This method of combat is entirely melee-oriented, archers on horse-back are laughable and a class like the Lore-Master is entirely, totally unsuited to mounted combat and implausible in that context.
As another Lore-Master 'main' I too hate the whole idea and am intensely annoyed that this isn't some optional side-show that can be ignored by those who detest it because it's nothing like the playstyle they prefer.
The Mongols were laughable now were they?
And you are reaching big time here. You haven't even played with Mounted Combat, so to claim that it will be entirely melee oriented or that LMs are unsuited to it is speculation and nothing more at this point.
And as another Lore-Master main I am looking forward to trying a whole new type of gameplay, and in particular seeing how the different classes perform on horseback.
Yes, throughout history there have been specialised groups of archers who trained for mounted combat .. you'll also find for example the Phoenicians hand such troops .. however, we are not trained for that.
There isn't to my knowledge a single example of a Hobbit fighting on horse/pony back at tall, let alone wielding a bow in the entire LOTR book.
In the context of this game then yes, it's LAUGHABLE that our characters would expect to be proficient as mounted archers.
No! Why should they leave the forums to Fanbois who believe that only they have a right to express their 'Holy' views. I also hate the idea of mounted combat and although I don't have to give a reason, I will. It totally goes against the playstyle of my character. I want my Lore Master to be able to use his pets, I have spent a lot of time and effort creating a character that I enjoy playing and have no wish to play as a different class, namely 'Jock' cavalry! Just because Turbine has added something new I have not got to fall in love with it if it is outside what I enjoy playing. If they added machineguns, would you expect everyone to start using them too?
Another reason is that my Dwarf Champion has been roleplayed for years with the attitude that horses are for eating and any true Dwarf would not be seen dead on one. He hasn't even got riding skill! So shall I change my whole roleplay persona for one small part of the game? Maybe I can go back to my roleplay character afterwards like a true hypocrite?
Originally Posted by Kraggy_Eldar
Agreed.
This method of combat is entirely melee-oriented, archers on horse-back are laughable and a class like the Lore-Master is entirely, totally unsuited to mounted combat and implausible in that context.
As another Lore-Master 'main' I too hate the whole idea and am intensely annoyed that this isn't some optional side-show that can be ignored by those who detest it because it's nothing like the playstyle they prefer.
I mean no offense, but calling people who like mounted combat and are excited about it as "fanbois" is just so condescending.....
My loremaster is my main too and the only class I have at lvl 75 atm and enjoy playing most....and while I absolutely love my LMs playstyle, I am really looking forward to how it will be implemented in conjuction with riding....
How much have Turbine told us about mounted combat with different classes that you guys have begun making your own inferences and already made prejudices that it would be wrong and clunky?....not to mention, there are a lot of people I know around here who are so set into the way they play the game that any sort of change (be it good or bad) becomes "against the playstyle"....do any of you know how pets are going to be implemented?....or just assuming the prejudice that they wont be in a good sense enough?
And about mounted archers or loremasters being unsuited?.....do please read the books and check out the parts about rohirrim archers....specifically mentioned by the way....part of Eomer's company that chased the orcs carrying Merry and Pippin to Isengard.....as well as Gandalf riding out on Shadowfax and using non-melee tactical attack on the Nazgul as he went to rescue Faramir and his retreating company....that is not 'jock' cavalry....there are MANY MANY more examples of all sorts and types of warriors on mounts....
So no...just because some people do not like to deviate even slightly from their playstyle or dont like to take the effort to learn anything new doesnt mean that the change is bad....nor does it mean that it is unsuited....you just need a fresh outlook to learn new stuff and enjoy it.....there were similar complaints on the forums from people who found it difficult to enjoy the champ skills while playing the champ Ori that they had to use in the session play "We Cannot Get Out".....complaining that they did not want to "learn" a new class for a quest which was compulsory.....seriously.....p eople need to accept a bit of change from time to time....its good
And you are reaching big time here. You haven't even played with Mounted Combat, so to claim that it will be entirely melee oriented or that LMs are unsuited to it is speculation and nothing more at this point.
