Curse

Mr Jazzy · Jan 02, 2006, 06:32 AM // 06:32

how can a HUGE polearm be weaker than a dinky little sword?

Dr Strangelove · Mar 13, 2006, 04:27 PM // 16:27

Wow, I love this idea, I'm not sure if GW could support something like mounts, but if it's possible, and if it's balanced, I would love to see this ingame. Great job.

Winterclaw · Mar 19, 2006, 06:13 AM // 06:13

I'm not too sure about this class. Part of me would rather see the spears/polearms bundled into warriors. Mounts aren't bad, but I'd question having dragons/drakes as mounts.

The idea of losing and reining in control sounds nice, but it have it you'll need one skill slot for the animal and another for the skill to keep it under control. The thought of using another skill slot just to keep my character under control doesn't sound nice.

Lampshade · Mar 19, 2006, 06:36 AM // 06:36

The only thing I could see happening is in PvE you can cause the mount
to go "out of control" indefinatly. (eg keep health >50%

actionjack · Mar 19, 2006, 06:46 AM // 06:46

how did this one come up again?

anyhow.. on issue of mount...
It would be something I am also unsure about. I think people would want and enjoy having mount in the game (it look "cool"), but I don't want to see them as a transporation ( which won't fit into the game much), but as something else for a new class. (its sorta a bio-armor type of thing)

Some of the "conditions" to go with mounts would surely need changing and rework.

For the "Out of Control" issue, it is more or less a balance thing, where you may run into this risk should you be a rider. (it also make things more intersting) I would say more points into the attribute will make the chance of it running of control less, and it is not needed to bring a extra skill (unless you want to reduce the risk) And differnt mounts have differt "conditions" that would make them go out of control. Of couse, this whole thing is more on the "extrem" side for the GW system (that it is bit more creative than the norm). So just take it as you will.

Sir Velron Rosemoon · Jun 23, 2006, 04:46 AM // 04:46

anet needs to step up there game a lil bit. Love the dragoon idea, seriously love your artwork, if GW incorps it into the game, hah I know what my fav class would be...

/signed

Seriously, we need to be able to buy horses for any character. My feet just hurt watching my character run everywhere all the time, keeps him in shape tho =)

EndoftheSyringe · Jun 23, 2006, 05:38 AM // 05:38

But that's the problem

. It would be too many people's favorite class BECAUSE you get to RIDE a dragon. GW is obviously a lot about aesthetics. 15k armor, "Rare" weapons, all of these things are just for looks... Dragon Riders would be all over the place. I think it would be a bit unfair to give one class such awesomeness that no other classes get. BUT, whatever, it's just a concept. That said, great idea.

/Signed because it's an awesome concept.

I don't know why they don't add in mounts that don't do anything. You just get to ride them... If players are willing to shell out over a million gold to get FoW armor, or 100k for a kuunavang, they sure as well will want to have another awesome little toy. They don't even have to mean anything except 'I have a mount'.

lightblade · Jun 23, 2006, 08:28 AM // 08:28

plz..plz don't use the word dragoon...
people misuse this word all the time...

Dragoon is a gun weilding cavalary unit that move on horse back but fight on foot. Even though they ride on horse back, nut they are classified as foot soldiers...

Dragoon USE GUNS NOT SPEAR!!!

Dragoon and Dragon Knight are different and not interchangable

actionjack · Jun 23, 2006, 05:16 PM // 17:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by lightblade

plz..plz don't use the word dragoon...
people misuse this word all the time...

Dragoon is a gun weilding cavalary unit that move on horse back but fight on foot. Even though they ride on horse back, nut they are classified as foot soldiers...

Dragoon USE GUNS NOT SPEAR!!!

Dragoon and Dragon Knight are different and not interchangable

I cann't disagree with that.

However, why do they need to follow the traditional meaning of words? Beside the Musket part, a Dragoon still fits them well, especially when also use with the modern day pop-culture mytho of the Dragoon.

anyhow, again, that is why its call dragonknight as a alternative name. also Lancer willl do.

(and they should not ride dragons, but either Drakes, raptor, or Guardian type of semi-living creature)

Rikimaru · Jun 23, 2006, 09:03 PM // 21:03

I Never mentioned it before, but I think this is actually a really cool class. But classes that have more than 1 choice for weapons/offense usually have 5 attributes instead of 4, and in my oppinion, I think that they should have a different primary, so that you choose whether to ride a dragon or just have it as minion/pet, rather than all Dragoons being pushed into riding one all the time.

