dorotea said:>No we just need a rule passed called VR Care where everyone gets buffs and every class can play solo. <
I agree. About time we have some people agreeing that we shouldn't all be forced into the same 'forced grouping" straightjacket. Grouping should be more rewarding, certainly, but if someone doesn't have time to group or has too many interruptions they should be able to progress toward maximum level even if it is only at 1/10 the speed. I don't agree about the buffs but as to the rest you are spot-on. ((deliberately ignores the obvious sarcasm))
Yea as far as the grouping goes VR has already said some classes will be able to solo better than others but grouping is the focus. Anyone who played Eq I would suspect soloing would be similar. Your not going to be able to go solo a camp of bandits but you could certainly grind it out on roaming mobs. But we are getting a bot off topic. Back to the speed buffs and others really. Just simply make it where you can't cast a max lvl buff [speed buff or otherwise] on a low level character. Not to continue quoting my favorite game but that is what eq did. Spells had a level limit where you needed to be a certain level before you could get a high level buff cast on you.
Let's bring this back to mounts though. In short yes people want to be able to get from point A to point B without it taking all day. Modern games have made this to easy . While I agree I do not want it to cost me and arm and a leg plus half my day just to get to a zone where my group or spell merchant is, I also would like to see people stopping to smell the flowers a little along the way. We are all here to support VR in making the best possible game for all of us, so keep those pesky content Skippy mechanics out of the game best we can.
Sintec said:dorotea said:
Let's bring this back to mounts though. In short yes people want to be able to get from point A to point B without it taking all day. Modern games have made this to easy . While I agree I do not want it to cost me and arm and a leg plus half my day just to get to a zone where my group or spell merchant is, I also would like to see people stopping to smell the flowers a little along the way. We are all here to support VR in making the best possible game for all of us, so keep those pesky content Skippy mechanics out of the game best we can.
Agreed. I'd also like flying mounts, they are not only cool but also add a new perspective on the scenery. but ONLY in zones which no longer pose any threat to me, so content skipping is moot.
I think mounts as a high level reward are a great carrot to hold in front of a player.
The issue is when mounts cause content to be trivialized. There is a balance there that needs to be considered. My vote would be mounts that grant a decent movespeed increase but not drastic. Make them a goal that takes time to achieve, not something that is just assumed and earned with little effort. No flying mounts. WoW has taught me that a flying mount is a big hinderence on immersion and social interaction in the world.
I've been in games - more than one or two - where a mount was something every character could get at level 1. Maybe not the first character - you might need to sell a butterfly or something to raise the cash - but every later character. That is far too easy. A mount should mean something. Ah but what should it mean?
Looking to the middle ages as an overused example, a relatively slow nag that could get you from one spot to another and carry a lot more than you could didn't exactly cost a king's ransom or require fame or prestige to get. A quality horse, well bred and cared for, considerably more expensive. A fancy horse imported from Arabia and maybe faster than these - really expensive. A trained warhorse able to carry a knight in armor and help in combat - super expensive, difficult to replace and train, and if you werent a knight or a noble's son you might wind up hung for theft while you were trying to explain where you got it.
Different mounts with different speeds, differing abilities to keep you from getting knocked off and differing requirements to actually use - not just traditional in many (not all) MMOs but somewhat realistic.
Terminus isn't the middle ages but I do see the benefit to differing mounts with differing abilities. Faster speed is a NICE perk for gaining levels. Hypothetically let's assume a maximum level of 50 (not a suggestion or wish just for the purpose of this discussion). Maybe no mount until level 20 - let the new characters look at the higher levels and drool. Any resemblance in these numbers to LOTRO many years ago not quite a coincidence. Not all that good a mount either maybe the speed of a fast movement buff (and an extra small plus if the buff and mount stack). Maybe a more majestic creature to ride on at 50 - a bit faster (still not content-defeating) and something visually showing your stature to the hoi polloi. Maybe harder to be knocked off of if the game has that mechanic at all.
But just walking into a stables at level 20 may be too easy. Even LOTRO once had quests that you needed to complete to get that mount. Granted, not difficult quests but they took some time. Rather than "ride to Bree to prove you know the front of a horse from its rear" maybe "We don't want every rifraff blocking the streets and thinking they are equal to their betters. Now if you kill that troll to the west or the ogre in the cave to the east we will let you ape your betters here". ((better make those poor monsters fast respawning or dozens of us will be standing in line taking numbers and waiting for a chance to kill them))
Ill sum my thoughts like this:
Mounts should be available at level 1. A new level 1 wont be able to afford to get/use it. (when most peopel turn 16, they cant afford a car, but doens mean there's not one for sale) A "child" from the progency system inherited a mount (or money to buy) from their parent? That makes sense. I'm not a fan of complicated care of the mount. MMOs already have enough "grinds" and bank clutter.
