Curse

HawkofStorms · Sep 18, 2007, 12:36 AM // 00:36

^^ Sigh at the first part of the above post.

Doesn't change the fact that pretty much anybody in computer or cartoon animation will tell you that horses are difficult to do.

Curse You · Sep 18, 2007, 01:33 AM // 01:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by fenix

Yeah. Great idea you have there.

It's [wiki]Burning Speed[/wiki] on a horse!

RhanoctJocosa · Sep 18, 2007, 07:18 AM // 07:18

How about you stop being cheap and go buy WoW.

Sencartha · Sep 18, 2007, 02:23 PM // 14:23

Because WoW is a bad game lol

I can see what you mean with the horse and mabye going into battle on the back of one would be fun. However I see this as more an option for lower level Guild Wars 2

silesky · Sep 19, 2007, 02:59 PM // 14:59

Thats a good thought, thanks guys

silesky · Sep 19, 2007, 03:02 PM // 15:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by RhanoctJocosa

How about you stop being cheap and go buy WoW.

For many reasons:
1. Crap Graphics
2. No storyline
3.Crap PvP system
4.Costs about £90 a year just to play (when GW is so much better and free

)
5.I dont need to say anymore

zamial · Sep 20, 2007, 01:32 AM // 01:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Onarik Amrak

Just hop on Zhed.

ummm I'd rather mount Jora.

Banditda · Sep 20, 2007, 03:31 AM // 03:31

They should be only for rangers though because they are the animal charmers, or there should be another profession completely like horse archers or something like that, and at the beginning when you design your character you should be able to design your horse.

Banditda · Sep 20, 2007, 03:32 AM // 03:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by HawkofStorms

^^ Sigh at the first part of the above post.

Doesn't change the fact that pretty much anybody in computer or cartoon animation will tell you that horses are difficult to do.

well, since it is hard to do, it will just prove that GW has the best programmers, that should be motivation for them.

KlutzySpy · Sep 20, 2007, 10:05 AM // 10:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Banditda

They should be only for rangers though because they are the animal charmers, or there should be another profession completely like horse archers or something like that, and at the beginning when you design your character you should be able to design your horse.

usually you see a swordsman or spearman on a horse..

and necros, cus thats already in the game, with Necrid Horseman

MithranArkanere · Sep 20, 2007, 11:15 AM // 11:15

I would not call that bony thing a 'horse'. Horses do not have horns and pointed teeth. It's called 'horseman' becoase it's 'riding', not because it rides a horse.

Hawkeye · Sep 20, 2007, 12:06 PM // 12:06

They'd have to make a class around the idea. A type of warrior that fights with his mount, and the mount idea would be very similar to that of a pet.

Though on that, there would have to be a few points to note about the implementation:

1) I would say the new class should have the very same 'tame animal' skill as the ranger (make it attributeless and shared amongst the two professions).
2) You can have only one pet or one mount, not both.
3) Only certain 'pets' could be called 'mountable', that is to say that this class could mount it (you could use current pets too.. mounting a bear would rock).
4) A mount has two separate modes of play: normal (like pets) and mounted.
5) Mount cannot attack in 'mounted' mode.
6) The new class would have an attribute devoted to the mount, and it will NOT be a 'beast mastery' clone. The abilities pertaining to this attribute will be modes of attack for the player ONLY in mount mode.
7) Player can dismount at any time.
8) Damage will still be taken in full by player by default (not distributed), though abilities and stances that redirect damage to the mount will be made.
9) A mounted player does not move any faster than a normal player, though there will be lots of skills giving speed bonuses (think sprint with bonuses to attack)

With these 9 rules, I think it could be doable.

legion_rat · Sep 20, 2007, 12:36 PM // 12:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by KlutzySpy

usually you see a swordsman or spearman on a horse..

and necros, cus thats already in the game, with Necrid Horseman

thats what happened to all the horses. You see what the story line doesnt tell you is the Orr was also the prime horseflesh peddler in all the lands. When The Lich sank Orr the magical backlash killed all the horses, gave them bad teeth and horns and now only the necrid horsemen can ride them. But I think a necro/war should be able to KD the rider and steal the pimp horse.

for the OP

/notsigned for GW1 no point as everyone said map travel is easy. Also charging in to battle on horse is cool, but have u ever seen the movies where a spearman (paragon) sticks his spear in the dirt and puts the point in the horse. bad news for mr ed and his buddy. Plus would there be "Raise Mount"

when Mr Ed did die?

~the rat~

Azael Durge · Oct 06, 2007, 02:11 PM // 14:11

Mounts would be a great addition to GW2 and would be extremly fun (isnt that the whole point) and these mounts would also be great fun to use in the mists (pvp worlds) would mind being a dragon/pheonix rider fighting in the air against another spaudron of riders. i think all proffessions should be able to get mounts as well, and leveling mounts wouldnt be a bad idea.

/signed on mounts for GW2

Snow Bunny · Oct 06, 2007, 02:29 PM // 14:29

....

If you guys want WoW so much then go buy it.
Please

/notsigned

creelie · Oct 06, 2007, 07:31 PM // 19:31

It would be fun to have an elite PvE skill that summoned a mount for you.

Junundu vs. Frostmaw = WIN.

Antheus · Oct 06, 2007, 07:59 PM // 19:59

Sometimes I wonder why people play some games.

Mounts have zero (0) purpose in GW. They don't make sense for travelling, they are incompatible with combat mechanic, and due to world partitioning, they cannot be paraded around as trophies.

It makes as much sense as saying it would be cool if there were HUD display for missile launchers, since it works so great in combat flight simulations.

But worst of all - such arguments get then slammed against Anet, claiming they ignore ideas.

There are viable ideas, good, but inviable ideas, poor ideas, bricks and oranges. Just like the last two don't fit into this post, neither do mounts in GW.

Dark and Light has all this: Endless world, mounts, and nothing but travel.

Darkobra · Oct 06, 2007, 08:06 PM // 20:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by MithranArkanere

Pick a character.
Walk around the world.
Have you seen a giraffe? Or a zebra? Or a donkey? Or a sheep?
There are only 'cow-like' creatures in Tyria.

We already have Devourers and Junundu.
Who the hell wants a Hourse when you can mount a Siege Devourer?

Ox in Cantha, too.

Darkhell153 · Oct 07, 2007, 12:14 AM // 00:14

forget all this horse nonsense, if we're getting mounts why don't we have a catapult fly us places instead? That would be more interesting to watch (not to mention the fact that they'd have to have the character scream like a 4 year old while flying).

william1975 · Oct 07, 2007, 12:39 AM // 00:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by MithranArkanere

Pick a character.
Walk around the world.
Have you seen a giraffe? Or a zebra? Or a donkey? Or a sheep?
There are only 'cow-like' creatures in Tyria.

while there may not be any live horses in Tyria, there are certainly more species than bovine.

I have noticed quite a few

there are bears, being of the Ursidae family
Wolves fromt he dog family
Lynx and Stalker from the cat family
Moa Bird and Strider from the Dinornithidae family
Warhogs from the pig family

there are numerous others throughout.

Some are not actual creatures in real life, so to discount the necrid horsemans mount as beign a horse is not fair. Its obviously meant to represent a horse and must have come from some living creature we haven't been privy to as of yet.

As in our own medieval history horse are probably extremely expensive and rare animals, so we wouldn't see many around