And as another Lore-Master main I am looking forward to trying a whole new type of gameplay, and in particular seeing how the different classes perform on horseback.
I have to totaly agree with this one! Just for notice, Mongols had largest empire/country ever on this planet, and they are known for thier horseback archery.
Same few guys are talking trash about this expansion (and other pieces of game) in several threads, always negative, always just looking for the wrong things. I remember they whined for new game mechanics for RoI, how RoI sucks etc. They are still here, playing this game, with negative attitude for RoR. Conclusion? They will all play RoR and grind those LI-s more than average player in game, even though they are against grinding.
All we need now is, "Im not paying for RoR, im buying GW2". Guess what, sounds similar... ah yeah, i heard "Im not paying for RoI, im buying Star Wars"
So which game are you referring to, I have to assume you're obliquely accusing Turbine of copying something?
Originally Posted by Kerin_Eldar
So it's a reference to GW2, the next 'great thing', Okay.
Well, GW2 didn't invent this mechanic, so sniping at Turbine for copying from GW2 is a fail as well.
It's not sniping, just poitning out that this is a feature that has been asked for and it's good that it finally was taken into the game. And i didn't say that GW2 invented this mechanic, those are your words. I DID say that GW2 has this mechanic, but in that they are far from alone. To an extent even LotRO has this mechanic in PvMP. I'm just glad however that it finally is being introduced in PvE as well
And about mounted archers or loremasters being unsuited?.....do please read the books and check out the parts about rohirrim archers....specifically mentioned by the way....part of Eomer's company that chased the orcs carrying Merry and Pippin to Isengard.....as well as Gandalf riding out on Shadowfax and using non-melee tactical attack on the Nazgul as he went to rescue Faramir and his retreating company....that is not 'jock' cavalry....there are MANY MANY more examples of all sorts and types of warriors on mounts....
I have read the books, several times, so your reference to the Rohirrim archers isn't news to me.
The point about our characters being able to fight as ranged archers was already covered: we're not trained for it and it's entirely laughable to think a novice would leap on to a horse and successfully land Heart Seeker.
That preview doesn't mention anything about non-melee fighting being present, at all, so your point about Gandalf, which I would dispute as being evidence that a per-using/casting class like the Lore-Master will be viable, is moot since there is no evidence such a mechanic exists, assuming this preview is anything like comprehensive as Massively imply it is.
If indeed the beta IS only a short time away then this alpha must be pretty feature-complete if the beta is to be meaningful at all.
Last edited by Kerin_Eldar; Jul 13 2012 at 06:20 AM.
That didnt make sense, but nice try. Also, why would you neg rep me? It hurt my feelings . TBH, I lold when I saw neg rep, too funny.
The joke's on you then, because I don't have the ability to give neg. rep .. seems someone else agrees with me about your condescending replies to any negative comments about the game.
The joke's on you then, because I don't have the ability to give neg. rep .. seems someone else agrees with me about your condescending replies to any negative comments about the game.
We have a little misunderstanding then... If I'm condescending to anyone, it's to Turbine, lets clear that up. Check my post history if you think I love Turbine. LMAO at the thought. I was merely going by the "can you please leave the forum and this game forever???" That was ridiculous. Sorry, it was. I mean really? I wanted to slap you just for that line, without knowing anything about you. Two, noone said GW2 is going to destroy LotRO. Someones making assumptions... Noone said that Turbine stole that idea from GW2. Just a few clarifications. And Im farther from a fanboy than you could ever imagine .
This extremely limited preview of the mounted combat systems (which didn't seem to involve much combat) more or less matches my expectations. It sounds like everyone will be learning to play a brand new class, with a few extra skills that sound familiar to their own class thrown in.