I Think the name Dragoon is fine. That word has a few meanings, and most of them fit. The real/dictionary term for it is "Heavily armed mounted cavalry", and the fake/fantasy term usally has to do with either being part dragon, riding dragons, being like a dragon, or having a pet dragon with some combination of the above. The most common one I've seen is a Dragoon being someone who rides a dragon.

Hyper Cutter · Jun 23, 2006, 09:39 PM // 21:39

Why not just call the primary "Dragon Riding"?

/signed. I love the idea, personally.

TadaceAce · Jun 23, 2006, 10:01 PM // 22:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyrent Frath

with some balancing (Apply poison + AoE polearm + virulence/epidemic= GG, yes i do realize it would be a 2 man job for this to work) this could be amazing

/signed

.... how about apply poison cyclone axe... yeah this is a dead horse it wasn't very good.

SaosiN17 · Aug 23, 2006, 08:46 PM // 20:46

Oh wow mounts... Another ripoff from WOW. As you can see the pet AI is horrible why base a class around it.

DietDew · Aug 24, 2006, 01:07 AM // 01:07

um Please Learn How To Make A New Class>>>>>> This One Sucks

Caboose117 · Sep 01, 2006, 09:35 PM // 21:35

Well I just read through most of the thread and much of the class description. I have had this idea for a long time too and have some things to say.

About the mounts. First off, I don't think it should be only dragons or magical beasts. I would say put horses into it. Horses are more common to find than magical beasts (or at least they should be).
-For controling the mounts it should be directly related to your AP you put into ridermanship (that word sounds a little smoother but I still think a different one is needed) just like a weapon requirement. Example: A lvl 20 mount may require 13 Ridermanship. If you have less, lets say 9 ridermanship, for each point you are down you have a 10% chance to be kicked off your mount when it gets attacked, so for having 9 with a req 13 mount, you have a 40% chance of being knocked off every time you get hit. That may be a little extreme, but think about it in reality. If you can't control and keep your horse calm, it will buck. A bucking horse is hard to stay on top of.
-Another idea I have for mounts is that mounts can be sold almost like weapons. Maybe even have the mount as an equipable item in the inventory but can only be equiped before entering an instanced area. Each type of mount should be different and unique. Example: A horse is a herbivore with no sharp edges. It would deal blunt damage when attacking (if it does) and because it is covered in leather probably won't be too good for taking attacks. A drake is covered in scales and has claws, it would have slashing damage and be much stronger in taking hits. To balance these, the horse can move faster and be more agile, while the drake is slower and takes more time to manuver.
-Yet another idea for the mounts is giving them armor. In my last suggestion about mounts, I mentioned the durabilty of different pets. Lets say you can put some armor on your horse to give it a better chance to survive in combat. But to balance this, armor slows them down. So if you put a bunch of chainmail on your horse it's going to naturally move slower because of the added weight.

Weapons for the Dragoon.
-Since the scythe was introduced for the Dervish having the sweeping motion and multi attack, maybe the polearm idea should be reconsidered or even dropped. But I do like the lances very much. One thing to consider in the real-life-ness that this game kinda has, is that lances are very heavy. It should be a two handed weapon for sure (IMO), be a slow weapon and have a pretty focused damage range. -OR- give them a fairly quick attack when dismounted and make them weaker (19-25) but then slower and stronger on the mount (24-39) because you have the use of leverage.

Dragon Mimicry
I personally don't like the idea of confining the Dragoon to the realm of Dragons. The extra "o" that Dragoon has doesn't make it anything like a dragon. BUT, I do like the way you created the skill type for this class. I would change the name to maybe something like "Spirit Power" (heck, its lame and sounds like a Rt Attribute but I'm trying to be constructive)
-These would have some small energy costings skills with a quick benefit. Below is an example.
*Spirit of the Fire Dragon- 5e|oc|0r your next attack deals fire + 1-12, and is all fire damage.

