The utility of the warclaw in the PvE environnement.

[Eekasqueak.7850]

Eh its engage does decent enough damage, and it is already tankier than the other mounts. I think it's fine being only really useful in WvW. I just hope they don't have plans for many more mounts because the select bar is getting quite crowded.

[Erasculio.2914]

Updating and changing my post from a previous topic:

 

**Q: What would players gain if the Warclaw were changed to be faster in PvE, as fast as the Jackal?**

 

A: More players would enjoy using it, and thus use it more often.

 

**Q: What would ArenaNet gain if the Warclaw were changed to be faster in PvE, as fast as the Jackal?**

 

A: With more players using it more often, players would be more likely to buy a skin for the Warclaw in the Gem Store. There's a diminishing return for mount skins - someone who already bought one is less likely to buy more skins for the same mount. One way around this would be for ArenaNet to add more mount types to the game, but this takes a lot of resources. Considering how the Warclaw is already in the game and is a new mount, thus one for which no one has ever bought a mount skin yet, it's a great opportunity for ArenaNet to sell skins. As long, of course, as a lot of people use it often.

 

So making the Warclaw faster in PvE is basically a win/win situation.

 

**Q: "But ArenaNet designed the Warclaw to be useless in PvE, that's part of its design!!!"**

 

Yes, which is why this is something called a "suggestion": when people ask ArenaNet to change something about the way they have designed the game. I know some people are alergic to suggestions and like to post in every topic saying that [everything is fine](https://i.imgur.com/c4jt321.png) and the game is perfect as it is, but ArenaNet itself has said they appreciate player suggestions (and sometimes follows them).

 

**Q: "But PvE players will be forced to get the Warclaw, otherwise they would be at a disadvantage!"**

 

This is a very bad argument, but anyway: with the Warclaw being only as fast as the Jackal, and considering how it already has other drawbacks (one less endurance bar, no imunity to fall damage through the dash, and so on), someone with the Jackal would be at no disadvantage when compared to someone with the Warclaw.

 

**Q: "But the Warclaw would need to have different speeds in PvE and in WvW, this is technically impossible!"**

 

False. The Warclaw already has two different speeds, one in owned WvW territories and another in enemy WvW territories.

 

Also, the day after ArenaNet introduced the Warclaw, they have already split it between a PvE mode and a WvW mode.

 

**Q: "Making this change would be too cost consuming for ArenaNet!"**

 

Possibly. You don't have information to judge this, though; you only know as much about how many resources this would take as those asking for it.

 

**Q: "But ArenaNet didn't make this change themselves, which means they thought it was a bad idea, and they know better than you!"**

 

If ArenaNet never made any mistake, they wouldn't just have been forced to layoff one third of their team. Just see the patch that nerfed the Warclaw. Once in a while they listen to suggestions from the community, and this is a good one.

 

In the end, this is a suggestion to which the naysayers cannot answer a simple **"why not?"**. The only answer has been "because ArenaNet is perfect and should never change the game because it's perfect as it is" (often hidden as "that's how ArenaNet designed the mount to be!!!!!!"). As mentioned above, increasing a bit the Warclaw speed would be a win/win situation for the players and for ArenaNet.

[Randulf.7614]

> @"Inculpatus cedo.9234" said:

> Why can't the Warclaw (in PvE) just be for fun?

 

Exactly. It’s just a bonus extra.

 

 

[Tanner Blackfeather.6509]

> @"Trise.2865" said:

> The Warclaw is already one of the fastest mounts, topped only by the RollerBeetle in pure run speed.

>

 

Eh... What kind of comparisons have you made? It's waaaay slower than Raptor and Jackal and roughly equal to Griphon *land* speed (not flight speed).

 

> What sets it apart, and designates it as "basic", is it doesn't have a movement skill/ability. Raptor can Leap for bursts of speed, Beetle has its downhill Charge, Jackal can Teleport uphill and past obstacles, etc... but Warclaw is just "pretty fast". Perfect for WvW, but "okay" in PvE.

>

It has a short forward leap with evade frames, kind of similar to base Jackal, but showing the model the entire way. Also, the leap is approx half the Raptor jump.