Personally, I enjoy playing my minstrel, and I'm not particularly looking forward to playing a war-steed.
Like others, I'm concerned that this new game system has only been in development for 9 months and is still in an alpha quality stage. Turbine has been talking about mounted combat for years; I honestly expected it to be further along. I'm concerned that at this point, Turbine won't have time to get feedback from a wide variety of beta testers and make adjustments prior to launch.
We're only 7 weeks away. I feel bad for the Turbine developers caught in this crunch. Given the quote that:
'The team is "very confident" about getting the expansion done for September 5th.'
I hope the marketing team makes the right decision on whether it's more important to launch on schedule or to release a high quality, enjoyable implementation.
Yes, throughout history there have been specialised groups of archers who trained for mounted combat .. you'll also find for example the Phoenicians hand such troops .. however, we are not trained for that.
There isn't to my knowledge a single example of a Hobbit fighting on horse/pony back at tall, let alone wielding a bow in the entire LOTR book.
In the context of this game then yes, it's LAUGHABLE that our characters would expect to be proficient as mounted archers.
I would love to see carts added then you could pop a few hobbits in the back and they could fire arrows or bolts at will.
A drive by shooting squad.
But I need to make clear that mounted combat was never requested. It was one of the long term systems wich the former lead designer wanted to integrate somehow into the game. Ther was a point when the old devs said they want to develop mounted combat but its difficult to make it fun and working and maybe impossible for a game like lotro.
Since you make a big deal of of "making yourself clear" I take it you have some form of facts to backup your statement?
The LotRO Store thrive just fine without the mounted combat cosmetics, so your argument is kinda invalid, sorry . Sure it will bring an additional cashflow, but it's up to people to choose if they want to use it.
Also, just because a developer at some point stated that mounted combat wouldn't work, doesn't mean that alternatives, better ideas and such couldn't have emerged. Developers ARE afterall dependant on good ideas and maybe, JUST MAYBE a fresh set of eyes changed the situation.
Stop blaming everything on the store. The game is perfecly playable as a F2P using TPs. It's all about how much time you want to invest grinding points to unlock items, features and quest packs. Turbine IS afterall good at making store sales imo.
There isn't to my knowledge a single example of a Hobbit fighting on horse/pony back at tall
There isn't an example of Frodo taking a dump in the book either. Did he hold it all the way to Mordor?
According to the book, there weren't many Hobbit adventurers either. So why question the existence of a Hobbit riding a horse, when you should be questioning the presence of the Hobbit itself?
, let alone wielding a bow in the entire LOTR book.
2 I can remember right now:
1. Hobbit archers were present in the Battle of Bywater
2. It was rumored that a group of Hobbit Archers were sent to aid the Men of the North in their wars against Angmar.
In the context of this game then yes, it's LAUGHABLE that our characters would expect to be proficient as mounted archers.
The Class *trainers* are there for a reason. They'll train you how to ride hands-free and wield a bow, just like they taught you every maneuver you know in the art of archery.
Peaceguy
"With that, I ran back to Hobbiton, Land of the Noobs" - TSK
I'm a little apprehensive about the new mounted system......just how intuitive or difficult it might be to learn a whole new system of combat.
But that aside the one thing that I took from the article I did not like was "mounted combat IS RoR".
I was under the expectation that we would have a new area to explore, like before with a SECTION of it geared to mounted combat. This is implying that ALL OF IT. So if you were eager to explore a whole new are and only, casually, wanted to partake in mounted combat...you are out of luck.
[QUOTE=Zhira;6286065]Since you make a big deal of of "making yourself clear" I take it you have some form of facts to backup your statement?
The LotRO Store thrive just fine without the mounted combat cosmetics, so your argument is kinda invalid, sorry . Sure it will bring an additional cashflow, but it's up to people to choose if they want to use it.
Also, just because a developer at some point stated that mounted combat wouldn't work, doesn't mean that alternatives, better ideas and such couldn't have emerged. Developers ARE afterall dependant on good ideas and maybe, JUST MAYBE a fresh set of eyes changed the situation.
