Curse

DreamWind · Jun 29, 2009, 06:24 PM // 18:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

You are naive, nothing is timeless, certainly not a free-to-play game like GW that requires servers to be maintained.

I can name at least 10 video games off the top of my head that are timeless, including some that require servers etc. I'm glad to know you don't think GW could have been timeless though...it really lets me know what you think about the game.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

From my experience, most of my friends quit even before NF. If Prophecies is the best, then Prophecies should be the peak, not grindy Factions. However, Factions suit title-chasers well.

Factions suits title chasers well, yet "real" titles weren't introduced until after Nightfall. Interesting theory.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

No they can't. Just because a cheaper Corolla exist doesn't mean people have no need to buy a Ferrari. If they don't have enough time to form a human team for an easy mission, then it makes sense for them to use H/H.

People who can't afford a Ferrari shouldn't be able to have one. Ah well Daesu...we agree to disagree.

I also want to say a word on titles. They were also bad for the game, but in my opinion heroes and titles almost go hand in hand. Titles were introduced, and heroes were a tool to grind for these titles. Ah well...life goes on.

Ghost Omel · Jun 29, 2009, 06:34 PM // 18:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

I also want to say a word on titles. They were also bad for the game, but in my opinion heroes and titles almost go hand in hand. Titles were introduced, and heroes were a tool to grind for these titles. Ah well...life goes on.

People need something to do.. Witht he way guild wars is. It wasnt mean to be grinded away or played by HARDORE PLAYERS IN PvE AREAS. Guild wars's PvE was made for casuals that play aliitle drop it go eat sleep party think about life log back on an dplay again. NOT for 8 hour game play time after which " Wha me no got to play moar, whats gives this sucks"
Title were made to quench the thirst of the hardcore PvErs that wanted to say "Haw haw haw look at me , me gots all these titlez..me is bestest naow"

Regarding PvP thats a different story, Balancing is hard and more skills = more inbalances and such

Once again combining both heroes and real players is how the game should be played now. (Look at my previous post if you bother to read this 1)

I slightly agre to why tityles and heroes were introduced all together but i find it being only 10% of the whole list of reasons.....

Daesu · Jun 29, 2009, 06:51 PM // 18:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

I can name at least 10 video games off the top of my head that are timeless, including some that require servers etc. I'm glad to know you don't think GW could have been timeless though...it really lets me know what you think about the game.

It can't be timeless because ANet has to maintain those servers somehow. If it is not from subscriptions, since it is free to play, then it has to be from new campaigns or other means of getting financing.

Quote:

Factions suits title chasers well, yet "real" titles weren't introduced until after Nightfall. Interesting theory.

Lol, "real" titles as opposed to "fake" titles in Factions? Right...

Quote:

I also want to say a word on titles. They were also bad for the game, but in my opinion heroes and titles almost go hand in hand. Titles were introduced, and heroes were a tool to grind for these titles. Ah well...life goes on.

Titles and heroes dont necessarily go hand in hand. I had to rely on human players in many areas to hit Legendary Guardian, so do heroes replace humans? The answer is a big NO. Human players are still much more overpowered than heroes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ghost Omel

Once again combining both heroes and real players is how the game should be played now. (Look at my previous post if you bother to read this 1)

That's right. Man and Machine...

Rocky Raccoon · Jun 29, 2009, 07:18 PM // 19:18

The problem with people playing GW PvE is there is no incentive to play together. The Level 20 limit means that using bonus experience as a reason to play together wouldn't work and people would continue to H/H. If ANET made it worthwhile to PUG, some things that could only be obtained or done by real people grouping, then I believe people would play together.

Ghost Omel · Jun 29, 2009, 07:26 PM // 19:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

That's right. Man and Machine...

Cyborgs.. What else you need =)... Feelings of a man ( and other things "wink' wink") But the strength of a machine. calculating power of a computer, eye sight of an eagle and dexterity of a proffesional sniper.

Apply this to guild wars hybrid teams... Quiq interupts by heroes, tactics of a human, coordination of a human, fast reflexes of a hero =).. Win Win....non the less full human team will offer alternatives....but you get my drift

Daesu · Jun 29, 2009, 07:29 PM // 19:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Risky Ranger

The problem with people playing GW PvE is there is no incentive to play together. The Level 20 limit means that using bonus experience as a reason to play together wouldn't work and people would continue to H/H. If ANET made it worthwhile to PUG, some things that could only be obtained or done by real people grouping, then I believe people would play together.

