Talking about Mounting before Combat, during Combat and after Combat.

I've seen older videos of people fighting, then during a fight, they would mount up and run away. As much as I love to get out of a sticky situation, it is frustrating fighting someone then they just run off during combat. I do enjoy the mounts and how they feel, but I feel like being able to fight then mount, dismount, fight, mount repeat is sort of annoying mechanics.

The other argument is lets say you are fighting a small group when your team from far away needs your squad to rotate. Then you'd want to get out of that situation you are currently in so you can help your team. If mount timer is added, then you have to deal with the current situation before going over.

I would like to make sure the current mounting system is and discussions on what are the best approaches to this. I also am wondering if some weapons/skills can offer disabling of mounts or dismount abilities. (This is from UO where you can have a crossbow knock someone off their mount and they have to take some time before remounting).

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Solvryn

In Darkfall we had to spawn the mount then you could just kill it.

AidanKD

I think similar to WoW should be okay. Mounting out of combat is a normal cast. No mounting during combat, and there needs to be a suitable period of non-combat activity to leave combat. Give people the opportunity to escape but only through suitable means.

clone63

A good case for persistent mounts - you'd have to physically get on it which would leave you pretty vulnerable, or your mount could get killed prior.. Different saddles and creatures could offer an advtange of mounting speed with a trade off of other traits.

Dygz

Depends on if it's a combat mount.

I'm not sure what no mounting during combat means.
If I'm out picking flowers, get ambushed and want to escape without flagging as Combatant, does that mean I'm stuck on foot while I'm being attacked?
I have to be able to run x distance without being hit before I can summon my mount??

Dygz

Some combat mounts should have Snare. Especially Spiders.

mcstackerson

So mounts are killable and if they are killed, they are not easily re-summoned. There are also ways to knock people off their mounts. Mounts have abilities, some of which are combat related.

What you have seen of mounts isn't the final system. From what we have heard, the mount system sounds similar to Archeage's if you are familiar.

AidanKD

Dygz wrote: »

Depends on if it's a combat mount.

I'm not sure what no mounting during combat means.
If I'm out picking flowers, get ambushed and want to escape without flagging as combatant, does that mean I'm stuck on foot while I'm being attacked?
I have to be able to run x distance without being hit before I can summon my mount??

I think that if we afford non-combatants some sort of protection then that may steers the system towards being a bit more defender-friendly. I guess you always have to balance how you want this weight between attacker/defender to feel (regardless of their combatant status).

I think that in a pvp game, even if I am picking flowers I expect to need to be overly aware of the constant risk of danger like an animal in the wild. I think that we should afford the same rules for attacker/defender. I.e. A defender can't just mount to escape if they get pulled into combat, however an attacker cannot mount to close the distance either if you manage to break off.

Dygz

You still have to be aware of the risk even with combat mounts available - but...

What this seems to suggest is that if I'm picking flowers and get attacked by someone on a combat mount, I can only run on foot. I can't also hop on a combat mount or flee on a mount while I'm being attacked.

Seems to me a Non-Combatant should be able to summon a mount, whenever.
Maybe a Combatant should not be able to summon a mount after flagging for PvP. Obviously, if they initiated combat while on a mount, the Combatant doesn't need to summon a mount.

A Non-Combatant is not a defender.
Ashes is a PvX game.

AidanKD

Dygz wrote: »

You still have to be aware of the risk even with combat mounts available - but...

What this seems to suggest is that if I'm picking flowers and get attacked by someone on a combat mount, I can only run on foot. I can't also hop on a combat mount or flee on a mount while I'm being attacked.

Seems to me a Non-Combatant should be able to summon a mount, whenever.
Maybe a Combatant should not be able to summon a mount after flagging for PvP. Obviously, if they initiated combat while on a mount, the Combatant doesn't need to summon a mount.

A Non-Combatant is not a defender.
Ashes is a PvX game.

I disagree that a non-combatant should have pvp protection in particular due to the game being PvX, perhaps we just don't see eye to eye here. I feel then we are steering to the argument that as the game will entice alot of "pve" players who don't want to engage in PvP, that they need protecting. The design seems to strongly go in the direction of there being risk in just about anything and I think that yes, even flower picking should have some risk.

And that is from someone who will not be one of the avid pvpers and will very likely be outclassed in most cases. But I believe that's how the system will work. Rather than using other mechanics to protect non-combatants should we be perhaps seeing how the corruption system works when fleshed out, and work on developing Corruption as the over-arching solution to trying to prevent "griefing"?

Azraya

I don't think we should be able to just hop on our mount in the middle of combat and ride off into the sunset.

Dygz

Non-Combatants don't have PvP protection simply because they can hop on a mount.
Combatants can be on mounts. Combatants can be on mounts that have Snare abilities.
It's just that Combatants would want to initiate combat from a mount, if they expect their target(s) will summon a mount to flee or fight.

Because the OP also suggests that if I'm picking flowers and I get ambushed by a mounted attacker, I can't summon a combat mount and flag as Combatant while I'm being attacked.

mcstackerson

I don't think it's as bad or works as people think. Please, if you haven't played AA, watch some videos because that is most likely how it will work. You don't instantly get mounted when you summon your mount and you are able to get CCed off it. It can also be killed.