 

> To address the suggestion specifically: Even with lots of HP, the Warclaw could never surpass a kitted-out Raptor in terms of travel safety. A fully Mastered Jackal adds evasion to each mount's movement ability, which means the Raptor can simply Leap away from (or through) enemy clusters mostly-invulnerably, while the Warclaw is always stuck taking damage (and CC). (The Skimmer is technically safer, with its long, evasive Glides AND high HP, but its slower overland speed can make escaping difficult.)

*This* is correct, except for the detail that **no** mount takes CC, they're all immune.

[Astralporing.1957]

@"Erasculio.2914"

Is there any reason why you think Warclaw should get better treatment than Skimmer? Besides the fact that you seem to like its skin more, because that is not an objective argument.

[Adul.1520]

In the [recent Guild Chat episode about the Warclaw](

"recent Guild Chat episode about the Warclaw"), they said they they were looking into expanding the mount's functionality in PvE. So I'm guessing that process might result in the Warclaw becoming slightly more useful in PvE. They even mentioned that they might put in a separate mastery track for PvE, which I find to be a really good idea.

 

I just don't understand why anybody would be against any of that. I'm sorry, but "you shouldn't have fun with it because it's not for you" is just a very petty thing to argue for on the face of it.

[Cyninja.2954]

> @"Erasculio.2914" said:

> Updating and changing my post from a previous topic:

>

> **Q: What would players gain if the Warclaw were changed to be faster in PvE, as fast as the Jackal?**

>

> A: More players would enjoy using it, and thus use it more often.

>

 

and it becomes redundant because you now have two nearly similar mounts on top of which one of both requires absolutely no mastery investment.

 

> @"Erasculio.2914" said:

> **Q: What would ArenaNet gain if the Warclaw were changed to be faster in PvE, as fast as the Jackal?**

>

> A: With more players using it more often, players would be more likely to buy a skin for the Warclaw in the Gem Store. There's a diminishing return for mount skins - someone who already bought one is less likely to buy more skins for the same mount. One way around this would be for ArenaNet to add more mount types to the game, but this takes a lot of resources. Considering how the Warclaw is already in the game and is a new mount, thus one for which no one has ever bought a mount skin yet, it's a great opportunity for ArenaNet to sell skins. As long, of course, as a lot of people use it often.

>

> So making the Warclaw faster in PvE is basically a win/win situation.

>

 

See above, it's redundancy. Once the Warclaw is the same speed as the Jackal people will come up with more demands. The mount is NOT a pve mount. It's not designed to be of ANY use in pve.

 

> @"Erasculio.2914" said:

> **Q: "But ArenaNet designed the Warclaw to be useless in PvE, that's part of its design!!!"**

>

> Yes, which is why this is something called a "suggestion": when people ask ArenaNet to change something about the way they have designed the game. I know some people are alergic to suggestions and like to post in every topic saying that [everything is fine](https://i.imgur.com/c4jt321.png) and the game is perfect as it is, but ArenaNet itself has said they appreciate player suggestions (and sometimes follows them).

>

 

Suggestions can be disagreed with. You are seeing a lot of people making use of that right.

 

> @"Erasculio.2914" said:

> **Q: "But PvE players will be forced to get the Warclaw, otherwise they would be at a disadvantage!"**

>

> This is a very bad argument, but anyway: with the Warclaw being only as fast as the Jackal, and considering how it already has other drawbacks (one less endurance bar, no imunity to fall damage through the dash, and so on), someone with the Jackal would be at no disadvantage when compared to someone with the Warclaw.

>

 

The Jackal requires more investment than the Warclaw for pve. (Level 3 other mount mastery, gold, trade contracts)

 

> @"Erasculio.2914" said:

> **Q: "But the Warclaw would need to have different speeds in PvE and in WvW, this is technically impossible!"**

>

> False. The Warclaw already has two different speeds, one in owned WvW territories and another in enemy WvW territories.

>

> Also, the day after ArenaNet introduced the Warclaw, they have already split it between a PvE mode and a WvW mode.

>

 

Never seen this argument being made, you basically put this in to fluff up your pro arguments. Obviously mount speeds can be altered, especially when already shown in game.

 

> @"Erasculio.2914" said:

> **Q: "Making this change would be too cost consuming for ArenaNet!"**

>

> Possibly. You don't have information to judge this, though; you only know as much about how many resources this would take as those asking for it.

>

 

Very unlikely since the speed is probably nothing more than some integer somewhere which would need adjusting. Is absolutely unrelated as to why the Warclaw has such a low pve speed.

