Curse

Daesu · Jul 07, 2009, 08:28 PM // 20:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Heroes did not replace humans. Instead, heroes CAN replace humans for 99% of the tasks available in the game.

So what? That doesn't prove anything in this thread. Heroes CAN replace humans and humans CAN also replace heroes. It has always been much easier to succeed by partying up with a good human team anyway, compared to using H/H.

Quote:

The difference here is heroes did not replace henchies, because henchies can't beat many areas while heroes can,

Hasty generalization again. Henchies can also beat many areas including your favorite, THK.

Quote:

meanwhile both heroes and humans can beat most areas. Do you understand what I'm trying to say yet? Now lets stop focusing on this ONE thing I said and start responding to all the other issues. What about the irreversable damage caused?

What damage are you talking about?

Quote:

What about the singleplayer game?

What singleplayer game?

Quote:

What about the screwed up difficulty challenge?

What has that got to do with this thread?

Quote:

Etc etc. Are you going to say these all didn't happen?

Again you are trying to go OT and talk about other aspects of this game.

Quote:

Uh...nearly all of it. I know for a fact I could roll heroway and beat basically all of Guild Wars right now,

Really? I will give you a concession, you dont need to show me how you beat all of guild wars with heroway, why dont you just show me how you use 6 heroes to beat ALL of DoA HM.

Quote:

PvE is easy, and has been for quite some time.

I suppose that is why you are still stuck in the easy areas.

Otherwise, you would know difficult it is to use heroes, versus a human team, for so many areas in this game.

Quote:

The only reason to even use humans is because they have better cons and skills. The intelligence barely matters anymore in this game.

Intelligence still matters, unless you havent been using intelligence to play. Heroes do not work well in many areas because they just dont have the intelligence to split or make good decisions on their own.

Tyla · Jul 07, 2009, 09:12 PM // 21:12

Personally, I think that Heroes did contribute to PvE's decline. Time withers anything away, but some things help drag it down sometimes.

DreamWind · Jul 07, 2009, 09:18 PM // 21:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

So what? That doesn't prove anything in this thread. Heroes CAN replace humans and humans CAN also replace heroes.

Heroes came after humans as a replacement. Humans can't replace heroes because humans came before heroes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

Hasty generalization again. Henchies can also beat many areas including your favorite, THK.

You know as well as I that heroes are a big jump up from henchies. Stop fooling yourself.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

What damage are you talking about?

The irreversable kind (like PvP).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

What singleplayer game?

Guild Wars.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

What has that got to do with this thread?

Again you are trying to go OT and talk about other aspects of this game.

Heroes contribute to game and challenge inbalance (which I've already explained).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

Really? I will give you a concession, you dont need to show me how you beat all of guild wars with heroway, why dont you just show me how you use 6 heroes to beat ALL of DoA HM.

I don't have to beat DoA HM. Its not the main game and if I wanted to do a side area I'd do an easier area for better rewards.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

I suppose that is why you are still stuck in the easy areas.

Otherwise, you would know difficult it is to use heroes, versus a human team, for so many areas in this game.

I'm not stuck. I simply don't play anymore because the game is stupidly easy. Its a farming game nowadays...everybody knows this.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

Intelligence still matters, unless you havent been using intelligence to play. Heroes do not work well in many areas because they just dont have the intelligence to split or make good decisions on their own.

If intelligence matters, why can I roll heroway and roll my head on the keyboard and beat 99% of the game? Stop naming the 1% and claiming my point is invalid because of that 1%.

Daesu · Jul 07, 2009, 09:44 PM // 21:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Heroes came after humans as a replacement. Humans can't replace heroes because humans came before heroes.

That still doesn't stop human players from replacing a hero's position in the team.

Quote:

The irreversable kind (like PvP).

Guild Wars.

No idea what you are talking about.

Quote:

Heroes contribute to game and challenge inbalance (which I've already explained).

Nope they are different issues.

Quote:

I don't have to beat DoA HM. Its not the main game and if I wanted to do a side area I'd do an easier area for better rewards.

You did say ALL of GW. An easier area with better rewards, like Ascalon City? Right...

The harder areas are the ones with better rewards, not the easier areas.

Quote:

I'm not stuck. I simply don't play anymore because the game is stupidly easy. Its a farming game nowadays...everybody knows this.

Yeah whatever, chicken out if you must.

Quote:

If intelligence matters, why can I roll heroway and roll my head on the keyboard and beat 99% of the game? Stop naming the 1% and claiming my point is invalid because of that 1%.

