Curse

BahamutKaiser · May 12, 2006, 12:56 PM // 12:56

That is purely your personal opinion, yes alot of people would think it is cool and want to use beast riding, but just like anything else, that should be an option. As long as it is balanced it doesn't matter what people choose, as long as there is a weakness to beast riding, or a balancing cost, it doesn't matter how many people decide to use it. Alot of people decide to use Ranger secondary so they can have a pet, but not everyone, and there are difficulties to using it, that isn't justification to limit it to one class.

We already have Warrior for 3 weapon options and a tactical option, your idea basicly provides another 3 weapons and another tactical option, it is a rather repetative addition.

I don't have to defend how the game "is" made, primary attributes revolve around adding improvement to a classes innate abilities, wile secondary attributes allow for other classes to use the many types of abilities they have, Your suggestion makes a primary attribute which is the whole point of using Ra totaly dependant on having it as a primary class, and has a host of secondaries which are slightly different weapon types which will not be useful enough for most classes to bother with. Warriors and Assassins have plenty of attack speed and movement abilities in thier own line, if you actually think Warriors would take Ra secondary for those abilities, then you don't understand a good build, There is a reason Warriors take monk secondary, to provide healing, they already have armor, attack power, movement skills and attack speed skills.

If everyone could ride beasts, it simply would work, balancing can be made, and making false unjustified statements isn't a defense, it is a weak defense of a failed viewpoint. Just because your certain to ride a beast if you have the option doesn't mean that everyone will, and just because there are 8000 Assassins at the release of Factions, doesn't mean it is broken. Being popular is a natural effect of a new addition, hundreds of people are going to try and make the new class, and old classes with new class combinations when an expansion is released, trying to make a class which has a totaly new type of skill/mounts and then limiting it to that class is broken, what you should do is make a primary that makes Ra indominably better with steeds rather than making it exclusive, that isn't a suggestion, that is the way classes and attributes work, Anet could change the game and make a poor class adaptation, but why would they?, they will make classes the better way, the way they should and do work, great abilities on every class, shared through secondary, but best with primary attribute for that class.

Lots of people tolk Ranger secondary because they think Tiger pets are cool, but it is far from everyone, and most players know that beast mastery skills and attribute points don't fit into their builds effectiveness and purpose, and don't use it. Simple truth is, as sure as Anet can make a new class, and make beast riding, they can also make it a balanced secondary that other classes can use. Whether or not you can realize that is your own personal dilema, not a reason why it couldn't work, there are limits, boundries, and balance restraining class ideas, personal acceptance isn't a requirement.

P.S. I trust myself, realy, it would work, and from my experience and successful achievement in making ideas which have been added to the game and have worked, I will take my word over yours.

BrotherGilburt · May 13, 2006, 09:21 PM // 21:21

Well, I thought sence this is melee it could be a little like a warrior.

Also i guess after what you said it doesn't matter if any profession could have a mount or not. But who else wants every class to have a mount?

Brother Gilburt

MCS · May 13, 2006, 10:09 PM // 22:09

Bunny Thumper on crack with free speed boosts, w00t!? How about some attack rates for those weapons.

Goats17 · May 14, 2006, 02:26 AM // 02:26

I like this. It's one of the few good class things on this site. A little overpowered, but that can be fixed.

/Signed

BrotherGilburt · May 14, 2006, 05:43 AM // 05:43

thanks! What do you mean "attack rates"?

Brother Gilburt

Korsakof Noobs · May 28, 2006, 02:38 AM // 02:38

I really liked the idea, but wouldn''t it be more fun if you're animal has life of it's own or like dies when you reach half of you're life coz then you need to ress it and hop back up again :P makes nice Guildbattles though , always found them boring

IllusiveMind · May 28, 2006, 03:08 AM // 03:08

A Giant Coachroach?

batou · May 28, 2006, 03:29 AM // 03:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by MasterDinadan

Sounds cool, but why not add horse to the list of mounts? I mean... it's a pretty obvious choice...

