Talk:Mount

Someone on the German wiki uploaded animated gifs of the mounts, and they look awesome! I'm not sure if we want to use them here, so I haven't uploaded them to the English wiki yet, but I thought I'd leave a heads-up. Links: Springer, Raptor, Skimmer, Jackal --Idris (talk) 16:51, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Those look awesome. I'd vote to have them here as well. -Darqam 19:41, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Seconded (or thirded?)! talk 20:05, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Three votes is good enough for me! You can now find them at File:<mount name> animation.gif. Have fun! --Idris (talk) 20:26, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Skills

Springer is Cannonball [&BgmkAAA=] (icon is File:798823.png), Skimmer is Barrel Roll [&BiWhAAA=] (icon is File:798824.png), Jackal is Pounce [&BuKiAAA=] (icon is File:798822.png) 178.209.42.84 21:13, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks a bunch for these! I've added everything you've mentioned. —Ventriloquist 23:10, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Plural

The reason why I created 'mounts' versus 'mount' is because plural feels more natural and intuitive to type, or even search for. Just by moving it to a singular would make the article feel weird e.g. "Mount is a creature used to traverse... It is available...". In my opinion, it lacks something that the current article has. On a quick glance, it could even trick readers into thinking there is a single mount available, at least the ones unfamiliar to the expansion. Just my 2 cents. —Ventriloquist 12:23, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Agreed. "Mounts" sounds much better than "mount". --Teletric.3821 (talk) 17:01, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

I really don't understand the reasoning. Having this article in the plural form is incredibly inconsistent, every single other game mechanic is in the singular form and that's the form people will often use to search. Why on earth should we have Mounts but not Weapons, Skills or Professions? It's not even like you can only have multiple mounts, you can only have one, so this decision just baffles me... Besides, you can make a plural link easily ([[Mount]]s), including in the introduction paragraph (there's nothing preventing us keeping the sentence the same). 06:20, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Mounts are different in this regard, just like we have Pets instead of Pet. With things like Profession, you can only have one per character while with mounts you have multiple per character. Dragon Hunter (talk) 19:03, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

I'm also a fan of the page as being a singular instead of as a plural. My main reason is for editing other pages, using the singular is easier/less awkard to do especially when, like Noxx stated above, we can make things plural by simply adding an "s" after the ]], and we already have it indicated as singular for Raptor (mount) and Griffon (mount). Additionally it's more consistent with the pages we already have: everything linked to on Template:Summon nav is a singular when easily you can have more than one of those out at a time, as well as having it be Pet and not "Pets". - Do_odleplex 19:19, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Grammatically speaking, mounts is the more appropriate version. For ease of linking, why not have a "Mount" redirect page? (EDIT: which I've now found out there already is) Fbody (talk) 20:56, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Erm, why? Oxford Dictionaries desribe mount as "A horse that is ridden or is available for riding", Merriam-Webster as "an act or instance of mounting; specifically: an opportunity to ride a horse in a race" or "a horse used for riding", Wiktionary as "An animal, usually a horse, used to ride on, unlike a draught horse". None of these mention anything about it being used primarily in the plural. Would you describe the raptor as "a mount" or as "a mounts"? 09:21, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

All of your examples either refer to a specific singular entity or are a verb instead of a noun. Think of it like a herd of horses or cattle. The singular term "Herd" encapsulates the pluralized concept of multiple horses or cows, due to its definition, it works. The page refers to the general concept, which (currently) includes 5 different entities. However, because gramatically and linguistically the singular term "Mount" does not work to encapsulate a pluralized concept, and there is no other legal synonym within the GW universe (except maybe "herd" which does not technically work here except as a parallel concept), you must go to the plural.

Additionally, ANet consistently refers to "Mounts" in its publications. It only uses the singular when referring to the use/behavior of a specific one (i.e. "The Raptor Mount...", "...this mount..."). I don't generally get into lore, but canonically speaking an argument can be made that the plural is the correct version, whether consistent with the rest of the wiki or not.Fbody (talk) 12:16, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

That's a very silly argument. It seems like you're saying that anything which you can have multiple instances of should have a pluralized article name. Yes, those definitions refer to a specific singular entity, and that's the whole point. You can have multiple "skills", "traits", "specializations", "weapons", "items", "trinkets", "gliders", "pets" and whatnot, but each of those has an article name in the singular. It still makes sense to talk about a single instance of them, and singular is the standard form – why should "mounts" be special, is there really no situation where you might want to talk about a singular mount? (You've already answered the question.) ArenaNet obviously uses the plural form because they're talking about the whole system at once, just like they're talking about "Specializations", "Guild Halls", "Raids" and "Dungeons", or even on the core game, "Releases", "Races", "Professions" and "Dynamic Events".