There are many places in the game that are worthwhile to PUG. There are tougher areas that are very difficult to use heroes for. For the other areas, sometimes I prefer to PUG too since it takes more effort for me to use and micro heroes due to their limited AI. The best team would be an organized human team.

Bryant Again · Jun 29, 2009, 10:58 PM // 22:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

I also want to say a word on titles. They were also bad for the game, but in my opinion heroes and titles almost go hand in hand. Titles were introduced, and heroes were a tool to grind for these titles.

Titles would've been a whole lot more awesome in the game if they were not the grind machines we have now. If they were based on singular achievements - surviving a fight with 1hp left, killing one of every profession in PvP, win a whole match without dying - I'd love GW a whole lot more.

I don't mind if there's some that take awhile to do (hero title, lux/kurz title), but it's really gonna have to depend on how you can progress towards that title.

For more examples, just look at the achievements for TF2.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ghost Omel

So yeah 3rd party of Adaptobale non-complaining players UNTIE and Post away so we can sweep away the 2 others and show what we CAN DO...CHARGE...henchmen are horrible honestly 33% boost -_-

We're not mentioning this group not because we don't care about them but because they don't care. They're fine with whatever change ANet makes. They would have nothing to offer to this discussion, and especially given how long everyone here has been arguing about it it's quite a vital one.

DreamWind · Jun 30, 2009, 05:12 AM // 05:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

It can't be timeless because ANet has to maintain those servers somehow.

You think Guild Wars could never be timeless. I rest my case.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

Lol, "real" titles as opposed to "fake" titles in Factions? Right...

Compare the amount of titles released in Factions to the amount released after and get back to me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

Titles and heroes dont necessarily go hand in hand.

Yes they do. Most titles are easily grindable with heroes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

Human players are still much more overpowered than heroes.

If it was because of skill or intelligence I would agree, but instead they are more ovepowered because of the inbalanced skills that shouldn't exist.

Anyways I'm off for a few days. This could be my last post or not. I have stated my case on the original topic of this thread. I think heroes were detrimental to the game. End.

Daesu · Jun 30, 2009, 07:27 AM // 07:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Compare the amount of titles released in Factions to the amount released after and get back to me.

What has that got to do with anything?

Quote:

Yes they do. Most titles are easily grindable with heroes.

Totally BS. It is not easy to grind maxed titles with just heroes, except for those that you can just buy with gold. Titles are far easier gained by having a good guild supporting you.

Quote:

If it was because of skill or intelligence I would agree, but instead they are more ovepowered because of the inbalanced skills that shouldn't exist.

Another BS, a good human team even with no PvE skills or cons, is still superior to a H/H team.

arcanemacabre · Jun 30, 2009, 08:04 AM // 08:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

a good human team even with no PvE skills or cons, is still superior to a H/H team.

Totally agree. The AI can only do a handful of things 'on-par' or 'better' than humans; namely specific trigger skills (such as hitting SoLS precisely when a target is v50%), micro-management (such as minion-bombing), and timing interrupts. Everything else is much better used in the capable hands of a medicore human player.

You could bring up "following commands/targets" as a pro for H/H, but then it just comes down to communication and personality issues with the human party. A good guild with voice com will nullify that bonus right away. A PuG may have problems, but again, that just shows the overall problem of the PuG rather than with H/H.

I would venture to say that a party full of mediocre players will do just as good, if not better - without cons or PvE skills, mind you - than a mediocre player with H/H. Subsequently, a party full of excellent players will destroy anything in PvE above and beyond what a single excellent player can do with H/H. Again- this is without cons or PvE skills which, when added into the equation, should erase any doubt of which is superior. I don't think anyone can deny that. If so, you are delusional.

DreamWind (and those who agree with DW), if you agree with the above, then what exactly is the problem? If you disagree, please explain why.

DreamWind · Jun 30, 2009, 08:49 AM // 08:49

Well I got 1 more post in me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

What has that got to do with anything?

...Nevermind.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

Totally BS. It is not easy to grind maxed titles with just heroes, except for those that you can just buy with gold. Titles are far easier gained by having a good guild supporting you.

Meh...almost everybody I know who still plays PvE grinded GWAMM with mostly heroway. Its mostly easy.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

Another BS, a good human team even with no PvE skills or cons, is still superior to a H/H team.

Completely irrelevent...and I hope some people see what I'm trying to say by now. Again...my case has been made.

Bryant Again · Jun 30, 2009, 09:16 AM // 09:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by arcanemacabre

DreamWind (and those who agree with DW), if you agree with the above, then what exactly is the problem? If you disagree, please explain why.

