Fly

[Aavataris.5720]

Before bothering without reason:

Read, yes? It is not "flying everywhere as you please", it is "**having access to new areas taking advantage of old maps**"

-----

Why do they have to complain about EVERYTHING, and without even reading first? ¬¬

 

___________________________________________

More and more I like the game and I could not help noticing, as a result of the events in History, a new obvious feature that needs to be implemented by Tyria.

 

Currently, in History, appeared in the new maps "instabilities" (low gravity areas) that allow **players mounted or with the Glider to ascend freely and, instead of planning, to fly!**

They could invent an excuse for these instabilities to be seen in certain parts of Tyria, **mainly in Lyon Arch and the 5 main cities**. Thus:

 

* It would be interesting to be able to **fly in these areas, either with Griffins or having all the dominions of Glider** (_another attractive thing for those who acquire the expansions_).

* In the old maps (for beginners) those of level 80 we could fly (and with expansions), **finding there veteran activities and challenges** (and _avoid creating maps for these_).

* They could add **more interesting things in the skies of the 5 major cities and Lyon Arch** (like fight arenas similar to PvP, more events, etc.).

* In the future they could implement aerial fights (personally, I would like a **PvP map submarine and/or aerial**, or that it combines both things with the fights in earth).

 

P.D.: _**At no time have I said "fly freely through ALL the maps", instead "take advantage ABOVE the areas where there are no vertical maps with "flight" (low gravity in that particular area to go up to new areas)"**_

[Tails.9372]

In certain areas it's already possible to fly (like in the mists or the ??? area in Jahai Bluffs). We just need a low gravity upgrade for the griffon. /done

[Inculpatus cedo.9234]

As for PvP, they already removed most of the underwater content because of player dissatisfaction, so it seems unlikely they would add it (or aerial combat [same issues]) back in.

 

I'm not sure, with the Griffon already available, flying would be _that_ different and worth the resources. /shrug Isn't the Griffon available for use in Lion's Arch and all the Cities already?

[derd.6413]

i rather anet not make the maps feel small and insignificant by letting us fly (and this happens to every game that wasn't designed around flying and some that did)

[Ayrilana.1396]

I’m against flying as it would have negative implications on maps.

[Tails.9372]

> @"Ayrilana.1396" said:

> I’m against flying as it would have negative implications on maps.

The springer already "breaks" pretty much every map and JPs are already covered in gigantic "no mount" bubbles. Also, if it's just going from A to B then the beetle is still going to be the better option most of the time since bond of vigor boosted beetle > having to reach certain height for the level 2 griffon boost.

[Zephyria.6103]

I actually like what they've done for flying. The gryphon and gliders are great and having 'low gravity' areas is great flavor when it fits those spaces. It's not overpowered and it has enough mechanic that it feels believeable.

[Aavataris.5720]

> @"Tails.9372" said:

Yes, I said that, in the new map you can fly: "... appeared in the new maps" instabilities "". And yes, it's because of the change in gravity of the area.

 

It is exactly what I am proposing.

[Aavataris.5720]

> @"Inculpatus cedo.9234" said:

 

I mean to take advantage of those areas where air is not used (there are parts where there are puzzles and others that can be raised by planning and riding, but there are others where there is nothing at all and something interesting can be done).

[Cyninja.2954]

Without getting into the entire flying makes content obsolete (which it does), consider this:

 

The current implementation of movement skills always has a pro and con:

- raptor is swift on even planes, can not fly, has very little vertical movement

- springer mediocre horizontal movement, can not fly, has great vertical movement

- griffon has mediocre to amazong horizontal movement depending on space, can semi fly, can not use updrafts

- glider has mediocre horizontal movement, can semi fly freely downward, can use updrafts

- etc.

 

All movement abilities have a cost-benefit aspect to them and between them. Pure flight would break this balance. It's one of the main reasons why flight is seldom a good concept to implement.

