CLOK BBS

I think I remember this being suggested before at some point but couldn't find it so here it is again.

How about adding some stealthier mounts (i.e. able to hide) for light weapon using professions like udemi, shar, utasa, and thieves. Maybe have the bonus go in reverse of the usual order:

Polearms: Bad
Chained: Below Average
Hafted: Average
Sword: Above average
Whip/improvised: Good
Staff: Great
Dagger/Brawl: Excellent

The idea is that heavier weapons would interfere more with one's riding/mobility on them and potentially imbalance the mount, so smaller weapons would be more advantageous.

Just as an example maybe large cats (panthers, pumas, sabretoothes, etc). Maybe have them available by using rec points through the various guilds and have guild specific mount types?

Right now being able to use a mount can potentially give some rather substantial mechanical advantages in combat. It would be nice if similar benefits were available for lighter weapon users.

I'm not sure this would necessarily be a good idea, in the same way it's not a good idea for an Elemancer to have access to every tier of every Elemancy. The con of riding a mount is being unable to utilise stealth (one of the reasons I actively choose not to bother with riding skill or a war horse), and the con of stealth is the fact that you are unable to use the bonuses for being mounted.

Lighter weapons already get a bonus to armor chinking (which will, I suspect, be immensely useful when poisons are implemented).

A war-trained mount can raise your offense substantially, while stealth can lower your opponent's defense substantially. Both can be extremely beneficial, and I think it's a good thing that they can't be used together. They've both got pros and cons to them, and I think they balance out nicely.

While stealth can lower defenses significantly, it does not provide a direct boost to combat skills that allows one to grow in combat at an accelerated rate. Hiding is very limited in many ways and certainly not a constant bonus, but a skill just like any other, that must be specifically trained. Characters who utilize stealth will take far more damage from hits due to inability to use heavier armors and still maintain the ability. I think stealth is very well balanced as is.

When simply mounting an animal is capable of raising one's offensive capabilities by amounts greater than 500 ranks on a constant basis, invalidate some offensive abilities of others, and provide other significant bonuses and even new abilities like charge and trample, it seems as if it imbalances things a bit to offer these significant advantages to a portion of the player base while excluding other guilds simply because their combat RELIES on stealth strategies.

Stealth is not the ultimate ability that everyone makes it out to be. There are a lot of factors that often prevent it from being successful whether room based (plains, light area, etc.) or having to do with the fact that perception does not need to be anywhere near one's stealth in order to notice hiding. Most of the time (unless you have shadow strike AND its successful) you leave yourself out in the open and prone to taking hits (with light armor or no armor) and also likely engaged and unable to hide again until other measures are taken. It's also difficult to train and become good at (unlike riding).

I think it's important to point out that if a stealth attack is actually successful (all the way or even partially), you will likely hit regardless of your attack strength. Stealth mounts would be a nice addition for the times stealth fails, as it shouldn't really make a difference otherwise. I really was unaware that the balance for stealth was mounts. This seems a bit odd as I thought inability to wear heavy armor and reduce damage as well as other limiting factors with stealth itself is a big enough balancing factor.

Kian, I don't really think armor chink should factors in as it's something that occurs after the strike is made and does not influence the chance of the strike hitting itself. It's simply an advantage of using light weapons, but heavier weapons still do more damage even without armor chink.

If you think that the idea doesn't make sense from a mechanical standpoint, I really don't know what to say to that. I just simply disagree. If it's not in your vision of the world, I won't continue to suggest it (for another few weeks at least). Thanks.

The wonderful thing about CLOK is that you CAN do anything. Regardless of guild.

Collins is a rather prime example. He's a trader with no special combat skills, but from the times I've spied on him you really do not want to be on the recieving end of his mounted charge. Any assassin could do the same if they wanted to. Just because we give you a guild skill does in no way 'limit' you. It's an advantage you can choose to use or not.

That said, I agree with Rias. These are entirely seperate mechanics.

Also, I really don't see the logic behind a 'stealthed' mount. I don't imagine a big horse, or even a big cat or dog being nearly stealthy enough to be effective. Using stealth you have to get close to your target. That just isn't going to happen without being able to crouch, crawl or move very slowly when necessary.

Collins is a trader and does not utilize stealth. He does get a ridiculously large attack bonus, I'm sure, from using a mount and this certainly doesn't interfere with the overall combat strategy he is entirely geared for. His use of a horse is absolutely logical and certainly not an example of atypical behavior.

Lions already hide in game. They're quite stealthy.