QUOTE]
I have been very excited about the mounted combat but also apprehensive at the same time. The article is quite nice, I am really impressed with the horse customisation and trait tree.
Of course it will all boil down to how it plays, i am a little disappointed that we get a new hot bar with skills once we are mounted. it would have been really really good if our characters sort of learnt how to use our skills whilst mounted but i totally understand why we don't.
As far as i have read we get 3 stances, then our horse gets a trait tree with skills, but the stances affect what skills we use (being offensive, defensive and utility) ? Slightly confused as i am not sure if the skill sets change per stance so the traited skills also change or remain the same.
The graphics engine will defo need an upgrade, so far when i run on my horse at max settings (no lag) things pop into play quite close to me which is distracting, so to run at a much faster speed, the distant imposters will need to pop into play much sooner.
As for character classes, I am looking forward to seeing how my lore-master pans out I in-vision myself as....
1. Hobbit archers were present in the Battle of Bywater
2. It was rumored that a group of Hobbit Archers were sent to aid the Men of the North in their wars against Angmar.
Yeah, but if you look more closely, you might see it was more like "Hobbits riding to war? Not really.. but eh, at least we have some exceptions using ponies in a book. (Oh, wait, to travel...) Hobbits as *mounted archers*? No way in hell".
It takes *years* to train solid archer. It takes considerably more to train mounted one, to master it - usually including childhood. I understand - to some extent - hobbit hunters - forests, game, talent for stealth etc. But imagine them spending *years* on mounted archery excercises... why... how.. I don't even...
This looks like a reather interesting addition to the game itself.
Horse cosmetics will be on the one hand the next big TP thing but are maybe the most advanced the game has to offer now.
But I need to make clear that mounted combat was never requested. It was one of the long term systems wich the former lead designer wanted to integrate somehow into the game. Ther was a point when the old devs said they want to develop mounted combat but its difficult to make it fun and working and maybe impossible for a game like lotro.
Now we get mounted combat. Not because they finnaly worked it out and made it function and fit into the game.
But because of the store. Not because its finally polished and ready for delivery. But because Horse skills and cosmetics are much needed to keep the store running.
original plan was like:
tier1: Character deleopment finised after level50
tier2: legendary weapons
tier3: mounted combat
but it was never clear how the game really would be further developed after SoA
I think this mounted combat are the remains of the half finished system from the past,
the one the old designers didnt see in a state to implement into the game
Obviously, since you have such a lot of precise information about the intentions and plans of Turbine's every action, one might wonder why they dint give you a blue name....
On a serious note....stop bringing every discussion to the store and apparel dummies angle.....we have specific threads for those....this is more about game mechanics and stuff.....rather keep the Store-hate and complaints out of it please.....
The Class *trainers* are there for a reason. They'll train you how to ride hands-free and wield a bow, just like they taught you every maneuver you know in the art of archery.
Yeah, but if you look more closely, you might see it was more like "Hobbits riding to war? Not really.. but eh, at least we have some exceptions using ponies in a book. (Oh, wait, to travel...) Hobbits as *mounted archers*? No way in hell".
It takes *years* to train solid archer. It takes considerably more to train mounted one, to master it - usually including childhood. I understand - to some extent - hobbit hunters - forests, game, talent for stealth etc. But imagine them spending *years* on mounted archery excercises... why... how.. I don't even...
It also takes years and years to learn stuff like Heartseeker and Rain of Arrows....it takes ages (if ever) to study Wisdom of the Council (Istari).....yet we all learn the unmounted versions fairly quickly.....yes we all want to stick to the lore....but lore is one thing....and reality is another.....this is not breaking "lore"...its just not "realistic" because its a game.....
