Curse

Faer · Nov 24, 2007, 10:42 AM // 10:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by N E D M

I thought we already had a 7 heroes thread
in sardelaac
where it belongs
instead of here
...

We did, until ArenaNet said STFU and I closed them all.

freekedoutfish · Nov 24, 2007, 02:24 PM // 14:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by =HT=Ingram

lol I was very excited originally to have heroes cause I thought they would be account based... only having to equip them 1 time for your account and they became your companions through your adventuring. However now that I have equipt 300 heroes with runes, inscriptions, weapons, and so forth; OUCH, I can say that it was nothing but a total Pain in the assets how Anet implemented them.

However I would not want to micro manage 7 heroes, nor do I think others would. And since only a FEW heroes AI is very good, and only on specific things... I know I would have to... ...

If they allowed 7 heroes in PUGs, that is no reason to run out and buy them all runes and spend tones of gold on them.

I only runed my necro and elemental and all the rest are without, and they do absolutely fine. Better then most humans.

You can also use the /bonus pack to give them max weapons nd buy the very cheap core skill pack to get them all weapons account based.

Heroes are not hard to equip or make effective. You dont need to waste time getting them runes or flashy weapons. The key to heroes is being able to set their skills, not whether they can use runes or not.

Sorry I just dislike replies which go along the lines of..."Hey, they changed this thing or added this thing, so that means I HAVE to use it or max it out or I cant play!" Just because they added 7 heroes is no reason to use heroes still, and its no reason to feel you have to run out and make them "perfect".

You can play the game how you want, and you dont have to follow a trend just because everyone might want to use 7 heroes. But that doent mean we should get 7 heroes if people want or need it.

Tamuril elansar · Nov 24, 2007, 03:14 PM // 15:14

pugs bore me, no1 in a pug has any form of skill. Every time i pug, there's at least 1 guy with a retarded build, 1 leaves and 1 goes ''brb'' aka just wait till the we finish the mission. so i vote yes even if its never going to come

Zeek Aran · Nov 24, 2007, 04:32 PM // 16:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rhedd

I assume you understand the irony in your posts.

Yes, but people are still discussing, which leads to more people discussing, while I'm just saying STFU.

Isileth · Nov 24, 2007, 04:36 PM // 16:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zeek Aran

Yes, but people are still discussing, which leads to more people discussing, while I'm just saying STFU.

If you dont agree with something about 7 heroes you could always post and say why rather than just trying to kill the thread.

Zeek Aran · Nov 24, 2007, 04:52 PM // 16:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isileth

If you dont agree with something about 7 heroes you could always post and say why rather than just trying to kill the thread.

Because this has been brought up a thousand times before and been shot down every time. Gaile came in and even said NO.

You're still discussing it. How many pages of discussion have we already had? ANET has seen it. They said NO. Get. Over. It.

Isileth · Nov 24, 2007, 05:10 PM // 17:10

Yes but the reasons given were....crap really.

It wasnt in their design vision.
I believe they mentioned balance as well.

We already know the balance reason is incorrect.
And not in your design vision? Come on. Im sure a lot of changes were never originally planned. That doesnt mean they will never happen.

This isnt just some small petition to be able to change your hair or fix some armour clipping. This is a key part of the game.

Bryant Again · Nov 24, 2007, 05:22 PM // 17:22

I'm still gonna say the same thing I've said in the other thread: ANet doesn't want to add the option of 7 heroes because they have no idea what will happen. It's also not like we need 7 heroes, we've been fine without them thus far.

Yes, I would love 7 heroes. For me, the game would be more fun and personal. But I don't think any of us know what repurcussions will happen if it becomes so.

freekedoutfish · Nov 25, 2007, 12:34 AM // 00:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zeek Aran

Because this has been brought up a thousand times before and been shot down every time. Gaile came in and even said NO.

You're still discussing it. How many pages of discussion have we already had? ANET has seen it. They said NO. Get. Over. It.

So if your local council said they were going to add a completely unjustified tax into your community or increase the cost of a local service by double or tripple, and the community protested and the council responded witht "We're not listening, we're going to do it anyway"....