Honestly, you've never seen a big cat stalk prey on nat geo? Large stealthy predators as mounts would seem very logical to me. They can get amazing close to their prey without being seen. Ambush predators rely on this entirely. They do rely on crouching, crawling, and moving very slowly to get close (which I'm sure we as player characters do as well when hiding). Taming them might be a different story entirely though...

Assuming there are stealthy mounts, how would this be balanced? You would be receiving these bonuses to combat on top of the bonus of being stealthy. Acarin, you could easily use a war trained mount, but you would have to give up the aspect of stealth (which you've already said isn't apparently that great).

On top of that, just because a mount is a naturally stealthy hunter doesn't mean you'd get a bonus to fighting barehanded on it. Or with daggers, or whips, or anything of the nature. That doesn't make sense and seems to just be an arbitrary bonus for the heck of a bonus.

I actually agree with you. There is a rather arbitrary bonus which mounted players now enjoy. Providing stealth mounts would balance that out.

There is, however, no equivalent arbitrary bonus that stealth provides. There is a potential pushdown when you attack from hiding. Stealth is great but it is not an arbitrary direct bonus like mounted players receive. I never said I dislike stealth and I certainly would not give up using it.

Stealth is, however, already balanced by perception which is a skill freely available to all and capable of removing the pushdown from stealth. It's powerful, but it's something that has to be developed just like everything else. Do you think it needs further balancing, Kian?

Mounts aren't intended to be the balance to stealth. It's just that I'm happy with the balance there currently is of, "You can use a mount, or you can use stealth, but not both."

[quote=KianTheArcher]Assuming there are stealthy mounts, how would this be balanced? You would be receiving these bonuses to combat on top of the bonus of being stealthy. Acarin, you could easily use a war trained mount, but you would have to give up the aspect of stealth (which you've already said isn't apparently that great).

On top of that, just because a mount is a naturally stealthy hunter doesn't mean you'd get a bonus to fighting barehanded on it. Or with daggers, or whips, or anything of the nature. That doesn't make sense and seems to just be an arbitrary bonus for the heck of a bonus.[/quote]

Not to defend Acarin, but I think the deal breaker for him is that his class depends on stealth. It's not something he wants to give up willy-nilly just because he *can*. If mounted combat does so much damage that Acarin actually has to make that choice to give up stealth on a regular basis just to get extra damage, then maybe mounted combat damage or assassin damage needs to be looked at. Otherwise, I think Acarin just needs to look at mounts as incompatible with his class.

Stealth, perception, mounts and dodge are available to everyone. The same as any other skill(magic aside), so I really don't see your point. Stealth is very powerful, it makes it so you can't miss!

You are asking for mechanics which don't make sense. How in the world are you going to ride a mountain lion(cougar)? They are not that big, and having a 200lbs (average) person riding them would significantly slow down even a large 'fantasy world' cat as it tried to sneak about.

At this point you're making requests that don't make sense. You've been beat up a few times by other players recently who have been mounted, and I can see that's frustrating. My advise is to adjust your strategy. I just gave you a way to try to dismount people rather effectively (you start with slight position on a mounted target with grapple, since you can't jab someone who's mounted), I would think you would be cheering.

The bonuses to mounted combat, currently, aren't arbitrary. Fighting on horseback with a large weapon is a superior strategy then to standing around waving daggers and trying to kick people in the face. Hence, things like pikes were created to combat horseback fighters. The bonuses to stealth based mounts are arbitrary because they don't actually make sense. It's just bonuses for the heck of having a bonus, rather than making sense.

Grapple can't be executed from hiding can it? I believe I would have to exit hiding to perform it and therefore be exposed to massively increased attack rolls. Thanks for letting me know though, as I was also unaware that this mechanic existed and that you start in slight position for mounted targets.

As you're probably aware Landion, some sort of balance with regards to mounts is something I have been requesting for a very long time now. It's a little annoying that by virtue of jumping on a horse, someone who isn't able to hit me normally (at least not easily) is able to then hit me practically every time and also remove any chance I have of using an otherwise effective ability such as cthroat or choke (considering the current ineffective nature of the brawling system).

I have been asking for something to deal with these ridiculous mounts for a long time now, so thanks.

