Alternative way to fix mount sound spam

    • Alternative way to fix mount sound spam

      Instead of changing the mount sounds themselves, why not change the behavior that results in spamming annoying mount sounds.

      Since the behavior of solo healers is being nerfed with a debuff for spamming, why not do the same for mounting/dismounting? The way it could work is that after so many times mounting/dismounting in a certain time frame subject to balance, for a time, that continues as long as the spamming is attempted, it takes longer to mount up, even when the mount is sitting next to you. It could be called getting saddle sore.

      The intended results would be to reduce the annoying sounds of some mounts by discouraging spamming their use, and to encourage more varied play for certain activities.

      Edit: As this thread has been attacked heavily by those that either don't like the idea, or me, I've had to take defensive measures to try to get a proper opinion that isn't an ad-hominem attack or shade without any logic behind it. That said, it would be easier to TLDR to the end and up to the latest recap post.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Dc1a0 ().

    • Yeqqi wrote:

      Terrible suggestion.
      You could actually add some context to you're terrible reply to give it at least a little weight couldn't you?

      A few reasons it's a good suggestion:
      It will discourage the misuse of a mechanic designed for another purpose
      In discouraging said misuse, naturally the sound spam will be lessened.
      It will allow for the re-use of code (namely the healing sickness check at least) which is always good for the code base.
      It will also improve the economy by reducing over-supply (due to misuse of a mechanic) which will raise profits for gathers and crafters alike as the demand increases for the lessened supply.
    • Dc1a0 wrote:

      The way it could work is that after so many times mounting/dismounting in a certain time frame subject to balance, for a time, that continues as long as the spamming is attempted, it takes longer to mount up, even when the mount is sitting next to you. It could be called getting saddle sore.
      While your suggestions affect gameplay mechanic - it is horrible idea , to just fix annoying sound.
    • Yeqqi wrote:

      I really don't have any arguments against this, but I'll say it's terrible, so that I can keep misusing mechanics meant for another purpose.
      Fixed it for you!


      Equart wrote:

      Dc1a0 wrote:

      The way it could work is that after so many times mounting/dismounting in a certain time frame subject to balance, for a time, that continues as long as the spamming is attempted, it takes longer to mount up, even when the mount is sitting next to you. It could be called getting saddle sore.
      While your suggestions affect gameplay mechanic - it is horrible idea , to just fix annoying sound.
      I don't think so narrowly as that. My suggestion had multiple facets from inception. If you had read before replying, you'd see some of them here:

      Dc1a0 wrote:

      A few reasons it's a good suggestion:
      It will discourage the misuse of a mechanic designed for another purpose
      In discouraging said misuse, naturally the sound spam will be lessened.
      It will allow for the re-use of code (namely the healing sickness check at least) which is always good for the code base.
      It will also improve the economy by reducing over-supply (due to misuse of a mechanic) which will raise profits for gathers and crafters alike as the demand increases for the lessened supply.
      So see? The idea was never just about ONE thing.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Dc1a0 ().

    • Another random thought, Could instead make anyone with an ox equipped red when they enter a yellow zone. That could solve some of the problems too. Not sure how many functions it could re-use, so that benefit would probably be excluded with this other idea.
    • So this non combat mount idea is being based around a combat healer change? Makes so much sense. Deft logic.

      Then you want to impose restrictions to mounting as a result.

      Why not just suggest a mount sounds in town toggle, that is far simpler without some arbitrary implications that have effects far outside the area you’re bothered about.
    • owensssss wrote:

      So this non combat mount idea is being based around a combat healer change? Makes so much sense. Deft logic.

      Then you want to impose restrictions to mounting as a result.

      Why not just suggest a mount sounds in town toggle, that is far simpler without some arbitrary implications that have effects far outside the area you’re bothered about.
      Oh come now, you're at least a little brighter than that. The title isn't all I'm bothered about. Perhaps if you'd have read the whole thread with more than the most basic reading comprehension skills, you'd have realized that.

      By the way, on a mostly unrelated note; between the comments you make and that avatar picture- By any chance, is your name Craig? You seem like a Craig I used to be acquainted with once upon a time.
    • owensssss wrote:

      Be warned OP just calls pple wrong.

      Prolly cause he’s mentally deficient idk. Hard to tell these days.
      Only when they are. At any time, you can realize that your statement was for yourself if you go back and read the thread properly with the intention to understand, rather than just raise your post count :)

      Your conclusion is funny given your responses here and elsewhere.
    • Figure it's worth a shot, given some of the other decisions SBI has made since I was here. This one would actually improve the game, even for people not directly affected, like you.

      That said, if you think that defending an idea, especially against replies that either don't seem to understand, or do understand but disagree with no logical argument other than a malicious intent to derail the thread, is calling them wrong, then, I suppose, I suppose we'll just have to accept that as the limit of your understanding.