 

> **Q: "But ArenaNet didn't make this change themselves, which means they thought it was a bad idea, and they know better than you!"**

>

> If ArenaNet never made any mistake, they wouldn't just have been forced to layoff one third of their team. Just see the patch that nerfed the Warclaw. Once in a while they listen to suggestions from the community, and this is a good one.

>

> In the end, this is a suggestion to which the naysayers cannot answer a simple **"why not?"**. The only answer has been "because ArenaNet is perfect and should never change the game because it's perfect as it is" (often hidden as "that's how ArenaNet designed the mount to be!!!!!!"). As mentioned above, increasing a bit the Warclaw speed would be a win/win situation for the players and for ArenaNet.

 

The reason the Warclaw is available AT ALL in pve is to entice players to try out WvW. Had it been locked out of pve, many pve players would not have given the mount any second thought. Obviously Arenanet did not want to provide another pve mount nor make a mount from WvW useful in pve.

 

You are speculating that they made a mistake. I am thinking the exact opposite: their choices and implementation was deliberately made and thought through.

[Erasculio.2914]

> @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> and it becomes redundant because you now have two nearly similar mounts on top of which one of both requires absolutely no mastery investment.

"Similar mounts" if you ignore how the Jackal has three endurance bars, how it has a teleport instead of a dash, how it has immunity to fall damage and how the Jackal can use sand gates.

 

In other words, if you ignore everything about the Jackal just in order to make a very weak point.

 

> @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> The reason the Warclaw is available AT ALL in pve is to entice players to try out WvW. (...)

> You are speculating that they made a mistake. I am thinking the exact opposite: their choices and implementation was deliberately made and thought through.

 

You are ironically telling me that I'm speculating, while making an empty speculation about the reason why the Warclaw is available in PvE. Do you have ArenaNet's quote saying what you claim was their reason? Or is that just a gap in your ability to discern what is fact and what is your opinion?

 

Oh, and fyi: thinking they made a deliberate decision is not the opposite of thinking they are wrong. Which is a nice example of how what you call "obvious" concepts are often, if not usually, wrong.

 

 

[Cyninja.2954]

> @"Erasculio.2914" said:

> > @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> > and it becomes redundant because you now have two nearly similar mounts on top of which one of both requires absolutely no mastery investment.

> "Similar mounts" if you ignore how the Jackal has three endurance bars, how it has a teleport instead of a dash, how it has immunity to fall damage and how the Jackal can use sand gates.

>

> In other words, if you ignore everything about the Jackal just in order to make a very weak point.

>

 

I went into more detail further down explaining that the Jackal has other drawbacks which more than evens this out. Again, it is tied into the mastery system, requiring both level 3 with other PVE mounts and a certain amount of mastery points as well as gold and trade contracts.

 

> > @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> > The reason the Warclaw is available AT ALL in pve is to entice players to try out WvW. (...)

> > You are speculating that they made a mistake. I am thinking the exact opposite: their choices and implementation was deliberately made and thought through.

>

> You are ironically telling me that I'm speculating, while making an empty speculation about the reason why the Warclaw is available in PvE. Do you have ArenaNet's quote saying what you claim was their reason? Or is that just a gap in your ability to discern what is fact and what is your opinion?

>

> Oh, and fyi: thinking they made a deliberate decision is not the opposite of thinking they are wrong. Which is a nice example of how what you call "obvious" concepts are often, if not usually, wrong.

 

Oh no, I am absolutely speculating too. The main difference is this: my speculation is based on how the mount is implemented on top of my personal assumption. Yours is based purely on the idea that the developers messed up on top of your personal preference. See the difference?

 

Your FYI is quite biased. Sure, we could go through the world and assume every body is a moron. Or we could assume that at least some people know what they are doing. Them making a deliberate decision shows intent. Now this intent might be incorrect but given the push back this nonsense has seen so far and given the history of pve players intentionally avoiding WvW and Spvp, I'm not so sure you would have a leg to stand on defending the idea that Arenanet screwed up.

[Erasculio.2914]

> @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> I went into more detail further down explaining that the Jackal has other drawbacks which more than evens this out.

 

Yeah, it doesn't. You are claiming that the temporary drawbacks in earning the Jackal even out the permanent drawback of having a mount that is inferior in many aspects to the Jackal. Which, again, just makes a very weak point.