2 I can remember right now:
1. Hobbit archers were present in the Battle of Bywater
2. It was rumored that a group of Hobbit Archers were sent to aid the Men of the North in their wars against Angmar.
Which are great example of hobbit archers on horseback, which refutes my argument that there weren't any .. er .. wait. Please read and quote the entire sentence, otherwise your selective quoting simply makes you look stupid.
It also takes years and years to learn stuff like Heartseeker and Rain of Arrows....it takes ages (if ever) to study Wisdom of the Council (Istari).....yet we all learn the unmounted versions fairly quickly.....yes we all want to stick to the lore....but lore is one thing....and reality is another.....this is not breaking "lore"...its just not "realistic" because its a game.....
While I am reluctant to touch LM side of the subject (not to mention hobbit =/= LM :P), all "unmounted" archery tricks are somehow ( really, really somehow ) covered by hunter as a profession, with some exceptionally talented. Hobbits did hunt game so their lifestyle provided natural opportunities to train. No mounted archery though - not to mention there was no need for that among peace-loving folk.
Sure, I agree game can trump lore - and I agree we already have many weird, make-believe or outright stupid things in-game. But is that enough of a reason to add *more* ? It feels like those famous apparel dummies - instead of implementing different versions and placing them in spots that actually made sense, they went with carbon-copy development style. Just like with those Hobbit Mongols :/
Sounds much as I feared, LOTRO's becoming a keyboard-mashing twitch-driven action adventure .. nothing in that long description of this mechanism appeals, I see nothing there remotely related to the playstyle I enjoy with my Lore-Master.
Actually, if you read the article (which I wonder if you did amongst all of your "fanboi" insulting) you'll see that they specifically address that, and talk about how it will NOT be a button mashing twitch mechanism but that it will be much more strategic, planning out your attacks before you deliver them. As someone who doesn't button mash well, I was very pleased with what I read there.
Originally Posted by Ferthcott
It takes *years* to train solid archer. It takes considerably more to train mounted one, to master it - usually including childhood. I understand - to some extent - hobbit hunters - forests, game, talent for stealth etc. But imagine them spending *years* on mounted archery excercises... why... how.. I don't even...
Probably not anywhere near as long or as much training as you might think. Real life example, my son joined his school's archery team this year- first time he ever picked up a bow he shot an 86 out of a possible 300. Within 2 months he was averaging 275 out of 300. He picked up how to shoot quite quickly. Adding more onto that repetoir (especially in the auspices of a game) wouldn't be taking years and years.
Another real life example- military snipers/ sharpshooters will be qualified within a couple of years of when they started basic training- including all of the other skills and abilities they need. It doesn't take a lifetime to learn, as you imply, but can be learned and picked up quickly when it is the focus, and certainly well within the parameters of a game world.
And again, you're overlooking the previously mentioned real life example of the Mongols.
New forums are coming!! Goto this link for details
Firefoot: Elendale (hunter) Galorlas (champ) Grimlaff (warden) Corny (warg)
This extremely limited preview of the mounted combat systems (which didn't seem to involve much combat) more or less matches my expectations. It sounds like everyone will be learning to play a brand new class, with a few extra skills that sound familiar to their own class thrown in..
I honestly expected it to be further along. I'm concerned that at this point, Turbine won't have time to get feedback from a wide variety of beta testers and make adjustments prior to launch.
.
We're only 7 weeks away. I feel bad for the Turbine developers caught in this crunch. Given the quote that:
'The team is "very confident" about getting the expansion done for September 5th.'
I hope the marketing team makes the right decision on whether it's more important to launch on schedule or to release a high quality, enjoyable implementation.
When/where did the playsession take place? (Aka, how long was the article embargoed?) Just because it uses language like 'next week to talk about beta invites does not mean that the entire thing wasn't something that took place on the floor at E3 or something similar.
Still it's amazing what kinds of UI polish you can do at the end if you've got all the back-end system stuff tweaked. Time will tell but I'm cautiously optimistic that it'll turn out well overall. ..