However, that doesn't make plural any more special than with basically any other article on a game mechanic in the entire game. You can unlock a single mount, ride a single mount, train a single mount, dye a single mount and in the future potentially skin a single mount. The singular is grammatically correct, the plural solves nothing other than increasing inconsistency and making it harder to link to the page. 18:01, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Minions

Is it worth noting on this page that using the Dismount skill preserves necromancer minions, but that using an Engage skill destroys them? Also, not sure if this is a bug or intended behavior, tbh. -- Timeoffire45 rawr 21:44, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

That sounds like a {{bug}} to me. :P ~ Fishrock ^(talk) 22:03, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Well mounting up on ele will kill any summoned elementals, so idk if it's actually a bug. -Darqam 22:20, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Let me clarify: the engage skill thing definitely sounds like a bug. Not sure about the rest. ~ Fishrock ^(talk) 07:22, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

So the note on minions being (sometimes) destroyed during dismount or engage may no longer be true. I don't remember reading anything about it in patch notes, but today I noticed that I can mount/dismount as fast as I want while I have minions equipped/summoned and they weren't being destroyed. Anyone else having the same results? I just want to get corroboration before changing the anomaly note to just say that necromancer minions aren't destroyed. ADDENDUM: mounting up will, however, still destroy jagged horrors summoned by Death Nova. -- Timeoffire45 rawr 12:04, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Image

The current image shows off the 4 mounts we had confirmation of, pre-release. Since then, the Path of Fire product page has been changed to include a version of the image we're using for this page, that also shows off the Griffon: https://guildwars2.staticwars.com/preload/pof/sections/mounts/img/intro/base.7e3a14c4.jpg

I would edit it in myself, but A) I can't get cleanly remove the background right now, as it's not a uniform black B) I don't know how people would react to me uploading the version with the black background

If anyone wants to either edit the black out, or confirm that uploading the background-inclusive version would be okay, feel free.

Engage Skill Keybinding

Using the 1 key when mounted activates the mount's Engage skill. This function cannot be remapped to another key. Separ (talk) 21:41, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

The Plural thing

So time has passed since the above conversation, and I got curious to know how things worked out in terms of linking to either "mount" or "mounts". So I had my bot go through all of the pages looking for that, and it came back with only 38 pages link directly to "mounts" or use [[mounts|mount]](30 for the former, 8 for the latter). Additionally around 185 currently link to "mount" which is roughly 87% of the total pages that come here. Based on that, it really might be better/more practical to move the page to "mount" seeing as the majority of edits got to the singular instead of the plural. - Do_odleplex 22:34, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Have you checked how many of them use [[Mount]]s? —Ventriloquist 22:48, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

41 pages. - Do_odleplex 23:36, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Out of the 185 you listed for 'mount'? In any case, I looked over through some pages, and 'mount' is seen in walkthroughs a lot ("Use your mount to..."), otheruses, and even templates, so I'm not opposed to switching it. I was, as you can see at the top, but since 'mount' is clearly in the majority, I'm fine with having it changed, just as long as the links and everything is cleaned up, but I've no doubt you'll be on it, Doodle. —Ventriloquist 08:45, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Methinks you know me too well in regards to link cleanup. (All done heh.) - Do_odleplex 01:47, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Unlock Image

So you know how when you get a mount unlocked, a box pops up with a nice little picture, a little blurb about the mount and letting you go to your masteries? I have a picture of this pop-up box for everybody except the Griffon which I don't have(yet), and was wondering if we could possibly use them somewhere? - Do_odleplex 00:16, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

I have the griffon one. We could add them to every gallery section for each mount, I'd recommend calling it "unlock window" or similar. —Ventriloquist 09:46, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Mount size comparison pictures needed

