Curse

Star_Jewel · Mar 22, 2011, 11:37 AM // 11:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lasai

Not a lot different than someone complaining about someone pulling out their foreign promotion or magazine minipet.

Mm, but for the right amount of ectos, the mini can be traded. Mercenary heroes cannot (and should not). But for those who don't want to pay the cash for the magazine or the collector's edition for the minipet, there are ways to obtain the item in game for in game effort/currency.

Quote:

I also have 15 char slots. I can create a permanent post char of every profession in game, something no one with stock slots can, maintain two perma pre, and have a pvp char as well. All paid for "advantages" under your model.. you going to ask for free Char slots as well?

I do think it was rather mean of them to have 10 professions, but only 8 gratis slots after buying the full set. I have wondered why EoTN didn't offer the last 2 slots. But I'm guessing paid slots were already available by then.

gremlin · Mar 22, 2011, 12:15 PM // 12:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by ensoriki

If they give everyone that right, I want a refund on my Mercenaries. I don't give a damn about cosmetic anything.

True

Once they made the decision to sell heroes giving away more than one maybe two more ceased to be an option or at least a fair one.

BTW I didn't buy merc and have no intention of doing so.

chessyang · Mar 22, 2011, 12:16 PM // 12:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by novawhiz

Why can the next guy who payed $45 get to run 7 monks, while i can't?[/B]

hum....... isn't that like saying "why does the next guy have more storage then me? i paid for all the same content but have 12( is that right?) where the other guy paid $20 for 4 slot get 12 + 4 toons to use as storage?

If i want more storage i have to ->pay<- for it. If you( or anyone) wants 7 monk you have to ->pay<- for it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Improvavel

because that someone has merc heroes as opposed to them that don't have".

ahhhh ok ok i get it. But can't you just use the 7 heroes and NO Merch Heroes for DOA?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Improvavel

I would like at least other mechanics to be able to accomplish similar speeds.

that my thing. what is the differences if your finish it 30 mins faster then me? I take 3 hours, you take 1.5 hours? At the end it gets done. why does speed have to matter if your soloing it?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaida the Heartless

I paid for a few Mercs. Price was a bit steep, but I like to think of it as supporting Anet. I like Guild Wars. I like the work and effort that was put into it. I like the way Anet has treated it's community.

That's the thing John was looking for under his Random Thoughs.

http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Feedback:John_Stumme

Quote:

When I see people on the forums posting things like "I'll buy this because I want to support ArenaNet," (and there have been a number of you I've seen) I feel a bit of pride, because it tells me that we've done things right.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gremlin

I believe that everyone who went to PAX and played the gw2 demo has an unfair advantage over me when it comes to competing in the game.

Ditto!

Also "Jesus sword." Never seen one ingame yet. Yeah lots of SS here on guru but never in game. I feel bad for all those foes who come to it's blade and die 5 seconds faster. You guys are funny.

gremlin · Mar 22, 2011, 12:32 PM // 12:32

I believe that everyone who went to PAX and played the gw2 demo has an unfair advantage over me when it comes to competing in the game.

This was a microtransaction that was not cosmetic it will give them an advantage over me which I consider unfair.
Please give me plane tickets for all future events to ensure a fair playing field.

Improvavel · Mar 22, 2011, 01:14 PM // 13:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by novawhiz

They are better because they allow you to create team setups that you can't do with heroes because you are limited to the hero professions they have made.

Its as simple as that. That is the advantage/unfairness/whatever you wanna call it. It doesn't matter how MH-only team builds compare with hero team builds. It doesn't matter which builds become the new meta. It doesn't matter how some random ppl in the Hero Subforum are fairing with/without MH.

All that matters, is that if i want to create some hero team setup (like 7 monks, or 4 paragons, or 3 mesmers, or 1000 necros, or 4 dervishes), then i can't without paying money. It doesn't matter if those team builds i create are better than the next guy's hero-only setup.