...would you just stop protesting and go back home and put up with it?

This is the entire point of the guru and other game forums such as this. The entire point is to pick out what we feel needs changed and then have the community vote on whether its a good idea or not and THEN push that idea onto Anet.

Its how the world works and its how progress is made and its how things change!

If you felt strongly about something (whether it be a computer game or something more important which effect you), would you just back down because the company or business said "STFU and go away"?

Im not saying you have no right to /not sign this thread. But give a good reason why not, instead of trying to bump it every chance you get. Explain your view better then just "Anet doesnt like the idea, so we cant have it".

We protested about storage and other aspects for a long time and they eventually got changed. Im sure at the time Anet was thinking "god would they stop asking for this to be changed"... but it did.

Bryant gave a good reason why not to do this. Anet is obviously worried about the impact and how it might effect the social side. But with all due respect, they stepped over that line when they added Heroes into Night Fall. Allowing us to use another 4 isnt going to make anything worse then what has already been effected.

Anet also has to hold its head up and admit that the population of guildwars has become thinned out due to 3 campaigns and an expansion. You have alot fewer people playing older campaigns and sometimes its impossible to find a PUG to do a mission or quest and the henches just dont cut it.

They should admit that and do something to fix it. Either re-vamp the existing henches so they come in line with heroe AI and functionality, or allow us to use more heroes in teams.

I personally find it confusing why we still have two different AI's ingame. Heroes are obviously more intelligent then henches, and that problem should have been fixed when heroes were added. You cant have two different hench/hero AI systems in one game.

Either pring henches up to speed and on equal ground as heroes, or allow us to use more heroes!

Silly Warrior · Nov 25, 2007, 12:55 AM // 00:55

Despite it being very ridiculous that Anet will not allow the change, but since they have said already that this change will never happen there is no reason to discuss it.

Because the change will never be happening, we can only talk on the forums about how dumb it truly is. I understand the logic in their decision, and yet we, as players can decide when its right to play with others or simply use the AI that Anet themselves have taken so long to create.

/Dumb

Smile Like Umean It · Nov 25, 2007, 01:12 AM // 01:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Faer

We did, until ArenaNet said STFU and I closed them all.

So why is this one 23 pages and still going?

I doubt anyone is going to mention something that hasn't been said plenty of other times. Probably in this very thread too.

HawkofStorms · Nov 25, 2007, 01:22 AM // 01:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by freekedoutfish

So if your local council said they were going to add a completely unjustified tax into your community or increase the cost of a local service by double or tripple, and the community protested and the council responded witht "We're not listening, we're going to do it anyway"....

...would you just stop protesting and go back home and put up with it?

In the real world, the city council would get voted out of office... or people would move to avoid the tax.

If not having 7 heroes angers you so much, stop buying A.net products. Hit them where it hurts. If it doesn't anger enough to stop giving A.net your money, then it really isn't a big deal (worth 23+ pages of discussion).

Khazad Guard · Nov 25, 2007, 01:57 AM // 01:57

Quote:

Despite it being very ridiculous that Anet will not allow the change, but since they have said already that this change will never happen there is no reason to discuss it.

It hasnt stopped people from discussin other issues over and over though. People should just take it and move on.

I think the current way is fine, having too many heroes per person is just ridiculous. I personally tend to play h/h. I find it rather time consuming waiting for a party to form, and having the pug smashed asunder. I also dont have to worry about losing half a team because they stink at time management and leave early, or purely because they fight between one another.

Bryant Again · Nov 25, 2007, 01:58 AM // 01:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by freekedoutfish

...But with all due respect, they stepped over that line when they added Heroes into Night Fall. Allowing us to use another 4 isnt going to make anything worse then what has already been effected.

No one can say. The mentality that "henchies suck" is quite prominant throughout the PvE population, and it could be the reason that some people don't use heroes - that you only get to have 3 of them. What if adding an additional 4 would really push that person to stop PUGging altogether, dealing yet another blow to people who are inexperienced and/or don't own any heroes?