I'm still worried about the thought of suddenly needing 2+ Horse-LIs and having 0 available slots to work on them in unless I buy LI slots 7 & 8.
I mean no offense, but calling people who like mounted combat and are excited about it as "fanbois" is just so condescending.....
I didn't! It was in reference to calling for anyone who disagrees with their views and Turbine's Godlike demand that we all have to do it or forfeit the right to follow the main storyline, should quit whining and leave the forums for ever. And anyone who has that sort of attitude deserves to be called anything anyone wants to call them!
Okay Turbine, you sold me. I just bought the Legendary edition. I am now uber-excited for this expansion. Now show me that beta key!
I see that my Warden has exceptional potential here, what with their specializing in spears and javelins. I do wonder: will we be able to switch between heavy, medium, and light mounts like we can switch between skirmish soldier classes? If it works that way, this system will be *exactly* what I was hoping for. Otherwise, it'd be a bit frustrating for those classes, like the Warden, who can personally trait for either tanking or DPS, to be stuck with only one role for their steed.
But other than that, and the concern of having a new LI to grind, decon, grind, decon, to infinity, it's all good news to my ears.
As Ryvick said, I really hope you consider moving LIs over to a system like the War-steed one, where we customize them by switching traits out at an NPC (fully customizable cosmetics would be great, too). Then, finally, I think our weapons would take on a character of their own, comparable to Sting and Glamdring, but that's off-topic. Carry on.
Last edited by TheOneRinger; Jul 13 2012 at 09:47 AM.
About the loot-all option: Today when you want to loot, you have to be very close to the target to do so or else you get a "too far away" message.
With the loot-all option for mounted combat, at the speeds we'll be traveling and the distance we can cover quickly, there must be a significant difference in the code for how the loot will be acquired and delivered to your inventory.
Maybe this is part of the "tweaks to the engine" we've heard about. I hope it gets a good workout in Beta.
Well to ignore all the cross talk and discuss some interesting items I saw in the interview..
1) The LI sounds interesting and it will not be the Horseshoe. I can image the uproar if that was converted into an LI. I have kept all mine but I think at least 50% of the players tossed their already. Also I do not see this new LI being equipped with our weapons / class items. it is only for the war mount. So those worried about taking up or having to buy slots can rest easy.
2) Different speeds sounds good and having different turn radius based on your mount skills and speed will make it fell more real life.
3) I like the idea of the "Spun on" skill. That way it will not be just a twitch skill which will have to deal with connection issues, etc.
4) Open tapping does concern me a little. I can see how it will be needed for warbands if they end up being as tough as reported or planned. But I also see way too many range folks running by tossing out one arrow, one song, one debuff or what ever and riding off. They get the xp and the folks doing all the work get a lot less xp. The answer is to make sure they have to be close to the mob when it dies to gain xp. IMO anyways.
5) Auto looting sounds great for this zone. I hope it is not added everywhere.
6) Skill trees sound great. It will be interesting to try out the various mount types. I can see using the mount to help make up for a class weakness. I.E. a light mount for my tank so i do more dps. A heavy for my LM so I can survive longer, etc. Should be a fun couple of months of experimentation.
7) I like the idea of really wide open spaces. I really hope it ends up playing out that way.
8) Customization sounds great also. So most folks will be riding a different looking mount. REALLY GREAT!!!!
9) Yes we were are dismounted we take more damage, sound correct to me.
Well we also know that RoR will be about building our war mount. LI, points for the skill tree, etc. Everything else will be secondary. That will be cool. I can already see our instance cluster being about mounted combat in 3, 6 and 12 man groups!!!! Fantastic.
Overall it sounds like a great plan. How it will work will be interesting to see and I am just glad all my toons have the descendant deed finished.
Probably not anywhere near as long or as much training as you might think. Real life example, my son joined his school's archery team this year- first time he ever picked up a bow he shot an 86 out of a possible 300. Within 2 months he was averaging 275 out of 300. He picked up how to shoot quite quickly. Adding more onto that repetoir (especially in the auspices of a game) wouldn't be taking years and years.