Dragoon's Equipment.
-First off I think they should be at 70AL since the damage is spread out between the rider and the mount. This would help keep them from being another tank, but maintain their ability to be a support attacker. The Dragoon should have an initially strong defense to elemental damage, maybe +30AL vs Ele attacks. They should have 3 energy regen, and probably 30 energy to start with.

I'd like to say that I really like this idea a lot and I hope I didn't butcher what Action Jack originally proposed. This is something I've really wanted ever since the game started so hopefully it will get made some day.

thetechx · Oct 25, 2006, 06:13 PM // 18:13

the fencer was way better then the dragoon.and ive been reading a lot of these concept classes and it seems ppl want guild wars to be final fantasy then guild wars. FF is an awesome franchise but leave it where its at and stop trying to turn GW into FF.

actionjack · Oct 25, 2006, 07:22 PM // 19:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caboose117

Well I just read through most of the thread and much of the class description. I have had this idea for a long time too and have some things to say.

About the mounts. First off, I don't think it should be only dragons or magical beasts. I would say put horses into it. Horses are more common to find than magical beasts (or at least they should be).
-For controling the mounts it should be directly related to your AP you put into ridermanship (that word sounds a little smoother but I still think a different one is needed) just like a weapon requirement. Example: A lvl 20 mount may require 13 Ridermanship. If you have less, lets say 9 ridermanship, for each point you are down you have a 10% chance to be kicked off your mount when it gets attacked, so for having 9 with a req 13 mount, you have a 40% chance of being knocked off every time you get hit. That may be a little extreme, but think about it in reality. If you can't control and keep your horse calm, it will buck. A bucking horse is hard to stay on top of.
-Another idea I have for mounts is that mounts can be sold almost like weapons. Maybe even have the mount as an equipable item in the inventory but can only be equiped before entering an instanced area. Each type of mount should be different and unique. Example: A horse is a herbivore with no sharp edges. It would deal blunt damage when attacking (if it does) and because it is covered in leather probably won't be too good for taking attacks. A drake is covered in scales and has claws, it would have slashing damage and be much stronger in taking hits. To balance these, the horse can move faster and be more agile, while the drake is slower and takes more time to manuver.
-Yet another idea for the mounts is giving them armor. In my last suggestion about mounts, I mentioned the durabilty of different pets. Lets say you can put some armor on your horse to give it a better chance to survive in combat. But to balance this, armor slows them down. So if you put a bunch of chainmail on your horse it's going to naturally move slower because of the added weight.

Weapons for the Dragoon.
-Since the scythe was introduced for the Dervish having the sweeping motion and multi attack, maybe the polearm idea should be reconsidered or even dropped. But I do like the lances very much. One thing to consider in the real-life-ness that this game kinda has, is that lances are very heavy. It should be a two handed weapon for sure (IMO), be a slow weapon and have a pretty focused damage range. -OR- give them a fairly quick attack when dismounted and make them weaker (19-25) but then slower and stronger on the mount (24-39) because you have the use of leverage.

Dragon Mimicry
I personally don't like the idea of confining the Dragoon to the realm of Dragons. The extra "o" that Dragoon has doesn't make it anything like a dragon. BUT, I do like the way you created the skill type for this class. I would change the name to maybe something like "Spirit Power" (heck, its lame and sounds like a Rt Attribute but I'm trying to be constructive)
-These would have some small energy costings skills with a quick benefit. Below is an example.
*Spirit of the Fire Dragon- 5e|oc|0r your next attack deals fire + 1-12, and is all fire damage.

Dragoon's Equipment.
-First off I think they should be at 70AL since the damage is spread out between the rider and the mount. This would help keep them from being another tank, but maintain their ability to be a support attacker. The Dragoon should have an initially strong defense to elemental damage, maybe +30AL vs Ele attacks. They should have 3 energy regen, and probably 30 energy to start with.

I'd like to say that I really like this idea a lot and I hope I didn't butcher what Action Jack originally proposed. This is something I've really wanted ever since the game started so hopefully it will get made some day.

Thank you for the review.

-On Mount:

I also think there are something flimsy with the mount system as I have it. Would never say it is perfect, nor the only one way to be done, but just one of the altenatives.

However, I still do like the buckle thing, as it make the mount seem more like an entity of its own, and add some interesting game play factors. Also keep in mind that when the mount buckle, depend on what kind it is, it will have differnt reactions (be they try to flee, or rush into battle), and different mounts will give you different bonus effect too.