Instead of the mount providing "buffs," what if the player trained skills (call them mount AAs). SO, a child inherits a mount from their parent, but they have 0 riding skill. Well, the horse walks and sometimes in a straight line. A highly experience paladin, who has trained rigerously, commands his steed! Providing nimble movement or enhanced combat function. Perhaps, a druid's riding skill allows it to gain an empathy for the animal and they share resource management (gains mana regen) or better Perception Checks.
A skill system with trees to pursue opens up doors so it's not simply buying a horse. Simple enough to do, but provides a more difficult task than going to a vender and becoming awseome!
Expected Speed levels: Walk (1), Run (2), Mount (basic(2.1), intermediate(2.2), advance(2.5), then master(3)), spell affects (range from 2.2-3.4) Knight's mounts(3.5), Bards(∞ - little joke here). With a cap on stacked speed (however that seems balanced, per level, set amount, etc) so while mounted a druid with a master riding skill can buff it's mount to move pretty fast: makes "Fantasy" sense.
Maybe there is a way to combine the "look awesome" and the loss of socialization that BeaverBiscuit was concerned with. ((thinks rapidly but with very little depth))
I have it - make Horse one of the playable races. It can fight effectively (both using magic and the old kick/kick/bite from D&D) and when it feels extra sociable it can let another player ride it as a speed buff.
I don't want mounts ( flying or otherwise ) and hope that Pantheon NEVER has them. Everyone has been spoiled and used to having mounts in practically every MMO on the market.
My reasons for not wanting mounts
1. Druids - currently Druids have a speed buff that they can share with their group. In EQ this buff made Druids a valuable class when it came to travel ( it wasn't their only strength ), but it was a good one. Give everyone a mount and viola you don't need them for the speed buff. Sidenote: this should be something for all classes. To have that one thing no other class has that make them valuable and needed in a 6 man group in a variety of situations.
2. It makes travelling less dangerous - unless players can be easily dismounted or surprised by mobs or hitting their head on a tree branch, they'll just run by every mob without any consequences.
3. Its ruins exploration and make the world smaller - open world games are all about exploring and discovery. Exploration should take time ( in my opinon ) and not be so easy that players can blow by content.
4. Creates problems - In many games players with mounts can often climb up to areas players without mounts can not. This can lead to bugs or exploits. Players will try to do these things anyways, but mounts make it easier.
If you haven't played an MMO game without mounts,I think you should try it before jumping to the conclusion that all games must have them to be fun. After all this is suppose to be a harder game. Mount don't equal fun, they simply make the challenge of getting somewhere easier. I understand the desire for them, but I'd rather wait and see how the game preforms before throwing them in as a quick addon for travel. Most mounts I see in games are vanity pieces so why have them? I think this game will have plenty of cool things to show off.
I don't want to see the dev's buckle under the pressure to provide them for simple reasons.
1) if the only thing that makes people want a druid is the speed buff... then VR has failed that class. That's a terrible reason to not want mounts.
2) it does not make traveling less dangerous. In eq1 you could outrun almost every mob you came across by jumping. Travel was still dangerous.
3) it doesn't make the world smaller. It might make the world FEEL smaller, but noone is making you mount up and explore. If exploring is what you want to do, then do it. Me being on a mount riding past you doesn't ruin your exploration.
4) you literally said it yourself, people will do this with lev and speed buffs anyways. Just make it so your mount can't jump, and can't levitate... problem solved.
Make mounts available at level 50. Make it a side quest. Out of combat only, no bonus to meditation. All it is, is a travel tool.
Mounts should be available only at relatively high levels but waiting until level cap is probably excessive.
Mounts should take time, effort and significant amounts of game currency to get. Quests are a good requirement.
To me the *least* persuasive reason not to have mounts is because one or more classes may have speed buffs. I shouldn't need to hunt up a druid when I want to get from a crafting hub to a training hub, for example.
Porygon said:1) if the only thing that makes people want a druid is the speed buff... then VR has failed that class. That's a terrible reason to not want mounts.
2) it does not make traveling less dangerous. In eq1 you could outrun almost every mob you came across by jumping. Travel was still dangerous.