[quote=Rias]Mounts aren't intended to be the balance to stealth. It's just that I'm happy with the balance there currently is of, "You can use a mount, or you can use stealth, but not both."[/quote]

If that's the case, would it be possible for you to re-evaluate the benefits of using a mount (for example, capping the actual increase in M they can provide to something reasonable) as they seem to imbalance attack rolls and combat in general severely and come with enough benefits without providing that massive attack multiplier. One person I asked about the bonus they received told me they were getting around 500 to melee accuracy from being mounted. I'm sorry, but that's balanced how? These are not inconsequential increases.

Lastly: Kian, while I respect your opinion and still disagree with you, I'm beginning to think that you make posts in most of the topics I start simply to grief me. I really do hope that is not the case.

It's perfectly logical for someone to be able to jump on a horse and suddenly have better attack, and defenses from someone trying to sneak up on them and hit them with a dagger to the throat.

A lot of time, thought and effort goes into making sure the game is balanced. This goes for every guild, the Claw included. The Claw is not going to be the 'best' in every situation, nor is a mercenary, nor is an archer, nor is a thief or a sorcerer.

Each offers a unique take on combat, and each have weaknesses and strengths.

As far as unarmed combat(grapple, etc) and stealth, I will look at adjusting stealth/ambush bonus to such attacks... but I can't promise exactly how if if that will pan out. The important thing to realize is that all of these mechanics are still being adjusted and added too.

- Cut throat has been adjusted recently to the positive.
- Unarmed combat is still needs a lot of work and polish.

Small adjustments like these and polish can make a world of a difference as compared to adding an unrealistic feature to the game. Having stealthed mounts isn't going to solve what more logical features, adjustments, guild abilities and polish can help balance further.

Things I'm willing to look at instead?

- Possibly removing the channel requirement for shadow step, and only requiring shadow cloak to be active for use. (This is due to changes in channeling energy usage since this was implemented.)

- A single, high energy attack which raises your damage and accuracy, but leaves you vulnerable afterward. (No promises, but it's been on my mind as an assassination type move.)

I've worked hard to get my skills (all of them, not just a couple) to where they are, and riding is in that group. Dwaedn also have a good deal of self buffs, which I always make sure to use in combat. It's not as though I'm just riding around on a war horse with almost no training, plus I use hafted weapons (which do a lot of damage on their own), and the weapons are often masterfully crafted.

[quote=Acarin]Lastly: Kian, while I respect your opinion and still disagree with you, I'm beginning to think that you make posts in most of the topics I start simply to grief me. I really do hope that is not the case.[/quote]


I don't post for the sake of griefing. I'm simply stating my thoughts, and my thoughts are that stealthy mounts would 1.)be incredibly unbalanced, and 2.) make absolutely no sense in regards to giving a bonus to brawling/daggers.

There's no reason that riding around on a panther should allow you to punch a target better, or stab them with a dagger. From what I can gather, the bonus given to mounted combat users with larger weapons comes from logic. You have a big axe, you use the high ground of a trained war mount (in conjunction with being TRAINED to fight on a mount) to get an advantage over your opponent. There is a reason there weren't people typically running around large scale battles with small weapons successfully taking on a soldier trained to fight on horse back, taking advantage of something like a spear or a long handled axe or hammer.

Yes, the 15% accuracy and damage bonus from a masterful weapon adds up, especially when using a high damage, high powered charge.

Evelyn, I realize you've worked hard for your skills and I'm not saying you didn't. It's not damage either as I expect to die in one hit to any massive weapon. It's also not just an imbalance I've seen with you, but I've had the same situation occur with Collins, Alexander, and Gad. Riding is an easy skill to earn. You get it simply by moving and you can earn it at the same time you are also getting gains to attack. The growth rate is therefore a lot higher than trying to earn a weapon skill alone. That is a huge issue I have with it (among other things). I've been killed by a lot of mounted players before just by virtue of them being mounted. While I don't mind that, I think it's extremely imbalanced that stealthy characters are unable to utilize this mechanic without sacrificing their entire strategy. Instead of whining and suggesting a nerf, I was simply trying to suggest a way that this GIANT imbalance could be rectified. Apparently it was not well taken... so I'll withdraw on it after this post... maybe.

I do, however, think that it's strange that you're stating that a big cat would not be reasonable to ride when a wolf which weighs significantly less than some of the big cats is ridable. Even if it's a giant imaginary type of wolf (since this is a fantasy game), why couldn't the same be done with cats or some other stealthy animal of choice?

Kian, my logic behind boosting smaller weapons would be that A) Larger weapons would imbalance the creature and sacrifice grip that could be better used controlling it and B) The critter would be fast and very capable of bringing one into close range and therefore provide momentum to speed up these close up attacks. I see it as relatively logical even if you do not.

