use or access half the maps or if travel is a long, boring, painful slog like pre-mount Orr, I'd never play on those maps. A total waste of my money.

 

You couldn't handle it if say one of five maps has no mounts? Or 1/4 of a map was a no mount region?

[juhani.5361]

> @"Opopanax.1803" said:

> > @"juhani.5361" said:

> > > @"Opopanax.1803" said:

> > > > @"Ashen.2907" said:

> > > > > @"Opopanax.1803" said:

> > > > > > @"BlueJin.4127" said:

> > > > > > Huh? Acknowledging what? Your OPINION that mounts cause problems is not a fact. They’re opinions that apply to players like you, in your own mind, because you make them into problems for yourselves, no disrespect. If you stop using mounts, everything you said can be avoided for you. To players like me, there is no problem with the existence of mounts, no matter how much you claim they are. Mounts enhance the game for players like me. If you prefer blondes because you like light colored hair but dislike dark colored hair, a partner with dark color hair may be a problem for you. But if I prefer dark hair over light hair, that “problem” you mention, is my boon. :) Your opinion is just an opinion that applies to you.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > It’s funny how you mention you say I’m changing your responsibility because of my preference. YOUR suggestion to gate mounts COMPLETELY PREVENTS players like me from using mounts during the gating period because of your preference. Your suggestion is the one forcing stuff on others because of your preference. But in the current system, you don’t have to use mounts if you don’t want to. And I can use my mounts because I want to. We can both play our way right now. I’m sorry if you feel that you can’t control your responsibility (not really sure why you’re calling it responsibility). Unfortunately, it is unreasonable for me to be penalized because you can’t control your free will.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > What I mean by making maps as if mounts don’t exist, but ensuring mounts don’t break maps is... Don’t create jumping puzzles that require mounts, for example. But ensure players can’t jump out of map boundaries with mounts, for example. If you think mounts make maps less fun and require specialized maps designed for mounts, that’s your opinion, and you’re welcome to it. But it’s not a fact. I want maps just as they are, so that having mounts creates advantages that I wouldn’t have, giving me more fun ways for me to play that would be impossible without mounts. Creating mounts then negating the advantage of mounts is pointless for me. That’s not why I play RPG’s.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Sorry for the spam of edits. :tongue: I’m not great at getting my point across and I also like to proofread and edit to make sure I get my points across without sounding like a jerk.

> > > > >

> > > > > Hey BluJin,

> > > > >

> > > > > Would you be ok if anet made maps that they designed solely to be traveled on foot (very limited vertically and no need for mounts) but you could use mount a in them? Would you find them fun? I am genuinely interested.

> > > >

> > > > This describes the majority of the maps in the game and has given them new life for some.

> > >

> > > True. And for others it makes them meaningless and inconsequential.

> > >

> > > I hope anet has some glider only sections/maps, some mount maps, etc, etc.

> >

> > That would pretty much be a no-buy for me. If I can't use or access half the maps or if travel is a long, boring, painful slog like pre-mount Orr, I'd never play on those maps. A total waste of my money.

>

> You couldn't handle it if say one of five maps has no mounts? Or 1/4 of a map was a no mount region?

 

I'm sure I could handle it fine. I just wouldn't pay for it ;)

[Dante.1763]

Unless they plan on changing how theyve done expansions so far, the next expansion wont require you to have mounts to do it, just like PoF doenst require or ever need gliding or any of the masteries you get from HoT or the LW episode after. So while mounts are going to be allowed, i really hope they dont design the maps and *force* you to use mounts, otherwise theyd force players to purchase the previous expansion which is something they havent done so far.

[Zaklex.6308]

> @"Loosmaster.8263" said:

> > @"MachineManXX.9746" said:

> > > @"ChronosCosmos.9450" said:

> > > What I miss about Guild Wars was the exploration aspect of the game. If we do get an expansion like Cantha, it would be fun to explore the map with everyone without mounts. However don't completely exclude them. Just limit them until map completion for the specific instance please! Just a thought. After revisiting GW1 yesterday, I really miss the journal rather than destination aspect of the game. In GW1 everything was far away and you would have to play hours to get to a destination but it was enjoyable. Thank you for your consideration!

> >

> > Why not just, you know, not use your mount, instead of trying to force everyone to not use their mounts?

>

> Yeah try that in the maps with the huge aggro range...

 

What maps? Are you saying there's maps you can't just run through, because I don't have that problem with any of the maps.

 

P.S. For the person that said there's only 3 places to use the Beetles special ability, actually there are 5...now good luck finding the other 2 you didn't know existed.