3) it doesn't make the world smaller. It might make the world FEEL smaller, but noone is making you mount up and explore. If exploring is what you want to do, then do it. Me being on a mount riding past you doesn't ruin your exploration.
4) you literally said it yourself, people will do this with lev and speed buffs anyways. Just make it so your mount can't jump, and can't levitate... problem solved.
Make mounts available at level 50. Make it a side quest. Out of combat only, no bonus to meditation. All it is, is a travel tool.
1. re-read what I wrote.
2. then why have mounts?
3. I agree to disagree. Also read between the lines. I never even implied phsically smaller ( you're nitpicking ). Offer something easy and everyone will buy it. Terrible reasoning here with the "noone is making you" comment. Argumentative.
4. I know I did. Bugs will be found no matter what. Adding more helps how?
Unless the game will cap at level 50 or 60 maybe. If not, this could easily turn into a rabbit hole mount chase to whatever the next level cap or even faster mounts ala Wow...boring and all to simiar to everything else. Mounts add nothing to a well balanced game, but a cheap speed boost. If there will be teleports and gates like EQ ...no need for mounts again. I'll only want mounts as a vanity item if and only if they'll move as fast as the druid speed buff.
Aatu said: Maybe just a bit faster than SOW. And yes make it possible to get dismounted by agro Just an idea that may have already been mentioned as I just skimmed this thread but how about adding some bags to it to use as extra storage. It is logical afterall.... we have been using animals to pack items as much as to carry us if not more so. If Implemented... the more you burden the animal with weight the slower the movement speed.
I would still say don't make mounts any faster than SoW, but I do like the idea you're using here of encumbrance. Makes me think mounts could be used like pack mules were in Dungeon Siege to carry more loot. More loot, the slower they go. So while they move only as fast a SoW, the benefit is having more bag space. This is the only idea I can get behind for mounts. Good one Aatu.
I think the best way to implement mounts is to have them use endurance which must be regenerated by stabling the mount for a long period of time at a significant cost (6+ hours for full recharge). This would make the use of mounts much more strategic, and you could have different environments drain the endurance faster. Running along a road would be the least draining activity. Riding in a dense forest would have signficantly higher endurance drain, and climbing mountains or other difficult terrain would drain endurance extremely fast. Furthermore, summoning the mount can use a chunk of endurance, so players wouldn't want to summon for short jaunts.
Having mounts work this way makes them more realistic, keeps speed buffs relevant, and minimizes the impact on the scale of the game.
I sarcastically will add this. If mounts are to be in the game, please for the love of all things holy do not add something like this:
https://s22.postimg.cc/i85dohddt/u_https_totemz.files.wordpress.com_2010_08_goblinstartercar.png
(As seen from World of Warcraft)
Bronsun said:1. re-read what I wrote.
2. then why have mounts?
3. I agree to disagree. Also read between the lines. I never even implied phsically smaller ( you're nitpicking ). Offer something easy and everyone will buy it. Terrible reasoning here with the "noone is making you" comment. Argumentative.
4. I know I did. Bugs will be found no matter what. Adding more helps how?
Unless the game will cap at level 50 or 60 maybe. If not, this could easily turn into a rabbit hole mount chase to whatever the next level cap or even faster mounts ala Wow...boring and all to simiar to everything else. Mounts add nothing to a well balanced game, but a cheap speed boost. If there will be teleports and gates like EQ ...no need for mounts again. I'll only want mounts as a vanity item if and only if they'll move as fast as the druid speed buff.
1) you LITERALLY are saying that mounts will cheapen druids because players won't want the run speed buff and instead will use a mount. If that's not what you're saying please clarify, because it seems to be what your saying. My response is still valid , if the only thing that lures people to druids is run speed, druids were designed incorrectly.
2) why have walking? What are you even trying to say. Your point was that mounts make traveling less dangerous. I proved you wrong with an example from the game pantheon is largely based upon... and you come back and question why have mounts. Mounts existed in eq1 and did not create any issues whatsoever.
3) your statement can only mean a few things... you're implying that moving faster will make the world smaller in the amount of time it takes to travel from point a to point b making your decisions on where to group or go to level less impactful.. well so do the run speed buffs, and portals etc. Why are mounts the breaking point in a game that already includes a vast number of ways to increase your speed.
4) so because bad people exploit terrain, that means mounts shouldn't exist? Well shouldn't we also remove levitation, and jumping from the game. This goes very well will answer 3, same exact scenario. Why are mounts the gamebreaking factor in how people exploit.