If you summon your mount, you are risking it being killed and you will have to deal with whatever penalty comes with that.

As an attacker, if you drop all of your CC on someone for no reason and they mount up, then i think they deserve to get away. You will also have your own mount to try to catch them on.

Azraya

Otr wrote: »

Azraya wrote: »

I don't think we should be able to just hop on our mount in the middle of combat and ride off into the sunset.

In the middle of the combat probably not.
As @Jawjak said, it can be annoying for the stronger side.

But for a surprised player, the emotions are higher if it has a chance to escape. Then will try to do that.

Else, if the flee option is missing in general from the game, the weaker player will be always prepared to let himself killed. That I find unfun for both sides.

I do think players should be able to escape combat if they desire.
I just don't think it should be as easy as hopping on your mount and waving bye.

mcstackerson

Azraya wrote: »

Otr wrote: »

Azraya wrote: »

I don't think we should be able to just hop on our mount in the middle of combat and ride off into the sunset.

In the middle of the combat probably not.
As @Jawjak said, it can be annoying for the stronger side.

But for a surprised player, the emotions are higher if it has a chance to escape. Then will try to do that.

Else, if the flee option is missing in general from the game, the weaker player will be always prepared to let himself killed. That I find unfun for both sides.

I do think players should be able to escape combat if they desire.
I just don't think it should be as easy as hopping on your mount and waving bye.

it's not that easy.

AidanKD

@Azraya players will be able to build a toolkit in a way that can perhaps afford them better means of escape. I will have to focus my augments on defensive/evasive/counters to any potential aggressor. Or perhaps carry certain items that may help. Party up perhaps. Those should be the means of escaping.

A person conducting an ambush will always have the advantage that is just a matter of fact. But given there shouldn't really be true invisibility, you should at least have a chance to watch your surroundings and determine if you are safe or not, before the ambush takes place.

CROW3

I think summoning / getting on / riding away in combat would be fine if:

When summoned you are not mounted, you have to get on your horse (think Witcher 3)
When summoned a mount is immediately vulnerable to attacks
Neither summoning cast nor the action of mounting are instantaneous
When dismounted (by choice or being knocked off) a mount stays around for 8-10 seconds (and is attackable)

Jawjak

Some people want a combat timer before being able to mount up. This is when everyone is in combat (Siege, Caravan Pvp etc). Non Combat shouldn't have a timer if they are chilling and someone tries to attack you. They should have a timer not the non combat.

I personally want some sort of delay before being able to remount during combat. I know in UO ( I keep referencing UO cause that is my most played MMO) there are pvp factions and there is a statuette that you can have in your bag where it will summon a mount for you to automatically ride on. When people get dismounted, they use this statue to get back on a new mount while they other one goes away. (Some people used scripts for this fyi auto mount if dismounted).

But just wanting more thoughts on this delay. I really don't want to see someone mount during a fight, but I also don't want to see someone waiting 5-10 seconds after combat before mounting cause you might never be able to mount back up. Trying to find a good median.

Dygz

I think a delay for Combatants, could be OK, but…
I have a feeling PvP folk won’t like Non-Combatants having an advantage for escaping PvP.

daveywavey

I don't see why you shouldn't be able to mount in combat. You'll still be being attacked, but won't be able to defend yourself. I could see having a Damage Taken increase while you're doing it, but if you make it, then ride for your life!

Leiloni

AidanKD wrote: »

Dygz wrote: »

Depends on if it's a combat mount.

I'm not sure what no mounting during combat means.
If I'm out picking flowers, get ambushed and want to escape without flagging as combatant, does that mean I'm stuck on foot while I'm being attacked?
I have to be able to run x distance without being hit before I can summon my mount??

I think that if we afford non-combatants some sort of protection then that may steers the system towards being a bit more defender-friendly. I guess you always have to balance how you want this weight between attacker/defender to feel (regardless of their combatant status).

I think that in a pvp game, even if I am picking flowers I expect to need to be overly aware of the constant risk of danger like an animal in the wild. I think that we should afford the same rules for attacker/defender. I.e. A defender can't just mount to escape if they get pulled into combat, however an attacker cannot mount to close the distance either if you manage to break off.

I would consider the needed balance in terms of the corruption system. From what we know so far of the settings and balance of the corruption system, it seems to heavily favor consensual PvP and attempts to discourage non-consensual ganking, with repeated non-consensual PvP being heavily punished. So in that light I think allowing a non-combatant who hasn't entered combat yet to run away on their mount an appropriate choice. It seems clear that this would be more in line with Intrepid's design intention.

Because the other choice is for the flower-picker to decide not to fight back, just stand there and die which makes the player frustrated and then give the attacker corruption and the associated negative effects, which then makes the attacker frustrated. I'd much rather we have a situation with one happy player and one unhappy player, whose unhappiness is purely of their own making, than two unhappy players who are unhappy due to game design choices.

Child Item