I dont believe you can roll your head on the keyboard with 6 heroes and beat ALL of DoA HM. It is the tougher areas of the game that matter because they have the better rewards. Who cares about the easier areas where people hire runners to do it for them anyway.

Bryant Again · Jul 07, 2009, 11:16 PM // 23:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Well...I have mostly stated all of them somewhere in this thread. In particular I'd say the damage to PvP is not reversable, but there have been many things in PvE as well. For now though I'll just say that the damage to PvP was not worth whatever benefit heroes may bring today...at least not for me.

In a PvP perspective I agree.

But I don't think so much for a PvE perspective, given how much damage already existed for many PvE players.

DreamWind · Jul 08, 2009, 04:21 AM // 04:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

That still doesn't stop human players from replacing a hero's position in the team.

The thread is about the problems with heroes. If heroes replaced humans in any way, that can be considered a problem to many people. Humans replacing heroes can not be a problem because heroes came later....I'm sure you can see that?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

No idea what you are talking about.

Then you haven't been reading the thread.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

Nope they are different issues.

No they aren't. If Anet has to build areas around heroes (the same areas that human teams will play), that is a problem.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

The harder areas are the ones with better rewards, not the easier areas.

Which is why FoW has a large farming base and DoA has almost no base to speak of?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

Yeah whatever, chicken out if you must.

Chicken out on what? The game is easy...that is common knowledge.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

I dont believe you can roll your head on the keyboard with 6 heroes and beat ALL of DoA HM. It is the tougher areas of the game that matter because they have the better rewards. Who cares about the easier areas where people hire runners to do it for them anyway.

LoL...you did exactly what I thought you would do (name the 1%). Some people just don't like how heroes have taken the game over and changed it. Its that simple.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

In a PvP perspective I agree.

But I don't think so much for a PvE perspective, given how much damage already existed for many PvE players.

Fair enough. From my perspective the entire game changed for the worse after heroes. PvP the damage done is irreversable and basically impossible to deny...I suppose in PvE the damage done is more on a person by person basis.

Bryant Again · Jul 08, 2009, 05:06 AM // 05:06

The PvE experience thus far has been an entirely mixed bag, but it's definitely set-up to be a nasty experience: leaving mid-mission cripples the party (especially if a monk), no way to replace them if they go, Rambo NPCs, annoying bonus objectives (mostly in Factions), strict party format, etc. etc.

If ANet want things to change in GW2, they're going to need to REALLY ease up on the strictness in PvE. Whiping should not be "mission failed" but instead a set-back. Something needs to be able to replace any players that ditch the mission half-way. Bonuses need to have more thought and not be confusing or "JUST DO IT FAST". And never have it rely on a "HURP DURP" NPC that charges at first sight.

Arkantos · Jul 08, 2009, 05:26 AM // 05:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyla

Personally, I think that Heroes did contribute to PvE's decline. Time withers anything away, but some things help drag it down sometimes.

The community is getting smaller, and it's spread out between 4 campaigns. Without heroes, there would be no way you'd be able to pug everything you wanted to. With heroes, you simply throw on a skill bar and go. I'd say heroes helped PvE much more than they ruined it. Without heroes, I know I would have completely quit a long time ago, and I know many people who would have too.

Nay of the Ether · Jul 08, 2009, 05:31 AM // 05:31

Heroes didn't kill anything. I have a few reasons why. I don't have to wait around for a party full of arrogant a-holes only to have our party wipe and have to redo the whole process anyway. I don't have to wait around for hours when I work all day and can only game in twilight hours for a team of over-caffeinated jerks that would be kicked out of a normal party during the day. I can FINALLY have some control, however feeble, over the pathetic friendly NPC AI that Anet has seen fit to grace us with from their oblivious perch in the heavens. We can FINALLY get a party underway by filling that one last oh-so-aggravating empty party slot rather than waiting for the right profession to come along with moderate sense. Last thing is if I really want to get a real PuG, guess what? I don't have to add the heroes, they will still be there in that magical dropdown menu land when I get done so I can suffer an irritating PuG to remind me why I am grateful for my half-witted heroes.

Daesu · Jul 08, 2009, 07:34 AM // 07:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

The thread is about the problems with heroes. If heroes replaced humans in any way, that can be considered a problem to many people. Humans replacing heroes can not be a problem because heroes came later....I'm sure you can see that?

Heroes do not replace humans, humans choose between heroes, humans, and henchies. I still dont see what the problem is except that we now have more choices in the game. That is a good thing.

Quote:

Which is why FoW has a large farming base and DoA has almost no base to speak of?