As far as when the level cap increases mounts creating a "race" ... well I'm sorry friend. But that race will always exist mounts or not. The hardcores will find the fastest way to travel regardless of what you do. My point about "not using them" was because you implied they cheapened exploration. If you really enjoy exploration you can explore without a mount. I dont see why this is such a point of contention
You dont like mounts so you're spending all your energy arguing against having them as opposed to finding a way to implement them properly.
zoltar said:I think the best way to implement mounts is to have them use endurance which must be regenerated by stabling the mount for a long period of time at a significant cost (6+ hours for full recharge). This would make the use of mounts much more strategic
I actually love this idea of having to recharge your mount to make them more strategically utilized. I think it fits in with pantheons design of making choices that matter.
It's a good thing that there will be mounts ingame. It's a feature in this day of age that players expect to be in a game.
I don't see a need for it to be available at launch or at day one of a starting character. It makes sense that there is a requirement to learn, earn, skill up and quest for a certain mount or abilities to purchase or collect a mount from the wild. Quest (or sorts) for mounts, don't just allow them to be bought.
Please don't allow 'horseracing' within villages or towns. If mounted players are allowed within citywalls, just make it a trod. For example walkspeed of player is 1..runspeed of player is 3 ..SOW or other totems might give 2-4. A horse could have two speeds as well. Within cities a trod of 2-3 and outside 5. It just makes no sense that mounts are passing others at topspeed within a city and it also takes away the immersive experience one could have when travelling at lower speed. At high speed one just stops paying attention to the fast changing surroundings.
It is very annoying to have mounted players blocking the view of an npc. You could disable the viewing of mounts, but that for me is an afterthought not a proactive measure. If it's not required to be mounted in order to reach or interact with an npc, make ALL players DISmount before being able to converse with an npc. It makes sense and at least others won't be looking at the swiping of a mounts' tail. In games now you see Guides during Guided Events requesting players to dismount and that I think says it all to me.
Mounts should not be allowed within dungeons or caverns. Even if it's a dwarven citadel with huge corridors and hallways. If you want, for my part, you can implement 'fasttravelling' by rope or jumping down or vertical travel.
Flying mounts are tricky. I fear at some point, they will be offered to players. I hope it's in a very distant future. Because indeed it allows content to be skipped and that's just a shame and will eventually break down the game as a whole as you'll need to provide even bigger worlds and expantions time and time again. This in turn will make normal travel or groundmounts obsulete and a waste of time and resources. For me flying mounts can be done to cover oceans (please don't forget about boat or rafts), deserts (traderoutes?) and perhaps the odd tropical jungle. But it could also be as a service from one city to another and not a player mount. That service again could be costly in various ways or perhaps the amount of times that service is active during a certain period is limited. So for players that want to go from one place to another fast, it might not be the best way and they might be better of by groundmount. So it would only be for players that really want to go to that other city and are willing to wait untill the service is available to them.
Finally not every terrain should be traversable by groundmount. You can not go at max groundmount speed through a jungle. So perhaps certain terrains would either favour different mounts or would disable any kind of mounted travel. So you "force" players to dismount and venture that portion of the road or region of the world on foot or perhaps at best with a lowered groundmount speed (similar to the speed one would have in within a city or settlement).
Just think outside the box from time to time. Sometimes you just don't need a mount to get players to go from point A to point B. Use your surroundings and differnent orientations (horizontal, vertical, diagonal travel) and not to forget portals of some kind (although not too many and make sure they remain costly) to enable players to find their way.
Porygon said:1) if the only thing that makes people want a druid is the speed buff... then VR has failed that class. That's a terrible reason to not want mounts.
2) it does not make traveling less dangerous. In eq1 you could outrun almost every mob you came across by jumping. Travel was still dangerous.
3) it doesn't make the world smaller. It might make the world FEEL smaller, but noone is making you mount up and explore. If exploring is what you want to do, then do it. Me being on a mount riding past you doesn't ruin your exploration.
4) you literally said it yourself, people will do this with lev and speed buffs anyways. Just make it so your mount can't jump, and can't levitate... problem solved.
Make mounts available at level 50. Make it a side quest. Out of combat only, no bonus to meditation. All it is, is a travel tool.
1) please refer to all the EQ wizards complaining in the wizard sub forum about how if they don't get port they will be useless. People just feel that way man.
But in all seriousness why does one function need to be the only reason people want a druid? Why cant it just be one of many that slightly spruces up the amazing social structure VR is looking for in Pantheon? In other words giving druids sow and then not giving people mounts does NOT mean the only reason people will want druids is sow. It means that druids will simply be that much more valuable. Classes should be many different unique things to everyone in and out of combat!