In terms of a PvE perspective, they're largely figured to be the supposedly #uno killer of PUGs. But I don't think that's fully the case, as evidenced from below:

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

It seems you have basically taken the stance " although heroes may have done negative things to the game and ignored problems, the convience of it is worth it given the age of the game".

Not entirely.

Many of what I consider problems in PvE are largely based upon how the earlier missions (pre-NF) are designed: eager to die mission-vital NPCs, time-based Faction bonuses, one wipe=complete restart of the mission - things that if implemented into a solo-play game wouldn't be so bad.

But in multiplayer? Added onto all the other things that PUGs can bring - i.e. random accidents leading to whipes on the beginning, subpar builds, bad pulls, etc.? Not a good "party up!" design, especially when topped off with the 8 player requirement.

What should more be advocated for is not the removal of heroes but the fixing of PUG PvE. If all was well designed we'd be seeing many more players actually wanting to play with others. But if so many are trying to go out of their way to play solo, we need to figure out why.

I can't really say how much "negativity" heroes have brought to the game. If there are players who still really want to pug then they'll pug, and if someone switched over from pugging at their release then they may not have been enjoying what they were previously doing. We'll only know much "bad" heroes have been once we get into the mind of quite a few million players.

arcanemacabre · Jun 30, 2009, 09:49 AM // 09:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

In terms of a PvE perspective, they're largely figured to be the supposedly #uno killer of PUGs.

...

What should more be advocated for is not the removal of heroes but the fixing of PUG PvE. If all was well designed we'd be seeing many more players actually wanting to play with others. But if so many are trying to go out of their way to play solo, we need to figure out why.

Exactly. That is where I see the true problem is. Heroes didn't have anything to do with the declining of PuGs (whether that can be an identifier as the 'death' of a game that isn't dead is a whole other matter entirely), but rather the way PuGs are in GW were the cause.

Before heroes, I would venture to say that most of the players used solely henchmen, and if they couldn't make it past a certain area they either "put up" with a PuG (and likely ended up with a horrible gaming experience as evidenced in this thread and many others), they struggled and kept trying till they accomplished it with henchies, or they simply quit playing.

Heroes didn't kill PuGs, they killed most of those desperate, horrible PuGs that were filled with last-ditch efforts by aggravated players. Title-farmers using heroes shouldn't even count since they probably wouldn't even be playing GW if they had nothing to grind or no H/H to grind with; and that covers most of the other players. Everyone else who plays with real people have likely found good guilds by now, and they do major PvE farms such as SCs, elite areas, and/or dabbling in PvP.

Think about this for a while: If there were no H/H, even if no one quits, do you really think there would be enough players to fill a random PuG in every area of the game as spread out as all the towns/outposts are? I mean how long do you really think that would take just to do a mission like The Wilds or Kodonour Crossroads if they had to "War LFG!" Do you think the incentive (reward) is enough to go through all that trouble? Oh, what - the fun? Re-read all the "fun" PuGs people have put up with and then ask yourself that again.

the_jos · Jun 30, 2009, 12:12 PM // 12:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

What should more be advocated for is not the removal of heroes but the fixing of PUG PvE. If all was well designed we'd be seeing many more players actually wanting to play with others. But if so many are trying to go out of their way to play solo, we need to figure out why.

When people have a clear advantage they will team up with others.
UB is a good example of the past, SC is the current example. Teaming up with others benefits the player.

What I ranted about in the past were teaming options.
Not so much teaming up as well as finding people in the first place when missions became less popular. US players might have had an advantage but as euro player I had to switch through various regions to find some players (fairly often German had some players while English was empty).
It's just the time related to forming a full team that gives a disadvantage.
Why wait for someone for 15 mins if you can hench the same mission and it will take you 10 minutes longer.

Then we had some minor annoyances.
Class discrimination (you know those Sins that blow up from afflicted or mesmers who give no advantage against huge numbers of foes).
Many PUG leaders who could not form a decent team (easy solution: lead yourself) but with the attitude of the best player in the game.
People run odd bars (pre skill-ping time).
Vital NPC's blowing up (many people where happy when R and T finally died).
Unclear mission goals for new players (desert for example).

When I look at the main reason why I fill a team with heroes instead of human players it has always been time.
In the past because I didn't know when I had to quit playing. H&H allowed me to get away from the computer fast, help my fiancee recover from panic attack and get back an hour later.
Nowadays it's because waiting for additional human players (I hardly H&H nowadays, mainly tag along with others) is too time consuming compared to the additional advantage of another human player.