Now then... moving on. Shouldn't mounts provide a decrease to dodge as they may increase speed but would certainly compromise maneuvability. The path of a horse is generally relatively predictable as they can't make sharp turns, jump to the side, etc. If a large bonus to accuracy of attack makes sense (and I don't think riding on horseback helps with accuracy as much as damage by creating momentum irl), then wouldn't a huge decrease in dodge also make sense. You'd likely have to parry almost exclusively once you were in range in order to defend on a horse. You certainly shouldn't be able to defend better. An archer would be quite effective against a mounted foe, for example since the rider can't move out of the way quickly. I really don't understand how being on a horse improves defenses other than the argument of reach and being elevated (And you have the same reach with a polearm regardless of whether you are mounted or not). If you're engage with a horse and rider, they're not really moving much...

Not everything in this game is fully logical (Sorry Rias), partly due to alpha and partly due to it being impossible to have everything perfectly logical.

Landion, I do appreciate your recent changes to Shar. This is not a Shar issue exclusively though.
We've talked in the past about how no class is supposed to be the best and I've never thought they should, but I certainly think there should be some moderate degree of balance, which there is currently not (again likely due to being in alpha among other things). I don't want to make this about Shar at all, so I'll comment on the rest of your post on the Shar board.

If your strategy isn't working against mounted characters, then you should probably reevaluate your strategy. Otherwise, maybe you just aren't meant to stand toe to toe with every single instance.

I'm made almost completely useless if someone gets in close range to me, on Kian, because I use a bow. That doesn't mean I think there should be a way to counter this every single time. Dirt kick, while useful combined with guerrilla tactics, often doesn't work as well as I would like, and because of this I'm forced to flee if I can't get back to ranged in a round or two.

You can do considerable damage to most lightly armored targets. You have some of the better combat oriented abilities from two guilds (thieves and monks), and you have specialised stealth abilities. Just because you can't fight people that are mounted doesn't mean that mounted combat is broken.

Kian, you don't really know what you're talking about when it comes to Shar skills.
We don't do considerable damage to most light targets. You're completely wrong. The only ability we have now that can is cthroat following the very recent change and our inability to do damage is the big problem since we are intended to be a purely offensive class. We don't have the better combat abilities of thieves and monks as you claim although we have some that are very useful. We have armor chink and shadow strike from thieves and blade slap and arrow deflection from monks. Our specialized stealth abilities as you call them are shadow strike (already meantioned) and cloak of shadows (and possibly shadow orb if this can be considered one). What is the point in stating that we have those abilities. Again, I feel like this is intended to grief me, especially since I just stated that this has nothing to do with what Shar abilities I have and more to do with an imbalance which I was going to drop until you felt the need to post again.

You're an udemi if I'm not mistaken and could just as easily pick up a staff (which you have abilities for) and be effective in melee combat. You have the option to do it without compromising your combat. I do not on a mount nor do you if you decide to use a mount. It's pretty clear that stealth mounts will never happen. Fine. You don't need to give me a lecture on strategy though as I'm already well aware of what's effective and what's not with my own guild. Your abilities not working on occasion have nothing to do with what we were talking about.

None of this has any bearing on mounted combat. And yes, now that there's grapple apparently brawlers actually can deal with mounted targets. If you'll notice, I suggested adding stealth mounts not removing all mounts. This was not to deal with other mounted characters but to give everyone a chance to gain the same sort of advantages. Not going to happen. Its over. Rias, can you please close this thread before this spirals down as it usually does when Kian starts arguing with me in order to get a reaction?

Chuck Norris has super kicks.

I wish people would stop bring up monks and combat in this thread. We really don't have too many offensive capabilities beyond stone fist. That guild isn't really meant to be combat oriented, almost all of our abilities are focused on keeping a monk safe. Not kicking ass.

Truth. Monks have no offensive combat abilities. You do have a couple cool defensive ones though (3 now I think) and some relatively effective strategies against nethrim.

Acarin wrote: Not everything in this game is fully logical (Sorry Rias), partly due to alpha and partly due to it being impossible to have everything perfectly logical.

This doesn't justify adding new and totally illogical aspects.

This is not a Shar issue exclusively though.

This isn't an issue at all. This is a fact that that Rias and myself have stated multiple times.

Let me make it easy for you and sum up the thread; There won't be stealthy mounts.

I think stealthy pets more widely available (maybe through an animal taming skill?) would be more appropriate and also help stealthy people counter the lack of mount usage?