 

Just to give you an example, let's compare the Jackal to the Raptor:

 

* Both are ground-based mounts

* Both have a movement ability that basically allows them to quickly move short distances

* The Raptor is earned for free during the first storyline mission. The Jackal requires gold, trade contracts, and etc

 

If we were to apply your reason as to why not make the Warclaw faster (in other words, redundancy), ArenaNet would not have added the Jackal to the game, since by your definition it's redundant with the Raptor, which also happens to be a lot cheaper.

 

> @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> Oh no, I am absolutely speculating too. The main difference is this: my speculation is based on how the mount is implemented on top of my personal assumption. Yours is based purely on the idea that the developers messed up on top of your personal preference. See the difference?

 

Sure! The difference is that you think your speculation is better than everyone else's (other than people who agree with you, of course). Because saying "purely on the idea that the developers messed up" is basically ignoring all the points as to why a faster Warclaw would be better for the players and for ArenaNet, but hey, I guess it's just easier to ignore arguments you can't reply to.

 

 

 

 

[Cyninja.2954]

> @"Erasculio.2914" said:

> If we were to apply your reason as to why not make the Warclaw faster (in other words, redundancy), ArenaNet would not have added the Jackal to the game, since by your definition it's redundant with the Raptor, which also happens to be a lot cheaper.

 

Idiotic, the Jackal has distinct benefits in both movement (up slope), survival (triple dodge) and unique abilities (movement through portals) over the raptor.

 

This is not even the same ballpark as same speed movement. Especially given that all mounts have distinct and unique movement speeds among themselves.

 

> @"Erasculio.2914" said:

> > @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> > Oh no, I am absolutely speculating too. The main difference is this: my speculation is based on how the mount is implemented on top of my personal assumption. Yours is based purely on the idea that the developers messed up on top of your personal preference. See the difference?

>

> Sure! The difference is that you think your speculation is better than everyone else's (other than people who agree with you, of course). Because saying "purely on the idea that the developers messed up" is basically ignoring all the points as to why a faster Warclaw would be better for the players and for ArenaNet, but hey, I guess it's just easier to ignore arguments you can't reply to.

 

I amended my answer but I'll just add this here again:

- the vast majority of pve players avoid wvw and spvp. This is self-evident by the constant recurring posts about, but not limited to, for example the Gift of Battle

- the Warclaw was designed and implemented as a WvW mount

- the Warclaw was intentionally not made useful in PvE. As in, the developers had to intentionally give it a slower movement speed than all other mounts when typing in the integer which dictates its speed or when coming up how it would perform in PvE. Given that they gave it different movement speeds in WvW, it stands to reason that they spent at least a few minutes deliberating how the Warclaw should perform speed wise and enforcing that this was not an oversight

- the Warclaws PvE availability is directly tied to encouraging PvE players to try out WvW. Very obvious with the minimum WvW actions required to get it (established WvW players had the mount within 5-15 minutes of its release)

- the bonus WvW experience for this week was another encouraging factor to make more people try WvW in combination with the Warclaw

 

Now am I speculating? Sure, I never said I wasn't. But I'll take my speculation any day over the counter argument: the developers are clue less or shortsighted or didn't know what they were doing, when there is a ton of evidence that this mounts performance was considered and decided upon on multiple levels.

[Erasculio.2914]

> @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> Idiotic, the Jackal has distinct benefits in both movement (up slope), survival (triple dodge) and unique abilities (movement through portals) over the raptor.

 

Guess what, the Jackal has distinct benefits in both movement (up slope), survival (triple dodge) and unique abilities (movement through portals) over the Warclaw. "Idiotic", right?

 

> @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> Now am I speculating? Sure, I never said I wasn't. But I'll take my speculation any day over the counter argument: the developers are clue less or shortsighted or didn't know what they were doing, when there is a ton of evidence that this mounts performance was considered and decided upon on multiple levels.

 

Yeah, you obviously didn't pay attention to my point above. Saying they did it deliberately is not the opposite of saying they are wrong. Of course it was considered, and of course it was decided upon; I wonder how much attention you are paying to my posts if you think I said anywhere that the Warclaw speed was decided by a set of monkeys randomly typing on a keyboard.

 

The fact it was a deliberate decision doesn't mean it was the best decision. It's as simple as that.