There are still some people who farm DoA. FoW is being farmed by SC teams which are human teams rather than H/H teams. Using FoW, which is predominantly farmed by human SC teams, to support your point that heroes are destroying GW is ridiculous.

boxterduke · Jul 08, 2009, 01:31 PM // 13:31

People don't group that much because of heroes. However I would not play without them now since I only have an hour or two a night to play (and not all nights) and don't have the time to wait for people to group and such.

Mordakai · Jul 08, 2009, 01:57 PM // 13:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zinger314

I've seen several threads saying that the introduction of Heroes in Nightfall was one of the killers of GW.

I'm not sure I understand the logic. Sure, outposts became more empty with a lack of humans...but how does that kill GW?

I decided to bring this back full circle.

Even in 2005, there were empty outposts.

I'll let that sink in a little bit....

Even when the game was most focused on one area, with no heroes, and henchman AI was shoddy at best, there were places where it was hard (or impossible!) to find a group.

ArenaNet had to implement Heros in Nightfall, or people would just quit playing. There was just not enough Humans available in every mission of the game at all times...

I'll reiterate what most people are saying: Heroes didn't kill GW, they saved it. I'm sure I wouldn't be playing GW if not for Heroes.

(EDIT: Fixed start date)

Daesu · Jul 08, 2009, 07:41 PM // 19:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by boxterduke

People don't group that much because of heroes. However I would not play without them now since I only have an hour or two a night to play (and not all nights) and don't have the time to wait for people to group and such.

People dont group that much because there are not many people in the outposts/missions areas, outside of the zquests, to start with. Even if there are people, most of them seem to be afk.

If it is because of heroes and henchies, I would see lots of people entering the outposts, getting the henchies, then disappearing into the mission. But I dont see this happening. The outposts are just pretty much dead, rather than people entering and leaving frequently.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mordakai

I decided to bring this back full circle.

Even in 2005, there were empty outposts.

I'll let that sink in a little bit....

Even when the game was most focused on one area, with no heroes, and henchman AI was shoddy at best, there were places where it was hard (or impossible!) to find a group.

ArenaNet had to implement Heros in Nightfall, or people would just quit playing. There was just not enough Humans available in every mission of the game at all times...

I'll reiterate what most people are saying: Heroes didn't kill GW, they saved it. I'm sure I wouldn't be playing GW if not for Heroes.

That is indeed true, being one of the first few mesmers in GW, it was really difficult to find a group. There were many threads in the forum about profession discrimination and how people prefer eles to mesmers because PvE was basically a nuke them all game and at that time, the monster AI would just stand in Meteor Shower until they are dead. I remembered someone posting that the "best shutdown against an enemy is to kill them", thus, eles make more sense than mesmers in PvE.

At that time, I didn't have a choice because if nobody wants to party up with me, I had to resort to henchies that suck most of the time. And in some quests, e.g. the Titan Quests besides DDF, henchies are just too low level to succeed. I decided to quit the game after Factions, if it hasnt been for the announcement from ANet that Heroes would be provided for NF which kept me interested in the game till now.

I just find it ironical that some people are suggesting that we go back to the old times without heroes (i.e. I can only assume that they must not be mesmer players back then

), because they want to party with other human players.

I find that people in this game, form their party based on what makes it easiest and most likely for them to succeed, not because of socializing, helping out, and all that crap excuses anti-heroes posters keep bringing up. This was why mesmers weren't popular with PUGs then. If you want to play in areas where human players, pve skills, and cons are most needed due to the difficulty, then the end game content and SC teams are where you want to be.

DreamWind · Jul 09, 2009, 02:51 AM // 02:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

I still dont see what the problem is except that we now have more choices in the game. That is a good thing.

More choices is not necessarily good. Some choices are not good.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

Using FoW, which is predominantly farmed by human SC teams, to support your point that heroes are destroying GW is ridiculous.

You are missing this point. Let me simplify things. You keep saying heroes are ok because humans have the potential to be more powerful. That is not necessarily true and you need to understand that.

Lastly I'd like to comment on the people who keep saying "I would have quit this game if not for heroes". Who cares? That isn't the point of this thread. The question is were heroes good for the game. If you quit the game Anet doesn't lose and the game doesn't die. Perhaps more people wouldn't have quit the game had changes not been made to it? Saying you would have quit means nothing in the context of this thread.

the_jos · Jul 09, 2009, 10:26 AM // 10:26

DreamWind,

Just as I told Daesu that his Corolla vs Ferrari is only focussing on a few things I can also say this to you.
There are so many forces at work that it's very hard to determine how heroes impacted Guild Wars.