[Aavataris.5720]

> @"derd.6413" said:

 

There are maps that already have their aerial part (thing to see the HoT expansion) and do not affect them negatively ...there are many that have NOTHING aerial and can be exploited, also taking advantage of the division with the low level (without affecting them negatively, but reviving old maps for which we are lvl 80).

[Aavataris.5720]

> @"Cyninja.2954" said:

 

Because you are saying "free flight and without ties", I am saying "low gravity zones, where to take advantage of the sky that is not being used in certain maps and specific zones"

[Cyninja.2954]

> @"Aavataris.5720" said:

> > @"Cyninja.2954" said:

>

> Because you are saying "free flight and without ties", I am saying "low gravity zones, where to take advantage of the sky that is not being used in certain maps and specific zones"

 

Are you comparing specific maps with low gravity designed around this concept with the entire game? Please say you are not.

[Ayrilana.1396]

> @"Tails.9372" said:

> > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:

> > I’m against flying as it would have negative implications on maps.

> The springer already "breaks" pretty much every map and JPs are already covered in gigantic "no mount" bubbles. Also, if it's just going from A to B then the beetle is still going to be the better option most of the time since bond of vigor boosted beetle > having to reach certain height for the level 2 griffon boost.

 

Just because some mounts break some aspect doesn’t mean we can just say kitten it and break it entirely.

 

Edit: it breaks immersion...

[Aavataris.5720]

> @"Cyninja.2954" said:

 

What?

I am saying, literally, that they could put low gravity in unused airspaces, in order to add new events, experiences and news, at low cost (of work).

Are you arguing just for complicating? "Plz, tell me not" ¬¬

 

 

[Aavataris.5720]

> @"Ayrilana.1396" said:

 

The fact of your just complaining, without giving arguments, and forcing "problems" does not cause them to destroy the whole game just to extend an interaction that they are already using in certain maps ¬¬

[Cyninja.2954]

> @"Aavataris.5720" said:

> > @"Cyninja.2954" said:

>

> What?

> I am saying, literally, that they could put low gravity in unused airspaces, in order to add new events, experiences and news, at low cost (of work).

> Are you arguing just for complicating? "Plz, tell me not" ¬¬

>

>

 

Okay, that makes more sense, then let me respond to that:

 

- underwater combat has not been popular in the game, something similar in the air might suffer a similar fate

- horizontal maps are designed size and content wise to be limited in horizontal activity, which means that adding even more players above the current map retroactively might adversely affect performance and even be impossible

- a majority of players did not enjoy the horizontal aspects of HoT. This might be less an issue in free air space which is more similar to underwater, but this point can't completely be omitted

- there are no mount skills associated with aerial combat and would require an entire new implementation. Balance would require extra work

 

Those are just the 4 primary ones off the top of my head which have nothing to do with movement.

[Ayrilana.1396]

> @"Aavataris.5720" said:

> > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:

>

> The fact of your just complaining, without giving arguments, and forcing "problems" does not cause them to destroy the whole game just to extend an interaction that they are already using in certain maps ¬¬

 

Allows you to essentially skip over large parts of the game world making it smaller. Imagine me being able to do map completion by just flying around to avoid all mobs and obstacles and only coming down to do something I need before going back up into the sky. It’d be similar to just having the ability to just teleport from point to point. You’d lose the connection with the gameworld.

 

 

[Laila Lightness.8742]

true flight in game would also be laggy and clunky at best and impossible to use at worst since it would take a heavy tool on your cpu to load all the ground below you

and there is no need for flying

[Aavataris.5720]

> @"Cyninja.2954" said:

 

 

* Underwater combat had many defects from the beginning. Recently they changed the speed of it, the speed of movement, MANY skills ... and the idea is to get it to work, not to say dead.

* That is a cheap excuse, considering that vertical maps are increasingly used (and large). On the contrary, I am offering to revive low level maps by including new content in the air (which needs less work than creating a bunch of new maps).