Daesu and others keep asking for 'proof' of how MH are better than heroes. Thats the proof right there. People who payed for MH can now make whatever hero team builds they want, while those who didnt pay are still restricted. It doesn't matter if someone's done DoA with MH faster than someone else with only heroes. It doesn't matter if you or others think that some certain hero setup is still better than any MH setup. It doesn't matter if 7 necroes are completely useless. I don't know how i can make myself more clear. The 'advantage' is being able to run anything hero setup you want because you payed. It has nothing to do with how MH are faster or better or stronger or safer or anything. I don't care if running 7 monks is 100000 times slower than running 2rit/3nec/2monks. Why can the next guy who payed $45 get to run 7 monks, while i can't?

Why can I have this hamburger and you can't?

Because I paid for it. You want one, you will have to pay for it.

Actually this is quite like "Why is that guy fries and coke bigger than mine? I bought the same menu!" "He payed to have extra fries and more coke.".

You bought Guild Wars but you certainly didn't buy mercenary hero slots - they didn't even existed.

The fact is you look at the merc heroes and you like the advantages of it but you don't think it is worth the money asked.

I know, micro transactions and DLCs in games are annoying in psychological terms. We are like "what the RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GO - I paid for the game and now there is a new thing in it that I have to pay for?!?!". And companies know about that - costumes are useless in terms of game play mechanics but it is so "I want that flaming pumpkin head!".

But the reality is other people having mercenary heroes doesn't change your game in any way. It is still the same game and even got better with 7 heroes update.

The argument you are presenting could be someone saying "Another frigging Guild Wars campaign?!?!? Frigging people bringing heroes and their damn pve-only skills and paragons and rits to my prophecies! It is unfair. They have an advantage! Just because they paid forit!".

Star_Jewel · Mar 22, 2011, 01:54 PM // 13:54

Improvavel - I want to say off the bat that I appreciate what you're bringing to this thread. I may not agree with all you have to say, but you do give me things to think about.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Improvavel

Why can I have this hamburger and you can't?

Because I paid for it. You want one, you will have to pay for it.

Actually this is quite like "Why is that guy fries and coke bigger than mine? I bought the same menu!" "He payed to have extra fries and more coke.".

This is an interesting analogy. But I think for those who think the mercenary heroes are unfair, it's like if the restaurant charged a flat fee for the burger itself, but the bun -- that's extra. "How come yours comes with a bun?" "I paid extra for it." I think what this mainly comes down to is what should be included as a part of the game, which is a free to play model, and what should be considered an "extra goody" that is fair to charge for.

We also have the very dynamic issue of personal thresholds of "reasonable pricing."

Quote:

The argument you are presenting could be someone saying "Another frigging Guild Wars campaign?!?!? Frigging people bringing heroes and their damn pve-only skills and paragons and rits to my prophecies! It is unfair. They have an advantage! Just because they paid forit!".

The "campaign as advantage" comparison is the one I do agree with. The difference, however, in my opinion is this: Competitive pricing. One doesn't have to pay MSRP for e.g. Nightfall, if they want the benefits. Wait long enough and various retailers eventually drop their prices. The biggest problem I have with advantages (however significant they may be) being sold in the cash shop is that NC controls the product and the price exclusively. There is no competitive pricing. Except for the rare 1/2 off sale (which, at their discretion, could exclude Mercenary Packs if they so desired -- and if they're selling well to people who eagerly gobble them up, they could make that decision), one has no choice but to pay the MSRP for the benefit.

Daesu · Mar 22, 2011, 03:16 PM // 15:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by lemming

orly

Good enough, yes. But "best?" Empirically? Really?

Again, I'm not claiming that the differences are huge - refer to my previous post if you need. I'm in full accordance with you that in all possible hypothetical situations, However, the difference between having no mercenary heroes and having five of them is from less than 888,030 to 10,000,000 potential teams. To claim that in no situations will that elevenfold difference in variety be relevant is incredibly bold.

Which was why I said there is no obvious advantage for having merc heroes.

Quote:

(Also, since someone else brought it up, even if in the current state of balance, you'll never need more than three of any class, that doesn't necessarily hold for the future.)