I might have forgotten to mention we were talking about a) moving targets b) military engagements c) medieval-ish quality of equipment. Oh, and that small detail of people having to actually work (and "peasant-hard" work, we might add) between sessions. I stand by what I said. Medieval archers' training period could take even ten full years. Ask your son how many arrows can he fire in a minute, with a strenght that can allow to pierce ordinary armour, while mantaining accuracy. I am not imagining this stuff, it comes right from descriptions of those pewpewing English longbowmen.
Originally Posted by sirwillow
It doesn't take a lifetime to learn, as you imply, but can be learned and picked up quickly when it is the focus, and certainly well within the parameters of a game world.
I recall using "lifetime" in terms of "mounted archery", not "standard one" - not so easy to miss *that*. And, in Mongols' case I allegedly forgot about, again: training since childhood. Do you happen to know what "childhood" meant in those times? In most cases - younger than 7-8. And average lifespan - 30-ish. So... 10 years for not-mounted longbowmen, how many years left for mounted style?
Even mentioning hobbits and Mongols in the same line qualifies as a big joke - I guess you understood my line in previous post differently then :/
Last edited by Ferthcott; Jul 13 2012 at 10:13 AM.
Given that everyone else is so jazzed about how detailed and involved this new system is, it's ironic that this is exactly what's turning me off about it. I recently shelved my Warden after the revamp because I just don't have time to re-learn a class from scratch at the cap. Now they're essentially doing the same thing to the majority of the expansion content going forward. While that's great for those who have the time to learn the new system, I feel it's going to hamper my enjoyment of the expansion.
With the many new systems we've seen in the past, WHAT we play inside the game was all that changed, not HOW we played it. This system appears to be changing how the game is played in a significant portion of the post-75 game. I too was under the impression that mounted combat would be limited to a couple regions within the new Rohan zone, not that it would be required for most of the content there.
I'm glad others are so excited about this kind of...gamechanger, but it's greatly reduced my enthusiasm for the expansion.
Come on, 8/28...
Elendilmir: Arda Shrugged - Crickhollow: The Colonists
Which are great example of hobbit archers on horseback, which refutes my argument that there weren't any .. er .. wait. Please read and quote the entire sentence, otherwise your selective quoting simply makes you look stupid.
As for you, please read m post clearly, so you can spot those lines I wrote explaining what essentially means "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence". Just because it isn't in the book doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
PS: Speaking of looking stupid, do you not know how to write your reply to my post in one post, instead of making three different posts quoting different parts of my reply?
Peaceguy
"With that, I ran back to Hobbiton, Land of the Noobs" - TSK
We have a little misunderstanding then... If I'm condescending to anyone, it's to Turbine, lets clear that up. Check my post history if you think I love Turbine. LMAO at the thought. I was merely going by the "can you please leave the forum and this game forever???" That was ridiculous. Sorry, it was. I mean really? I wanted to slap you just for that line, without knowing anything about you. Two, noone said GW2 is going to destroy LotRO. Someones making assumptions... Noone said that Turbine stole that idea from GW2. Just a few clarifications. And Im farther from a fanboy than you could ever imagine .
Ah, you're one of those who are just sitting on their old played MMO forums and reply negative post about an MMO and then talking about GW2.
Why do you even bother reading this forum? Wait.. What.. Why do I even bother replying to you.
Maybe LM's can keep using their pets while mounted. I'm sure an eagle/raven/lynx/sabretooth/spirit could keep up with a horse. Not so sure about bear/swamp thingie (forget name) though :P
We'll just have to see how Turbine handles gameplay of classes who don't seem to relate to mounted combat as directly as melee classes (talking LM/RK/Minstrel/Burglar here...ever seen a stealthed horse? )
I'm confident they find a good way to deal with it.