Let's go back to the days before heroes and see what happened there (on PvE side).
Oh, we got Factions release. And with that we got titles. Awesome!
But Factions spread the player base. Between Proph and Factions but also in the Factions storyline. Introduce some elite areas where many people try to team and you will create somewhat empty outposts along the way.
On top of that titles made this problem worse. It encouraged single profession play and the thinking of: "why do certain things twice when there is no benefit (either gold or title progress)". Individual people were probably about as busy as they were before only doing a lot of different stuff.

The introduction of heroes can be seen in this light. It somewhat solves the empty-outpost problem and it enables people to achieve certain titles a little faster.

After Nightfall we got Hard Mode. Spreading players even more and creating a new problem. Full outposts where people would seek NM only to find out that most players were there to play HM. HM players don't tag along with NM players, thus slowing down experience gain for new players.

Somewhere around this time (earlier/later?) we got the message that GW1 was no longer receiving expansions and focus was put to GW2. We got EotN as last sales boost for A-net because it's a bridge-chapter because of HoM.
And because everyone should be able to have a decent HoM various overpowered skills were introduced for human players. And we got consumables, you can almost buy your titles nowadays if you ain't good enough to get them by playing.

I doubt that heroes destoy GW.
Where human teams gain huge benefit over hench/hero teams they will get together.
That's mainly in farming areas. Dungeons, UB craze, nowadays the various speed clears.
It's just that the average benefit of (random) human teams isn't enough compared to that of playing H&H for a lot of stuff. When taking heroes you are managing risk.
This means less downward risk (d/c, afk, human error, waiting for players) but also less upward risk (faster times, being able to do stuff a H&H team cannot do).

I think that other things besides heroes had a far more negative impact on random teaming (and even teaming in guilds for unorganised stuff).

Daesu · Jul 09, 2009, 03:01 PM // 15:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Lastly I'd like to comment on the people who keep saying "I would have quit this game if not for heroes". Who cares? That isn't the point of this thread. The question is were heroes good for the game.

Uh...Obviously I would say heroes are good for this game (read numerous posts above for supporting points), which you should be able to imply from my "I would have quit this game if not for heroes" statement.

Quote:

Originally Posted by the_jos

Just as I told Daesu that his Corolla vs Ferrari is only focussing on a few things I can also say this to you.

Each make has its own advantages and disadvantages, if anything else a Corolla is still cheaper, but someone who buys a Ferrari obviously value the other advantages more than just the price. Similarly someone who chooses to form a human team obviously value the other advantages that a human team can provide, more than the shorter waiting time in town if he uses H/H instead.

Since each option has its own advantages, then heroes and humans dont compete with each others in the same vertical "market" (similarly for compact vs luxury cars). Players are free to make different choices based on the areas and whatever they fancy at a particular point in time. Having that choice available to players, is good for the game.

Quote:

I doubt that heroes destoy GW.
Where human teams gain huge benefit over hench/hero teams they will get together.
That's mainly in farming areas. Dungeons, UB craze, nowadays the various speed clears.
It's just that the average benefit of (random) human teams isn't enough compared to that of playing H&H for a lot of stuff. When taking heroes you are managing risk.
This means less downward risk (d/c, afk, human error, waiting for players) but also less upward risk (faster times, being able to do stuff a H&H team cannot do).

I think that other things besides heroes had a far more negative impact on random teaming (and even teaming in guilds for unorganised stuff).

And that was what I have been saying.

Mordakai · Jul 09, 2009, 03:06 PM // 15:06

If not for heroes, people would quit the game.

Groups need people to play.

Ergo, Heroes saved Group Play.

(the reason this works is because very few people are exclusively H/H or Group. There is considerable overlap, in my experience).

Ghost Omel · Jul 09, 2009, 04:27 PM // 16:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mordakai

If not for heroes, people would quit the game.

Groups need people to play.

Ergo, Heroes saved Group Play.

(the reason this works is because very few people are exclusively H/H or Group. There is considerable overlap, in my experience).

jUST TO REINFORCE YOUR POINT so Dreamwind wont do a sneaky on you.. heroes did not provolke decline in playerbase..we all know why.

Gigashadow · Jul 09, 2009, 05:15 PM // 17:15

Heroes helped one set of people (prefer to H/H), and didn't help another (prefer to group). It's way too late to change it now, because the people that don't like heroes have already left the game, and the people that like them will leave if you change it.

Mordakai · Jul 09, 2009, 06:14 PM // 18:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ghost Omel

jUST TO REINFORCE YOUR POINT so Dreamwind wont do a sneaky on you.. heroes did not provoke decline in playerbase..we all know why.

I assume that's what you meant.

But it's hard to get exact numbers on the player base, unfortunately.