I've explained this in the past.
When looking at team builds it's easy to state that the more humans you have the better the team will be.
However, this does not include the additional time for waiting for players.
The optimal team is 8 human players, no doubt. However, lets assume each joining player takes an additional 5 minutes to join. For a full human team this would mean about 30-40 mins for a team to form.
In many areas this isn't worth it considering the time difference between a 2 human/6 hero team and a full human team to finish.

The real advantage for human teams is either in busy places where teams form fast or when stuff is organised (guild/alliance or z-quests).
In most situations however it often takes too long to form a team compared to the difference in time additional human players would make.
Heroes tipped this too much to the advantage of 2/6 or 3/5 teams in my opinion and are therefor part of the problem.

Implement something that cuts the time for teaming with other human players and I'll probably tag along with people more than I do nowadays.
You won't hear me complain about the skill of the average PUG, we all had to learn to play the game and the occassional gem is nice to discover, enjoying the beauty of a PUG doing everything right.

Just my thoughts on this subject.

Ghost Omel · Jun 30, 2009, 12:40 PM // 12:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

We're not mentioning this group not because we don't care about them but because they don't care. They're fine with whatever change ANet makes. They would have nothing to offer to this discussion, and especially given how long everyone here has been arguing about it it's quite a vital one.

So you are saying those who adapt.. dont care?

Maybe. maybe.. im not denying the scenario you are explaining.

Is it a bad thing?.. Instead of hearing Biased.... "this is bad i want it back to 3.5 years ago" or "No NO what are you talking about, with the possibilityies we have now there is no way we need to go back" . Hearing from some 1 who adapted in full having non-bioased 9somewhat) view on the cituation. How that is bad...

The reason these individuals dont post are for simple reasons

Age- they adapt without realizing the "faults" that are described by the debaters here

Game time- They adapt realizing all the changes but simply dont have time to post on the forum, being bussy wiht the game

Poster- They adapt but at the same time asses the situation from both points of view which i have stated above regarding 'good old times" and "better advanced ones now" Making a logical comparison of both combining them into one view which results in the said adaptation.. Realizing that + the time at hand they go in and enjoy the game with same-minded persons.

The latter one is rather rare on the forums especial when it comes to the Riverside Guild Wars "Now and Then" threads that come up every week.

Im torn etween now and then.. but sort of in the middle.... To me personally heroes are fine.... Titles could be changed or some removed... PvE consumables can be removed .... the ones bought in EotN and such...PvE skills are meant for that PvE.. they hold no ground in PvP so shouldnt be touched at all.

Maybe i am one of those adaptable people.. i dont know i am definetly not "Emo" aboiut the changes and not gonna go on a "Wa@#@@3 the F@##...i didnt pay my muney for this cwap" spree... but not going to go glorify allt he changes made either....

I think what it comes down to me personaly is the so called "Balance" of proffesion in both PvE and PvP..... PuGs want only perma sins monks and RoJers... for elite areas adn there is no place for a War there at all.. Im just glad i got a guild , and we do thing with breather and fun ...

Anyway Bryant Just because some players Adapt.. doesnt mean they are HAPPY or SATISFIED with changes made to the game they do what their instincts tells them its to ADAPT... Obviusly instinct to argue and complain is present and completely natural and is alwasy welcome.. its just overshodowed by the most basik and primary Animal instinct given to us at birth...

EDIT:

Quote:

Originally Posted by the_jos

When I look at the main reason why I fill a team with heroes instead of human players it has always been time.
In the past because I didn't know when I had to quit playing. H&H allowed me to get away from the computer fast, help my fiancee recover from panic attack and get back an hour later.
Nowadays it's because waiting for additional human players (I hardly H&H nowadays, mainly tag along with others) is too time consuming compared to the additional advantage of another human player.

AGreed... Just another example of adapting to a new feature.. =)

Bryant Again · Jun 30, 2009, 01:38 PM // 13:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ghost Omel

So you are saying those who adapt.. dont care?

Okay *now* I see what you're earlier post is saying - and it's wrong. We've been taking the majority player into the equation as much as possible in this sense, especially since these changes do affect them.

The casual, however, is indeed very "meh" when it comes to their game. In general they're satisfied as long as they can hit stuff. That's not saying they're stupid, just that they want to play a game.

Ghost Omel · Jun 30, 2009, 01:56 PM // 13:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Okay *now* I see what you're earlier post is saying - and it's wrong. We've been taking the majority player into the equation as much as possible in this sense, especially since these changes do affect them.