 

[Cyninja.2954]

> @"Erasculio.2914" said:

> > @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> > Idiotic, the Jackal has distinct benefits in both movement (up slope), survival (triple dodge) and unique abilities (movement through portals) over the raptor.

>

> Guess what, the Jackal has distinct benefits in both movement (up slope), survival (triple dodge) and unique abilities (movement through portals) over the Warclaw. "Idiotic", right?

>

 

The Warclaw also is available way earlier than the Jackal or any other PoF mount for that matter. We are going in circles.

> > @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> > Now am I speculating? Sure, I never said I wasn't. But I'll take my speculation any day over the counter argument: the developers are clue less or shortsighted or didn't know what they were doing, when there is a ton of evidence that this mounts performance was considered and decided upon on multiple levels.

>

> Yeah, you obviously didn't pay attention to my point above. Saying they did it deliberately is not the opposite of saying they are wrong. Of course it was considered, and of course it was decided upon; I wonder how much attention you are paying to my posts if you think I said anywhere that the Warclaw speed was decided by a set of monkeys randomly typing on a keyboard.

>

> The fact it was a deliberate decision doesn't mean it was the best decision. It's as simpe as that.

>

 

I fully understood what you were saying but thanks for assuming otherwise. You have not yet shown that the developers implementation was incorrect or wrong, besides your personal assumption and bias. Ergo, I am siding with the developers idea for this mount over your argument that they might be wrong. Clear enough?

 

Or to use your words from earlier: a suggestion was made, I disagree with it.

[Erasculio.2914]

> @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> The Warclaw also is available way earlier than the Jackal or any other PoF mount for that matter. We are going in circles.

 

And? The Raptor is also available way earlier than any other PoF mount for that matter. Does that mean the Raptor makes the other mounts redundant?

 

> @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> Or to use your words from earlier: a suggestion was made, I disagree with it.

 

And why do you disagree with it?

 

Because it was ArenaNet's decision, they can do no wrong, so any suggestion saying otherwise is at fault?

 

Or because you have considered the arguments in favor of the suggestion, including everything you didn't talk about (such as the impact of Warclaw use on Gem acquisition) and have made a counter argument?

 

Because, so far, your only reply to the question of "why not" is because the Warclaw would make the Jackal redundant. A reply clearly proved wrong above.

 

 

[Adul.1520]

> @"Erasculio.2914" said:

> Because it was ArenaNet's decision, they can do no wrong, so any suggestion saying otherwise is at fault?

 

In light of the Guild Chat discussion I've mentioned earlier, it seems likely that it was actually _not_ their decision, they just didn't have the time before release to develop a good niche for the Warclaw in PvE. Additionally, they seemed very open to the idea of developing that niche post-launch. So there's that.

[Erasculio.2914]

> @"Adul.1520" said:

> In light of the Guild Chat discussion I've mentioned earlier, it seems likely that it was actually _not_ their decision, they just didn't have the time before release to develop a good niche for the Warclaw in PvE. Additionally, they seemed very open to the idea of developing that niche post-launch. So there's that.

 

Sounds like a good idea.

 

Most of the time there's a suggestion in this forum, it's a matter of, "I want something (but that something is going to be a loss to someone else)". See all the "please buff X profession" posts. ArenaNet has then to decide how much it's worth giving to a part of the playerbase to take from another part, which doesn't sound like something easy.

 

This suggestion, though - making the Warclaw a bit (not much, just a bit) better in PvE is one of the few ideas in which no one loses. It's probably something ArenaNet would have done anyway because, they, too, win with it. But it's worth pointing out how it is something (some) players want, too.

[Cyninja.2954]

> @"Erasculio.2914" said:

> > @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> > The Warclaw also is available way earlier than the Jackal or any other PoF mount for that matter. We are going in circles.

>

> And? The Raptor is also available way earlier than any other PoF mount for that matter. Does that mean the Raptor makes the other mounts redundant?

>

 

The raptor requires:

- completion of a story step which new player might not want to do out of order or risk getting spoiled story wise

- requires significant mastery investment to achieve decent vertical movement (rank 3)

- requires enough mastery points to gain access to these abilities. Mastery points which are not as easily available when entering PoF as new player

 

The Warclaw circumvents all of this with basically 1 skill point in WvW which is attained multiple time over while gaining the short collection achievements.

 

> @"Erasculio.2914" said:

> > @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> > Or to use your words from earlier: a suggestion was made, I disagree with it.