The addition of the Dreadnought Raptor skin has made it apparent that mounts of the same type can have drastically different sizes. The Dreadnought is huge compared to the normal mount, like Charr-size versus Human-size. I saw a different raptor mount skin that was a bit smaller than the normal raptor, but I'm not sure which one it was. There should be screenshots taken of multiple mounts of the same type (all the Raptor mounts, all the Springer mounts, etc.) standing next to each other in the same picture to make mount size apparent - or just have each screenshot of a mount skin standing next to a normal mount of its type. --Evilsofa (talk) 01:19, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Mount speed on ground vs in air (or over water)

Should page include a summary about how certain mounts move faster on land than others? E.g. Skimmer slows down over land but speeds up over water this is mentioned in abilities but seems like it's worth putting in another section too along with how Griffon and Skyscale don't run as fast on the ground as Raptor or Jackal, etc.

Feedback 2019/06/12: Missing Mount!

Hi, the "gem store" sorting button for premium mounts in the mount table doesn't show the 'Magnificent Hummingbird' under the skimmer section--only the 'Umbral Demon'. Otherwise, the page is super helpful! --69.158.88.221 14:21, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for noticing! I've added it to the list. —Ventriloquist 14:47, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Patch update borks

Links broken with - what was - link now showing as text. Broken images - but only some - in the table of mount skins. Hesione (talk) 19:08, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Refresh/purge the page few times and it will be fixed. ~SimeTalk 19:11, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

That works, had to purge it more times for the skin source links to work. I didn't think this page was in my cache. Is there a problem at the server end? Hesione (talk) 19:31, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

The wiki had a large update last week. It's broken a lot of templates and a lot of pages need manual refreshing. It's lovely.--Rain Spell (talk) 19:47, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Lack of guide to mounts

New players are forced to look offsite to find how to unlock mounts beyond a menial reference to masteries; this needs work and sadly I am one of the new players who's having to find this what should be documented information about how to play this game. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.242.21.250 (talk) at 20:39, 26 October 2020‎ (UTC).

Every mount has an overview for unlocking under Types and mechanics and a detailed, step-by-step guide on their pages. ~Sime 20:51, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

I think there is a slight problem with this page- people go table-blind, and this page is full of them. We could try and slim down the "Types and mechanics table" - does it really need the skills? Also the health feels irrelevant and should only be on the individual mount pages. -Chieftain Alex 22:15, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Mount Skins Names

Any rules about mount skin names ? Resplendent Avialan without "Raptor Skin" while on the other hand we have Synergetics Gyrocycle Roller Beetle Skin with "Roller Beetle Skin". Shouldnt it be all the same for all of them ? --DiegoDeLaHouska (talk) 20:56, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

The item was renamed in January of 2018 and we never caught it until you asked. That's all. - Do_odleplex 23:05, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Sure ? o_O. I was more poiting to it because I remember a discord conversation where it was decided that calling a raptor skin a raptor skin would be a bit useless when that information is there 4 times on the same page but alright xD. You got "Raptor Skin" in the name, item description, Item infobox as well as normal description of the page. But its alright any deriction is fine. Now just check every mount skin we have to make it clear everywhere ;) --DiegoDeLaHouska (talk) 23:52, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Mind you most of the skins are based off what is in game. So if there's an inconsistency in mount skin names, it's not on our end unless the skin got renamed and we didn't know. - Do_odleplex 00:27, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Yes, all mount pages are based on their ingame name. Just in case of the premium 2k mounts, they have technically two names: one of the skin and one of the consumable, so the page is named after the consumable and the second is made as a redirect. ~Sime 03:29, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Feedback 2022/06/02

Text at the start of the page mentions Mounts are creatures used to enhance travel through the Crystal Desert and the open world of Tyria. They are available exclusively through the Guild Wars 2: Path of Fire expansion. Two additional mounts can be obtained through the Living World Season 4.The Roller Beetle can be obtained in episode 3, Long Live the Lich, and the Skyscale can be obtained in episode 6, War Eternal. The Warclaw is available in WvW.

This is currently inaccurate as it doesn't mention Siege Turtle —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 110.226.120.30 (talk) at 05:13, 2 June 2022‎ (UTC).

Added the siege turtle to the intoduction. —Kvothe (talk) 13:27, 16 June 2022 (UTC)