The casual, however, is indeed very "meh" when it comes to their game. In general they're satisfied as long as they can hit stuff. That's not saying they're stupid, just that they want to play a game.

Precisely...I agree with you on hitting stuff and playing the game... Somehtign that some ( no 1 in person i ust cant find a word to use so il use 'some') can seem to be doing becaus eof the changes. wether it be for personal reason such as "My bar isnt good eanuf me no play no more" or for more serious reasons like "Witht he way the PvE set up right now i cant seem to find a reason or gola to continue playing the PvE portion of the game and because of the PvP balance issues i find PvP stale and boring"....Which 1 would you listen to first.. the one that is complainig about his build.. or the person that looks at the both sides of the issue....

Now take the 2nd person add adaptability to it and you will get this (in my opinon)

" With the way the PvE is set up right now i cant seem to find an effective group of humans to play together in order to have a full human team so i am slightly forced to put on heroes instead of certain parts of my team. Due to the low content of the game at its 4th year of existance titles have given me something to do.. i agree some titles are completely useless but being a very dedicated player and a fan of Guild Wars i decided to spare few hours a day doing VQs and dungeons for those said titles that will benefit me in GW2 in the future. PvE skills only honestly are almost constantly on my bar now due to their power.. i dont like to use them very often but due to the PuGing i do sometimes i am forced by the team to put them on, as wel as buy consumables. PvP (well i havend GvGed in a year or HA,s i cant give anythign on it).....Heores shouldnt be involved in PvP in my opinion but once again teams arent alwasy full and sometimes i really want to win so i will put on a hero interupter for greater efect. I find myself sometimes wondering if it was better back in the era of Proph but alwasy find myself easily adaptable to situations at hand>"

OK there we go... I mean thast my average thoughts and those of my guildmates... how is this not caring?.. or just "Whack and smack il aduptd dut -ta-duh" kind of thinking....

Listen i agree wiht you about almost evrythign besides the fact that daptoble poeple dont care ot just there to "MEH" Casual player cares about his game time.. he just doesnt post here....

Anyway feel free to comment

As alwasy at the end of my statements.... No insults or personal attacks intended sorry if i did.

Mordakai · Jun 30, 2009, 02:06 PM // 14:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Okay *now* I see what you're earlier post is saying - and it's wrong. We've been taking the majority player into the equation as much as possible in this sense, especially since these changes do affect them.

The casual, however, is indeed very "meh" when it comes to their game. In general they're satisfied as long as they can hit stuff. That's not saying they're stupid, just that they want to play a game.

I'm probably taking this out of context, but aren't the majority of players casual?

I try to find PUGs whenever I can, I enjoy playing with other people, especially on Missions.

If Heroes killed GW (and I don't think they did), then the Zaishen Missions brought it back.... ie, it's easy to find PUGs for HM for those particular missions. And surprisingly, I've found most of these groups are good.

Of course, when I need to, I use Heroes/Hench, especially on normal mode where you can't find people, and it's easy enough to do anyway.

Gli · Jun 30, 2009, 03:05 PM // 15:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mordakai

If Heroes killed GW (and I don't think they did), then the Zaishen Missions brought it back.... ie, it's easy to find PUGs for HM for those particular missions. And surprisingly, I've found most of these groups are good.

Ironically, it's the Z-quests that I do by myself with H/H. That is, the quick and easy ones, when none of my guildies are online, or when they're all already busy when I arrive. Practically everything else I do with real people.

And when I say quick and easy, I mean most missions and most non-dungeon bounties.

Daesu · Jun 30, 2009, 03:38 PM // 15:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by the_jos

It's just the time related to forming a full team that gives a disadvantage.
Why wait for someone for 15 mins if you can hench the same mission and it will take you 10 minutes longer.

Sure, and that would be the balance deciding between H/H and a human team. A human team, although more powerful, requires you to invest additional time to form. You can always go for a hybrid team, which is what ANet recommends.

Quote:

For a full human team this would mean about 30-40 mins for a team to form.

And if you are forming for an unpopular quest like Titan Source, it can take alot longer than 30-40mins to form a team. This is partly due to the spreading of player population across 4 campaigns. Without heroes, this game would be unbearable, as most of my time would be spent waiting in town. For easy quests/missions, it makes sense to use H/H because that is the faster option. But for some of the tougher quests or missions, I can't help waiting for people because they are too hard to clear with H/H. For example, you can try completing (with bonus) HM Aurora Glade, HM Dzagonur Bastion, or HM Eternal Grove with H/H without cons. These are some missions that would go a lot smoother with a good human team than with H/H.