We can speculate on what the future holds, but mere speculation holds no weight in an argument.

Quote:

It'd be a lot easier to show you more evidence of mercenary heroes making a difference if, you know, everyone had them.

They are probably not going to give everyone 8 free merc heroes. So even if they give everyone ONE free merc hero, then people would complain about others who can afford 3 or 8 having an unfair advantage over them.

Quote:

The difference is that the Fire Imp (or preorder weapons, or skill unlocks) don't increase the power cap except at levels below 20, which I believe we can agree as being, in the long run, trivial.

The time it takes for a pre-searing character to level up to 20 is probably much longer than it takes for them to finish a campaign in post searing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Star_Jewel

I think what this mainly comes down to is what should be included as a part of the game, which is a free to play model, and what should be considered an "extra goody" that is fair to charge for.

When we bought this game, we knew that merc heroes were not supported and we knew what we would get.

Now that ANet has included merc heroes as an optional purchasable feature, people seems to demand that they should get them for free also.

Taking that burger analogy further, you paid $5 for just a burger and a coke, then after they have added donuts to the menu as an optional purchasable item, some you are saying hey I paid you $5 before, you should include the donuts too. And if they added pancakes to the menu as another optional purchasable item, they would keep pointing to the old $5 that they spent on that burger and coke and claim to be entitled to the pancakes and donuts also, without paying any extra.

Improvavel · Mar 22, 2011, 03:20 PM // 15:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Star_Jewel

We also have the very dynamic issue of personal thresholds of "reasonable pricing."

The "campaign as advantage" comparison is the one I do agree with. The difference, however, in my opinion is this: Competitive pricing. One doesn't have to pay MSRP for e.g. Nightfall, if they want the benefits. Wait long enough and various retailers eventually drop their prices. The biggest problem I have with advantages (however significant they may be) being sold in the cash shop is that NC controls the product and the price exclusively. There is no competitive pricing. Except for the rare 1/2 off sale (which, at their discretion, could exclude Mercenary Packs if they so desired -- and if they're selling well to people who eagerly gobble them up, they could make that decision), one has no choice but to pay the MSRP for the benefit.

First I agree that the price of some store items are quite high. There is still a factor on competitive pricing though - investment on the product development. It isn't the same as having a ton of boxes with dvd stored somewhere, but it still is a factor.

If a game can still generate revenues, the company that produces it will be much more interested in support it/improve it. And we have seen and keep seeing results of it.

It is in their best interest and it is also on our interest since we can have a better experience/fun.

Second, I don't like the way Anet bunched the merc packs. 1 merc is too expensive, the 3 mercs has reasonable initial price but it still is expensive and the 8 merc pack, while has the best cost/slot has a initial price that is too steep. Then if you want to go from 3 mercs to 8 you need to buy another 3 mercs and 2 1 mercs.

I think that was poor thinking on Anet part. Lets be frank, $5.625 for a merc slot (the price you get with the 8 merc pack) isn't that much. But $10 for a slot is. And $45 in a single transaction is huge.

Quote:

This is an interesting analogy. But I think for those who think the mercenary heroes are unfair, it's like if the restaurant charged a flat fee for the burger itself, but the bun -- that's extra. "How come yours comes with a bun?" "I paid extra for it." I think what this mainly comes down to is what should be included as a part of the game, which is a free to play model, and what should be considered an "extra goody" that is fair to charge for.

That does happen a lot in software/games. Part of it is I believe because gaming is still seen as something for kids and gamers don't have a strong vocal voice.

And really, when you see some crappy games sell millions (mostly in consoles) you really have to wonder if gaming isn't something for kids since no adult would buy some of that garbage.

But I digress.

Some companies do indeed seem happy to make a game, sell half of it for the price of a full game and then make you buy the other half with DLCs.

This doesn't seem to be the case.

We talked a lot about fairness and advantages on this thread. But lets face it PvE isn't a competitive game. There is no reward to finish first or do it faster.