As for you, please read m post clearly, so you can spot those lines I wrote explaining what essentially means "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence". Just because it isn't in the book doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
Using that logic I want a unicorn mount, just because they are not mentioned doesnt mean they didnt exist.
This method of combat is entirely melee-oriented, archers on horse-back are laughable and a class like the Lore-Master is entirely, totally unsuited to mounted combat and implausible in that context.
As another Lore-Master 'main' I too hate the whole idea and am intensely annoyed that this isn't some optional side-show that can be ignored by those who detest it because it's nothing like the playstyle they prefer.
Have you played it? If not, you have no idea how weak or powerful mounted archery or tactical attacks will be in comparison to melee. Nor do you know how the skill branches will affect your class' particular skill sets and how they will be adopted for mounted combat.
I would say play it before you make you make sweeping, generalized statements about mounted combat. But I won't, since you clearly have made up your mind that you are going to hate it, and I don't think anything is going to change that.
Maybe LM's can keep using their pets while mounted. I'm sure an eagle/raven/lynx/sabretooth/spirit could keep up with a horse. Not so sure about bear/swamp thingie (forget name) though :P
We'll just have to see how Turbine handles gameplay of classes who don't seem to relate to mounted combat as directly as melee classes (talking LM/RK/Minstrel/Burglar here...ever seen a stealthed horse? )
I'm confident they find a good way to deal with it.
Yes, I will be fascinated to see how my Rune Keeper's rock keeps pace with the horse too!
Using that logic I want a unicorn mount, just because they are not mentioned doesnt mean they didnt exist.
Hobbit Cavalry Archers are hardly as unreasonable as Unicorn mounts. Unicorns would break immersion, making the game world not seem like Middle-earth. But having Mordirith, the Dourhands and Lhu Brenin are okay for the game, even though not one of them were mentioned in the lore.
Peaceguy
"With that, I ran back to Hobbiton, Land of the Noobs" - TSK
This looks pretty cool. I think it's good that they ditched the horse-based attacks that are cool on paper but I had my doubts about how they'd fit into fast-moving combat. It also makes me more enthusiastic about having good weapons, as I was sort of afraid that mounted-combat dominated RoR would make your regular weapons not really as important, which would have been a shame.
I think it's cool that the skills are largely similar in effect between classes with different flavors depending on your class playstyle and abilities (for example, the one in the article about damage bonuses/bleeds when pursuing enemies from behind seems very burg-ish). It seems like more emphasis will be placed on choosing between the stances and the heavy, medium and light mounts, which will effectively make our choice of mount sort of like a sub-class system. I've always loved games where you could combine different classes in interesting ways, so I'm glad to see this come to LotRO.
I'm also happy to hear about the sense of speed, the Mount & Blade style manual gear shifting, and the strategic style of combat.
Cosmetics are a plus, especially since they made it sound like we might be able to use mounts we already have as cosmetics for our war steeds.
Grand Member Online status:
Reputation:
Originally Posted by Kraggy_Eldar
Senior Member Online status:
Reputation:
Grand Member Online status:
Grand Member Online status:
Senior Member Online status:
Grand Member Online status:
. TBH, I lold when I saw neg rep, too funny.
Senior Member Online status:
Member Online status:
Grand Member Online status:
Century Member Online status:
Senior Member Online status:
Member Online status:
Counter of Stairs Online status:
Senior Member Online status:
I do wonder: will we be able to switch between heavy, medium, and light mounts like we can switch between skirmish soldier classes? If it works that way, this system will be *exactly* what I was hoping for. Otherwise, it'd be a bit frustrating for those classes, like the Warden, who can personally trait for either tanking or DPS, to be stuck with only one role for their steed.
Grand Member Online status:
Counter of Stairs Online status:
Senior Member Online status:
Poster of Note Online status:
Senior Member Online status:
Grand Member Online status:
Reply With Quote
Posting Permissions