>

> And why do you disagree with it?

>

> Because it was ArenaNet's decision, they can do no wrong, so any suggestion saying otherwise is at fault?

>

 

I am not a slave to Arenanet's developer whims. I can chose to put more trust in their ability to design and manage their game over you though. As is the case right now.

 

> @"Erasculio.2914" said:

> Or because you have considered the arguments in favor of the suggestion, including everything you didn't talk about (such as the impact of Warclaw use on Gem acquisition) and have made a counter argument?

 

I did consider the other arguments. I also believe that if the Warclaw under-performs and does not see enough gem sales for skins via WvW it might likely get more PvE importance added. On this note, most often business decisions which encourage more spending are not the most fun to implement or of best interest to the player base.

 

> @"Erasculio.2914" said:

> Because, so far, your only reply to the question of "why not" is because the Warclaw would make the Jackal redundant. A reply clearly proved wrong above.

 

First of all, I have given a multitude or reasons as to why the Warclaw should not be made more PvE centric. You simply decided to ignore all of them. Let me rephrase some of them for easier access:

- redundancy in design

- requirements forcing PvE players into WvW essentially forcing players into content which might drive them from the game

- access to a mount completely circumventing the mastery system

 

That is 3 direct reasons as to why I personally am against a more PvE centric Warclaw. That is not counting other ideas like giving it unique abilities to make it PvE required, which go even further than speed adjustments (which also have come up by now). Or any arguments about game mode unique rewards. Or any future mount implementation in other game modes which would be made more and more convoluted if every mount had to be made viable in every game mode.

[Witch of Doom.5739]

> @"Dreamy Lu.3865" said:

> I have to say honestly that I don't get it why PvE players (I am myself one) are close to obsessed with the warclaw. There are 6 PvE mounts. Why is it such a problem that one unique mount does exist, that is not matching for PvE? Sorry, I really mean no offense in any way, but I really don't see the issue. The other 6 are not enough?

 

^^ This. I'm a PvEer and got the Warclaw only as a vanity/completionist item. I'm fine with it only having true abilities for the WvWers, and I vastly prefer any of the other mounts (well, except the beetle 'cause I don't like insects).

[Erasculio.2914]

> @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> The raptor requires:

> - completion of a story step which new player might not want to do out of order or risk getting spoiled story wise

> - requires significant mastery investment to achieve decent vertical movement (rank 3)

> - requires enough mastery points to gain access to these abilities. Mastery points which are not as easily available when entering PoF as new player

So? The Warclaw:

 

* Requires playing in WvW, which a new player might not want to do due to not enjoying WvW at all

* Has no "decent vertical movement" (the Warclaw's jump is smaller than the Raptor's jump without the rank 3)

* Has no ability in PvE. So it doesn't require mastery points because it cannot be improved at all.

 

So yeah, this only highlights how the Warclaw is worse than the Raptor.

 

> @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> First of all, I have given a multitude or reasons as to why the Warclaw should not be made more PvE centric. You simply decided to ignore all of them. Let me rephrase some of them for easier access:

> - redundancy in design

> - requirements forcing PvE players into WvW essentially forcing players into content which might drive them from the game

> - access to a mount completely circumventing the mastery system

 

Considering how I have replied at lenght about your mention of "redundancy", your claim that I have "simply decided to ignore all of them" is factually, objectively, wrong.

 

I would like you to stop and think about that for a while. Can you actually accept that you are wrong?

 

I have mentioned and explained in detail above about how the Warclaw is not redundant (at least, as much "redundant" as the existing mounts are).

 

About the WvW requirement, why do you think making it faster, and still worse than the other available mounts (remember your comment saying "idiotic", explaining to all of us why the Jackal is better than the Warclaw?), would "force" people into WvW?

 

And the Warclaw is already circumventing the mastery system. What makes you think that making it faster would make it circumvent the mastery system more? Do you happen to believe that a faster mount would run faster around the mastery system, is that it?

 

So yeah, you don't really have good reasons as to "why not". In the abscence of valid counter arguments, I'm led to believe that my first hypothesis was right.