In PvP the objective is to win the match, defeat the other team. A jesus sword would definitely increase my chances of defeating the other team.

In the end even the money (the more you play and the faster you generate it) you get in PvE is only used for aesthetically looks - a shinny weapon skin, a shinny armor, a title, an exclusive mini pet.

If is all about the aesthetically appearance, how aren't costumes or the BMP weapon skins seen as an advantage?

I can agree mercs are expensive. I can't agree mercs break PvE or are in the same level as jesus sword of pwn and that Anet is selling a competitive advantage. Especially because PvE isn't competitive. They are selling comfort, flexibility, better game play - and that is an advantageous thing for a player/costumer to get.

Essence Snow · Mar 22, 2011, 03:33 PM // 15:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Improvavel

We talked a lot about fairness and advantages on this thread. But lets face it PvE isn't a competitive game. There is no reward to finish first or do it faster.

There are several instances where PvE is very competitive. Just because it isn't as obvious, doesn't mean that it is not.

Missing HB · Mar 22, 2011, 03:49 PM // 15:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Essence Snow

There are several instances where PvE is very competitive. Just because it isn't as obvious, doesn't mean that it is not.

Can you quote some ?

As long as it's not Player versus Player it's already not the same definition of word competitive... They added tournaments in GvG and HB , guess why...
It's definitely not at all the same winning a mat and doing 27mn instead of 40mn in x area....

Xenomortis · Mar 22, 2011, 04:03 PM // 16:03

Strictly speaking, the Competitive Missions.

Xiaquin · Mar 22, 2011, 04:18 PM // 16:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by lemming

I did, three times. You can't exactly PvP without having access to all the skills.

I rest my case.

tealspikes · Mar 22, 2011, 04:56 PM // 16:56

Anet went down the pay2win road six years ago when they released Factions and introduced hundreds of new skills and 2 professions that were exclusive to those who paid for the new campaign. This trend has continued ever since. MH ARE NOTHING NEW.

X Dr Pepper X · Mar 22, 2011, 05:01 PM // 17:01

PvE is obviously competitive.

It may not be so obvious for newer players, but as a player for over 5 years, it's amazingly apparent.

People are competing on the same team for the same objectives with the resources available to them.

Just like working a job is competitive because you're competing against your own team for promotions or work bonuses.

PvE being competitive was one of the reasons Dervishes were buffed with Sand Shards and VoS. They were excluded from the metagame because of their inability to play as well as a 100B Sin or Warrior.

If you don't believe people on the same faction or side can compete for the same objective, then you must be living under a rock rejecting reality.

Improvavel · Mar 22, 2011, 05:08 PM // 17:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by X Dr Pepper X

People are competing on the same team for the same objectives with the resources available to them.

Just like working a job is competitive because you're competing against your own team for promotions or work bonuses.

My drops don't affect your drops - there is no finite amount of drops.

1 party of 8 players or 8 parties of 1 player + 7 heroes each is equal, although the party of 8 players has more resources (pve-only skills).

Quote:

PvE being competitive was one of the reasons Dervishes were buffed with Sand Shards and VoS. They were excluded from the metagame because of their inability to play as well as a 100B Sin or Warrior.

Those are professions not players. All players have access to all professions.

Quote:

If you don't believe people on the same faction or side can compete for the same objective, then you must be living under a rock rejecting reality.

Generally teams work together for the same objective.

If someone is in the same faction/side but are competing for the same resources, then the individual is superseding the team/faction.

X Dr Pepper X · Mar 22, 2011, 05:26 PM // 17:26

Your logic is awful.

Your drops definitely do affect other player's drops. If people have an easier access to Armbraces or Ectos, then the value of stored material wealth in Ecto and Braces will depreciate.

Secondly, I have no idea why you would nitpick at player vs profession viability. To be viable or nonviable assumes there is value in the strength of the profession compared to how efficient other professions are and thus, comparing and contrasting 2 different professions' efficiencies to accept or deny their participation. It only supports the fact of my argument that PvE has competition.