* I did not understand what you said ... like "they are not going to have them horizontal aspects of HoT"?

* Again the same excuse: "It does not exist, I prefer to say that everything is bad instead of getting excited because the game can expand and improve (with little work and long term, does not have to implement air combat right now, but can be fly to reach platforms, as in HoT) "

 

The fight under the water must be improved, not only left lying (and they are trying to do), if air combat comes to exist, the same thing can happen and it is absolutely and totally possible.

[Aavataris.5720]

> @"Laila Lightness.8742" said:

 

hem.... the content is already used ¬¬

...the HoT maps are totally vertical and use air currents to get you up.

They can put similar content on maps that are only horizontal and take advantage of them for level 80

[Tails.9372]

> @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> All movement abilities have a cost-benefit aspect to them and between them. Pure flight would break this balance.

Not really, you would still use the springer for quick jumps like the one in the Temple of Joko as flapping around just for a quick floor change would be impractical. It also woudnt affect any of the other mounts that much as they all would still have their pros and cons. The only places where it would be problematic are the areas where you can't use mounts anyways (minus the mistlock sanctuary).

 

[Laila Lightness.8742]

> @"Aavataris.5720" said:

> > @"Laila Lightness.8742" said:

>

> hem.... the content is already used ¬¬

> ...the HoT maps are totally vertical and use air currents to get you up.

> They can put similar content on maps that are only horizontal and take advantage of them for level 80

 

not exactly gliding never takes you in that way and its slower and griffon its limited true flight is to stay up indefently at same speed

[Aavataris.5720]

> @"Ayrilana.1396" said:

That's because you are totally exaggerating the idea, which is "zones, specific, low gravity", take advantage of the vertical limit in areas where it does not exist. At no time did I say "free flight everywhere".

 

.... you are exaggerating and disproportionating the idea (as if you had not read anything of what I wrote) just to force faults.

[Cyninja.2954]

> @"Aavataris.5720" said:

> > @"Cyninja.2954" said:

>

>

> * Underwater combat had many defects from the beginning. Recently they changed the speed of it, the speed of movement, MANY skills ... and the idea is to get it to work, not to say dead.

 

They reworked underwater combat to adjust it to where the game has moved to after 6 years since many of the underwater skills were outdated. Underwater combat is still as disliked as it was 6 years ago. A strong indicator for this and Arenanet agreeing is: we have had almost 0 underwater content added since vanilla GW2.

 

> @"Aavataris.5720" said:

> * That is a cheap excuse, considering that vertical maps are increasingly used (and large). On the contrary, I am offering to revive low level maps by including new content in the air (which needs less work than creating a bunch of new maps).

 

Actually no, the PoF maps are specifically larger from a horizontal scale BECAUSE they are not as vertical as HoT maps. There has been sufficient Arenanet communication on this issue and how they learned hot to make different types of maps more efficiently but are always limited by some size factors.

 

> @"Aavataris.5720" said:

> * I did not understand what you said ... like "they are not going to have them horizontal aspects of HoT"?

> * Again the same excuse: "It does not exist, I prefer to say that everything is bad instead of getting excited because the game can expand and improve (with little work and long term, does not have to implement air combat right now, but can be fly to reach platforms, as in HoT) "

 

I am giving you reasonable concerns. Feel free to disagree but don't give me this nonsense. If you do not want feedback, fine. Next time I'll just leave a: "I disagree and would not want this." and let you feel happier about your suggestions.

 

> @"Aavataris.5720" said:

>

> The fight under the water must be improved, not only left lying (and they are trying to do), if air combat comes to exist, the same thing can happen and it is absolutely and totally possible.

 

Sure a lot of stuff is possible. I'm not the person you need to convince. It's if at all Arenanet. I gave you some reasons as to why I believe there is issues with this. Feel free to have a differing opinion on this but be sure to be able to factually support your claim and make a strong argument as to why this is a benefit to the game.