What is this thing you call a "horse?"
I have never seen a horse in Tyria

Kaida the Heartless · May 28, 2006, 03:41 AM // 03:41

Balancing Ideas/Suggestions: Not that these ALL have to be thrown in, but perhaps some here and there if you want to make other aspects stronger/weaker. The key to balance is to make the coveted object stronger only in the hands of the primary. When used or wielded by a secondary, it has greater weaknesses:

- When knocked down, you fall off your mount (not really, just in animation) and it therefore takes +X seconds to mount back on them again. Perhaps the primary "riding mastery" (assuming that riding a beast can be done by any class) decreases this time.

- While suffering from weakness, you move 10% slower (10% being just a number, subject to change). Your beast cannot drag itself AND you along very fast when weakend!

- While mounted, your attacks are more likely to strike the head area of your targets, inflicting more damage.

- Impliment a feral effect. Perhaps every now and then the beast will rear back, stopping your movement/action (dont know about spells or skills, that's a little unfair). Higher primary will eventually diminish this.

- A rider should not be able to use a shield unless they are warrior sub'ed using a sword or axe.

- Chains should be able to entwine thier players with a grabbling effect; while grappled, you should be able to either: 1) pull the player towards you (no dragging, your standing still) or 2) the lesser of these, keep them within a certain radius of you. While your chain is being used to grapple someone, you cannot attack.

- See above --> Look into chain+beast combos. Pull target in and infliuct damage. Success rate of combo depends on your mastery. You said this build was to chase down runners, well, why not pull them into you?

- This build should only use a longspear, not a single handed version. (see no shield above)

All I can think of at the moment. I'll gladly post more later. I love the idea of being able to ride a beast.

TheOneAndOnlyX · May 28, 2006, 04:06 AM // 04:06

I like it, its like a ranger but it actually really depends on its pet, nice job clearly unique and done well

BrotherGilburt · May 31, 2006, 06:56 PM // 18:56

Thanks

And nice balenceing ideas Kaida, I added them to my orignal post.

Brother Gilburt

Trylo · May 31, 2006, 08:21 PM // 20:21

small question/tweak, all of those pets would be charmable by the ranger, and the raider would have to always have a skill equipped to tame the pet, AND a skill to rez him... unless the pet is your health basically?

explain a bit more...

sounds like a melee character that isnt too overpowered for once!

BrotherGilburt · Jun 01, 2006, 12:23 AM // 00:23

If you die your pet dies, if your resurected your pet is resurected. You and your pet are one.

Brother Gilburt

Ggraphix · Jun 01, 2006, 04:24 AM // 04:24

I agree, some beast riding spear chunker would be cool.

Ggraphix · Jun 01, 2006, 04:27 AM // 04:27

Could be a great class.
Not over powered.

I think the beast should not have a separate life bar in this case though.
The beast would just make more of your skills available.
But you should be able to charm a whole different group of ridable animals, including some of the larger untamable animals in previous installments.

Ggraphix · Jun 01, 2006, 04:34 AM // 04:34

think the club should be replaced with a lance
the energy regen should be +2 or 3

Da Deathblade · Jun 01, 2006, 05:58 AM // 05:58

I like the idea, few problems with it though. If your mount could run faster than the average pedestrian player, think of runners in random arenas. They'd go to heaven, they would never be able to get caught. That would need to be fixed and how would the health ratio work out between you and the mount. I can see Ra/R in pvp now, running into the battle with their pet and their mount (since beast mastery is not the primary ranger attribute), that would be a little overpowered. Flying pets would be awesome, like those huge uncapable pheonixes at the end of factions. Though I can't wait to see the Raider vs. the MM. That would be cool, anyway its a great concept idea. I vote to keep.

/signed

BrotherGilburt · Jun 01, 2006, 12:04 PM // 12:04

You can cap the phoenix's at the end of factions.

You and your pet of have the same health bar.

Maybe the extra speed the primary attribute gives you doesn't stack? That would keep them from being an unfair running class.

Thanks

Ggraphix · Jun 01, 2006, 02:15 PM // 14:15

i still think u should have to use a skill to run faster

Spoony · Jun 01, 2006, 06:51 PM // 18:51

Oh i dont know, for some reason it reminds me of a WoW warrior, no idea why.

I'd say, i sorta like it.

Perhaps, the mounts should have some of their own skills, like beast mastery?

OH yeah, another idea for a mount. - Giant turtle , for luxons (ftw)