Lastly, competition within teams is not detrimental to the performance or efficiency as a whole. It is how many fundamental things work worldwide like oh say capitalism, job credentials, team based competition, sporting events, education, and more. Abuse of competition is bad. Competition itself is as inherently rooted to the world as nature itself.

I should be reluctant to argue such points with you, but you only strengthen the crux of my argument that which PvE does indeed have competition. I guess I should thank you for your ham fisted dickery in trying to pick apart subarguments.

Improvavel · Mar 22, 2011, 05:45 PM // 17:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by X Dr Pepper X

Your logic is awful.
Your drops definitely do affect other player's drops. If people have an easier access to Armbraces or Ectos, then the value of stored material wealth in Ecto and Braces will depreciate.

And your point is?

The stored wealth isn't a competitive goal.

Quote:

Secondly, I have no idea why you would nitpick at player vs profession viability. To be viable or nonviable assumes there is value in the strength of the profession compared to how efficient other professions are and thus, comparing and contrasting 2 different professions' efficiencies to accept or deny their participation. It only supports the fact of my argument that PvE has competition.

Because professions don't compete vs each other, since they are non-entities.

Quote:

Lastly, competition within teams is not detrimental to the performance or efficiency as a whole. It is how many fundamental things work worldwide like oh say capitalism, job credentials, team based competition, sporting events, education, and more. Abuse of competition is bad. Competition itself is as inherently rooted to the world as nature itself.

Competition within team may or may not be detrimental.

I never said it was bad, I only said PvE isnt competitive

Quote:

I should be reluctant to argue such points with you, but you only strengthen the crux of my argument that which PvE does indeed have competition. I guess I should thank you for your ham fisted dickery in trying to pick apart subarguments.

If you say so.

I see it differently.

Ghull Ka · Mar 22, 2011, 06:12 PM // 18:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

I think the Fire Imp in pre-searing is many times more excessive than any merc hero.

^For real.

Pre-searing is NOT prepared for Fire Imp. Fire Imp is the best dollars-to-ingamebenefit you can currently buy, in my opinion.

Nobody complains about Fire Imp as hard as they complain about Merc Heroes though. Which is weird. Because Fire Imp is imba as RED ENGINE GO, in almost every scenario.

Quru · Mar 22, 2011, 06:39 PM // 18:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ghull Ka

^For real.

Pre-searing is NOT prepared for Fire Imp. Fire Imp is the best dollars-to-ingamebenefit you can currently buy, in my opinion.

Nobody complains about Fire Imp as hard as they complain about Merc Heroes though. Which is weird. Because Fire Imp is imba as RED ENGINE GO, in almost every scenario.

Because people don't want Fire Imp and they are just using RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GOing advantage argument as an excuse for their greed. They want MH:s because they are cool, but for them, everything in this world should be free.

Karate Jesus · Mar 22, 2011, 06:55 PM // 18:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by chessyang

Can a mod please PM and tell me why i got my post delete? you know so i don't do it again. post 241/242-ish. whatever i did? Before i pull my funding from guru and guru2. thanks

Wow.....just.....wow. Well, I won't be reading anything you type anymore.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ghull Ka

^For real.

Pre-searing is NOT prepared for Fire Imp. Fire Imp is the best dollars-to-ingamebenefit you can currently buy, in my opinion.

Nobody complains about Fire Imp as hard as they complain about Merc Heroes though. Which is weird. Because Fire Imp is imba as RED ENGINE GO, in almost every scenario.

Honestly, a lot of people just got the Igneous Summoning Stone without even realizing it. It was so easy to get. All you had to do was buy something from the in-game store, and if I'm remembering correctly, it was free for those who had all of the campaigns when it came out.

Hence, it was infinitely cheaper than Mercenary Heroes (or free), even if you bought a full game for it, which were less than $45 at that point. And, I would argue that having a Fire Imp in Pre-searing isn't nearly as badass as clearing elite areas in 2 hours by yourself.

But, I couldn't care less about titles, so that's probably just my opinion.