2) I'd argue that if you travel one centimeter further due to running from the mob on a horse as opposed to not a horse, then the game is less dangerous because you are one centimeter closer to getting away from that mob. In addition, if two mobs are walking towards each other, you can theoretically get through that particular time window more effectively if you move faster. Therefore anything that makes you faster makes travel less difficult. Things which make travel less difficult in a game that wants difficult travel should only be considered if they somehow serve the other tenets well. Speed buffs serve the other tenets well...
...do horses? I mean, I guess mounts might effect trade a bit..and groups can get together faster. One could argue that with the announcement of auction houses, trade+related communication is priority two at best. In addition, great commincation/social relationships in groups can happen with or without the group being near one another, so long as they are working towards a common, complicated purpose (like travel).
There is also the worry that having too many things that do the same thing can also have unintended consequences.
Going on Iksar's idea of mounts and buffs stacking: If mounts are worthwhile, and speed buffs are worthwhile, and the bonus you get from getting a speed buff while on a mount is worthwhile, it's an important argument of whether, at this point, we have already broken our desires for complicated, immersive travel, because the mix of all your speed stuffs is just that good.
Conversely, If we go by mount OR speed buff, then Pantheon's planned social structure takes a pretty big hit, no matter what level players get mounts, even if mounts aren't quite as good as sow. If it is good enough to get, then it will be good enough to be going on with. A very important "good enough" point is when you run faster than most mobs.
3) In a game built around groups of people, my group of people could very often force me to travel as fast as possible. I want to enjoy my travel but not at the expense of grouping at the same time. Thus, your point is moot, unless you want to promote small niches of people who play specific ways NEVER grouping with other niches? Travel is a big part of a group, especially, i suspect, in Pantheon. Or more likely the smaller niches will be forced to play with the bigger niches, and now we've come full circle.
4) I actually do agree that something which allows more people to exploit the game should still be fully considered, even if I don't agree with mounts very much besides their roleplaying conveniences. It's VR's job to keep their game fixxed. period.
Alexander said:I hope mounts arent available until, at most, ten levels or so before the cap. Seems like a good way to preserve the travel magic in game as long as possible.
Near full travel becomes available at level one. Theoretically you can reach the entire world besides the pieces gated behind environmental hazards at level one. So why not make mounts available at level one and make better mounts for harsher environments available upon exploring higher environments? Why force level ones to experience travel, and yet not force level 50s to experience travel? There's no guarantee that a level 50 has "finished the travel game". Why not gate mounts behind getting to all the normal temperature areas in the world, and better mounts behind getting to the related harsh temperature areas of the world?
A final important note: full time crafters in pantheon will theoretically not need to level. It seems pretty ridiculous to force guys who likely thrive on traveling between cities/nodes/trade points almost constantly to not have mounts, when guys who thrive on killing stuff, in several areas that may or may not be very far apart, and may or may not require leaving very often while you're there, do get mounts.
Or better yet, have no mounts at all and gate speed related spells (on the casting and/or receiving end) behind travel-related achievements instead of mob killing achievements (levels).
High level players will already be better at travel because they are stronger and can run past more without worry, they don't need more speed in order for levels to be plenty worth while.
______
By not having mounts, we force everyone to travel "immersively". By having mounts, we force players to travel conveniently unless they are solo or in their "niche" that refuses to group with other players. Either way, people are being forced, it just depends on what VR wants more in their game. Difficulty+immersiveness, or player convenience. Last I checked, it was Difficulty+immersiveness, (to the best of my knowledge, VR feels both are important to meaningful content/gameplay)plus a smattering of new things which help convenience without breaking difficulty and immersion. Mounts, imo, definately risk breaking difficulty and immersion.
_________
P.S. by mounts people refer to the speed boost, and that's what I refered to in this post. If you cut the speed boost part out and removed any benefits you might get from being taller, then we can totally have mounts for roleplay (that are worse than useless in every other situation since you can't attack).
While I understand the reasoning - I can't agree that mounts should be available at much lower levels for "alts".
I don't really want to see level fives riding all over the place in starter zones. Even less do I want low level "alts" able to get to mobs and resources faster than new characters of players that are new to the game. That is simply unfair and, worse, discouraging to new players. Least of all do I want anyone that intends to play multiple characters given a huge incentive to speed-level the first one to "mount level" so that all the little toonlings can ride around.
Kittik your point makes perfectly good sense I just think that the negatives outweigh the positives.