[Cyninja.2954]

> @"Erasculio.2914" said:

> > @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> > The raptor requires:

> > - completion of a story step which new player might not want to do out of order or risk getting spoiled story wise

> > - requires significant mastery investment to achieve decent vertical movement (rank 3)

> > - requires enough mastery points to gain access to these abilities. Mastery points which are not as easily available when entering PoF as new player

> So? The Warclaw:

>

> * Requires playing in WvW, which a new player might not want to do due to not enjoying WvW at all

> * Has no "decent vertical movement" (the Warclaw's jump is smaller than the Raptor's jump without the rank 3)

> * Has no ability in PvE. So it doesn't require mastery points because it cannot be improved at all.

>

> So yeah, this only highlights how the Warclaw is worse than the Raptor.

>

 

If the Warclaw speed is adjusted to match the Jackal, it would outperform non upgraded raptor when using its dashes. Yes, the Warclaw right now is worse than both the not upgraded and upgraded raptor respectively.

 

> @"Erasculio.2914" said:

> > @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> > First of all, I have given a multitude or reasons as to why the Warclaw should not be made more PvE centric. You simply decided to ignore all of them. Let me rephrase some of them for easier access:

> > - redundancy in design

> > - requirements forcing PvE players into WvW essentially forcing players into content which might drive them from the game

> > - access to a mount completely circumventing the mastery system

>

> Considering how I have replied at lenght about your mention of "redundancy", your claim that I have "simply decided to ignore all of them" is factually, objectively, wrong.

>

 

Yes, you did get 1 right. My bad. You decided to ignore all the others.

 

> @"Erasculio.2914" said:

> I would like you to stop and think about that for a while. Can you actually accept that you are wrong?

>

 

Sure, can you do the same?

 

> @"Erasculio.2914" said:

> I have mentioned and explained in detail above about how the Warclaw is not redundant (at least, as much "redundant" as the existing mounts are).

>

 

and as I had pointed out, you were wrong or at least the example you gave was incorrect (Jackal being redundant with the raptor).

 

> @"Erasculio.2914" said:

> About the WvW requirement, why do you think making it faster, and still worse than the other available mounts (remember your comment saying "idiotic", explaining to all of us why the Jackal is better than the Warclaw?), would "force" people into WvW?

>

 

Because the more useful it becomes in PvE, the more it incentivizes or forces people to get it in WvW. You keep looking at this issue from a veteran player perspective. I keep telling you that not every account comes with a Jackal attached and unlocked to it.

 

> @"Erasculio.2914" said:

> And the Warclaw is already circumventing the mastery system. What makes you think that making it faster would make it circumvent the mastery system more? Do you happen to believe that a faster mount would run faster around the mastery system, is that it?

>

 

A faster Warclaw outperforms a not upgraded raptor. It is directly encroaching on a PvE mounts area and usefulness.

 

> @"Erasculio.2914" said:

> So yeah, you don't really have good reasons as to "why not". In the abscence of valid counter arguments, I'm led to believe that my first hypothesis was right.

 

Glad you ignored all the ones I gave at the bottom:

- more mount additions in other game modes would automatically need the same treatment because we know, people will rush to the forums and demand adjustments for PvE just as they are now. You are proving this adamantly

- making the Warclaw better in PvE will lead to even more demands. This is often the case and is already happening right now in other threads. I would like to nip this right now and be donw with it.

- game mode unique rewards

[Sarpan.9074]

If it's modified to be viable, as good as or better than any of the original mounts in PVE, then there needs to be a comparable PVE path to obtaining it.

[Erasculio.2914]

> @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> If the Warclaw speed is adjusted to match the Jackal, it would outperform non upgraded raptor when using its dashes. Yes, the Warclaw right now is worse than both the not upgraded and upgraded raptor respectively.

 

Ah, so you actually admit that the Warclaw is worse than everything else, so its speed could be increased at least so it would have the same performance as the non upgraded raptor?

 

> @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> and as I had pointed out, you were wrong or at least the example you gave was incorrect (Jackal being redundant with the raptor).

 

And in doing so, you clearly explained to all of us how the Jackal is not reduntant with the Warclaw. Thanks!

 

> @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> Because the more useful it becomes in PvE, the more it incentivizes or forces people to get it in WvW.

 

I see. So, you think that the Warclaw today "forces" people to get it in WvW, and making it faster would "force" more people?