I did thought of the horse befoe. However, it is strange seeing how there are no horses in the game (only centaurs). Also the lore supposely is that they are people who worship Dragons, and ride on Drgaon-istic mounts (live or in-animated), so horse are not much of fit. But another Rider-type Concept class could certainly have Horse.

-On Weapon:

I do want to see a Lance/Pole-arm type of weapon in GW sometime in the future too (that is not being thrown). Like said, 2 handed, slow, decent damge, with multi-attack (in 90degree angle or straight line) damage, and a bit extra range. One thing uncertain if needed is to decrease effect when use in close melee. Also they would not suffer the extra weapon penality when use on mount.

-On Dragon Mimicry

Yes, a Dragoon is a riding soldier and not related to Dragon (historically). Name can be change, as skills here just give more or less defense/offensive enchantment like ablity. But one thing I do like is the breath type of attack, which would be cone-shape, short lasting elemental attacks. It just seem cool looking.

-On Armor
Don't think they should have high armor, as they are not to overtake Warrior in Tanking. (65-75AL range). Also Mount will help with the armor factor (depend on how to split the damage between the two) They are to be supportive melee-range fighter, and not the best at up-to-face fighting.

Thxs for reading.

--------------------------------------------
thetechx:
FF doees have few good classes. The goal is of couse not to make GW into a FF clone, but make it more fun. Thus I do hope to see a mount related class (be they dragon related or not)

homie_star · Jul 06, 2007, 03:54 AM // 03:54

about people complaining with Dragoon's having mounts...Rangers have pets dont they?

Hawkeye · Jul 06, 2007, 10:50 AM // 10:50

I like the idea a lot, and the fact that Guild Wars needs a good mid-range attacker makes it even better.

For creativity, I give a 9.

For practicality, I give a 5.

For suitability, I give an 8.

The reason I give a 5 for practicality is that there are a lot of issues to be flattened out before this would work.

For example, self-imposed disarm? Such a thing doesn't exist yet. Perhaps you meant that there would have to be a new condition called 'disarm' by which during its effect, one cannot attack with their weapon (and the animation for the weapon is gone).

My issue would just be the 'tank' spell in which your mount takes the damage. You realize everyone would become Dragoon/warrior types and would easily take more damage than anything else. There would have to be a penalty if the mount died, much like if a pet died.

Moreover, to die while mounted should give even more of a penalty (perhaps the skill disable and being knocked down would be enough).

And lets make it so that someone on a mount could get thrown off easily (and from there, add skills to prevent such things such as tight saddle).

Knockdown obviously would dismount.

But what about dazed.. I can see how that would, at the very least, make it so that if hit while dazed would cause one to fall off.

And if a dragoon is diseased, automatically, the mount is diseased as well.

The animation might be a little difficult, because to have a mount model, it requires the player to have sprites mounting. If the primary is about being able to 'mount' the mount, can dragoon secondaries have mounts?

A lot to think about. I think where it would fail is its practicality, but such details can be hammered out, so to speak.

actionjack · Jul 06, 2007, 05:30 PM // 17:30

mmm.. I am curious why this was dig out again... Oh well.
But since Hawkeye put the effort in reviewing, guess I have to give a reply too.

Anyhow.... Good observation, Hawkeye. Yes, Disarm is a new condition (dicussed in another thread), which would leave you unable to use your weapon for duration (but you can still switch to another). Helpful in momentary confuse enemy, and strip them of the weapons effect. But that would mostly skill for another CC (Rogue), but self-impose would be related to weapon throwing skills.

Now, the meat of your critic, the Mount. one of the balance (and something to make them more unique from other Mount in any other games), is that they could get "spooked" or out of control, making you loose your control over movement.

But alas, I myself is still uncertain about the mechanic of Mount too. There are seveal way to do it (proposed by differnt people in their CC). Mine was a bit more complex, which could also consider as its flaw.

I think Mounts would certainly be cool and appeal to many players, but still seeking for a good system to support it (so not to be too overblance in its tanking or damging ability or speed buff, yet still have a nitch in its use). I have a new version of Dragoon in mind (with a new mechanic), yet it was stalled (forever) due to the fact that still could not think of a good way to handle Mount..... oh well...

Thxs for reading.