 

Considering how you claimed that:

 

> @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> requirements forcing PvE players into WvW essentially forcing players into content which might drive them from the game

 

...Making PvE players try WvW may "drive them from the game"; and that you also said:

 

> @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> the Warclaws PvE availability is directly tied to encouraging PvE players to try out WvW. Very obvious with the minimum WvW actions required to get it (established WvW players had the mount within 5-15 minutes of its release)

 

Then you are saying that you disagree with ArenaNet's strategy to encourage PvE players to try WvW? Since that could "drive them from the game"?

 

Interesting, I wouldn't have expected you to say ArenaNet was wrong, not when you mentioned that you are basing your assumptions on them being right.

 

> @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> - making the Warclaw better in PvE will lead to even more demands. This is often the case and is already happening right now in other threads. I would like to nip this right now and be donw with it.

 

[slippery slope fallacy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope).

[Inculpatus cedo.9234]

> @"Erasculio.2914" said:

> > @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> > and it becomes redundant because you now have two nearly similar mounts on top of which one of both requires absolutely no mastery investment.

> "Similar mounts" if you ignore how the Jackal has three endurance bars, how it has a teleport instead of a dash, how it has immunity to fall damage and how the Jackal can use sand gates.

>

> In other words, if you ignore everything about the Jackal just in order to make a very weak point.

>

> > @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> > The reason the Warclaw is available AT ALL in pve is to entice players to try out WvW. (...)

> > You are speculating that they made a mistake. I am thinking the exact opposite: their choices and implementation was deliberately made and thought through.

>

> You are ironically telling me that I'm speculating, while making an empty speculation about the reason why the Warclaw is available in PvE. Do you have ArenaNet's quote saying what you claim was their reason? Or is that just a gap in your ability to discern what is fact and what is your opinion?

>

> Oh, and fyi: thinking they made a deliberate decision is not the opposite of thinking they are wrong. Which is a nice example of how what you call "obvious" concepts are often, if not usually, wrong.

>

>

 

The Devs did actually state that the Warclaw was introduced (and available) to entice more PvE players to WvW.

You'll find lots of Dev information in Guild Chat. :)

[Zoser.7245]

> @"Inculpatus cedo.9234" said:

> The Devs did actually state that the Warclaw was introduced (and available) to entice more PvE players to WvW.

> You'll find lots of Dev information in Guild Chat. :)

 

In that case, better to spend a few minutes, or a few hours that I really doubt that more is needed, to return something useful to the warclaw in PVE splitting game modes or those PVE players attracted to WvW will end up quite angry seeing their beloved new mount is the most useless mount that has been seen in PVE. At least, they should return a longer jump in PVE and adjust the damage of 1 appropriately to that game mode, even considering 5-10 objectives instead of 3. Or what they imagine that could improve it without make other mounts less useful, to avoid that part of the people who have gone to get it instead of continuing to visit WvW, complete the mount and probably play there again, decide not to return because they feel scammed ... disappointed, a waste of time or as you want call it. And those who still don't have it, change their opinion and forget it instead go to WvW to try it and get the mount, knowing that now is useless in PVE where they usually play.

 

I imagine that at some point, they'll do it in PVE. And perhaps, in the future with more time, tweak it in WvW too, to make it feel better after research appropriately how to do it and hopefully this time testing its functionality better on the WvW maps and its impact...

[Loosmaster.8263]

> @"Zoser.7245" said:

> > @"Inculpatus cedo.9234" said:

> > The Devs did actually state that the Warclaw was introduced (and available) to entice more PvE players to WvW.

> > You'll find lots of Dev information in Guild Chat. :)

>

> In that case, better to spend a few minutes, or a few hours that I really doubt that more is needed, to return something useful to the warclaw in PVE splitting game modes or those PVE players attracted to WvW will end up quite angry seeing their beloved new mount is the most useless mount that has been seen in PVE. At least, they should return a longer jump in PVE and adjust the damage of 1 appropriately to that game mode, even considering 5-10 objectives instead of 3. Or what they imagine that could improve it without make other mounts less useful, to avoid that part of the people who have gone to get it instead of continuing to visit WvW, complete the mount and probably play there again, decide not to return because they feel scammed ... disappointed, a waste of time or as you want call it. And those who still don't have it, change their opinion and forget it instead go to WvW to try it and get the mount, knowing that now is useless in PVE where they usually play.

 

The Devs had stated from the get go that it would be pretty much useless in PvE. My only reasoning for it to be in PvE is so they can sell skins for it. Other than that it's just a Fashion Wars thing which it will be in WvW if the nerfs keep coming...