We don't know. No one knows. What I *do* know, however, is that we're fine as it is. 3 heroes is just good enough.

Loviatar · Nov 25, 2007, 02:41 AM // 02:41

[QUOTE]

Quote:

Originally Posted by freekedoutfish

Bryant gave a good reason why not to do this. Anet is obviously worried about the impact and how it might effect the social side. But with all due respect, they stepped over that line when they added Heroes into Night Fall. Allowing us to use another 4 isnt going to make anything worse then what has already been effected.

please try to understand one thing.

you can take 3 heroes and up to 4 more henchies............NO PUG REQUIRED
that rules out forced PUGing because they still allow you to fill the entire party .......NO PUG REQUIRED SO DROP THAT FALSE ASSumption

Anet did not state they were worried about what might happen they stated they did extensive testing before deciding on 3 as the limit because they saw in the tests what would be the result.

HINT.............one of the experts here stated he/she would happily trade all 4 henchmen for one additional hero.

4 henchmen for one more hero........must have a very good reason.

he/she did

in testing where a guildie moved the fourth hero as directed with the best skill bar he/she with their 3 heroes cleaned house on several very good high end NM farm areas getting 8 drops on exempted goodies with 3 empty slots.

with 4 heroes the guildie would not be taking a share.

this is not a forced social issue this is a power farmer issue

Quote:

Anet also has to hold its head up and admit that the population of guildwars has become thinned out due to 3 campaigns and an expansion. You have alot fewer people playing older campaigns and sometimes its impossible to find a PUG to do a mission or quest and the henches just dont cut it.

3 heroes plus henchies will do all except the elite areas where no amount of henchies would do it or HM

3 heroes plus the henchies does cut it

way back they actually did give reasons and the so called community said we dont like that answer do it our way.

Vinraith · Nov 25, 2007, 02:53 AM // 02:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

3 heroes is just good enough.

...as long as you've got a few friends in game whose schedules coordinate with yours well enough to be able to do elite missions (several hour propositions, I think you'll agree) with you. Oh, or unless you actually enjoy playing a game with strangers who may or may not be completely wasting your time.

Anet opened this box the moment they advertised on the original box that the game could be played solo, and it's not going to go away until they make good on that. If anything it'll just get worse as fewer and fewer people are playing the game and even the folks that enjoy PUGing can't find anyone to play with. Sooner or later every game's community dies down and one of two things happen: it becomes a single player game, or it becomes nothing. I know what I'd prefer.

Bryant Again · Nov 25, 2007, 03:09 AM // 03:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vinraith

...as long as you've got a few friends in game whose schedules coordinate with yours well enough to be able to do elite missions (several hour propositions, I think you'll agree) with you.

5 elite (and optional) missions out of the 50+ campaign missions, that's pretty minimal. Not to mention that there aren't any henchies in those outposts, a pretty big and clear indication that ANet really wants you to have to party with real people for it (all that coordination is really worth the time and effort: Them missions can be tough at times.)

Also, there are instances where people *have* been able to hero through them, so it's more a matter of getting creative.

Edit: FoW, UW, Deep, Urgoz, DoA...Okay, did I miss any? Hollah if I did.

Loviatar · Nov 25, 2007, 03:15 AM // 03:15

[QUOTE]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vinraith

...as long as you've got a few friends in game whose schedules coordinate with yours well enough to be able to do elite missions (several hour propositions, I think you'll agree) with you.

hasnt it been already established by the experts here that the *ELITE* areas can not be done with 7 or 11 or whatever number of heroes?

if 7 heroes wont enable you to do the elite few areas there is no need for more than the 3.

Quote:

Anet opened this box the moment they advertised on the original box that the game could be played solo, and it's not going to go away until they make good on that.

the box also said online game content may change so that is invalid from the start

you can play the entire storyline game solo and the optional elite areas are exactly that.

optional not needed for playing the game and needing a better quality gamer than the average player that gets squashed in the first 5 minutes of entering then yells make it easier so i can do it because i paid for the whole game i should be able to do the whole game no matter how bad a player i am.

Vinraith · Nov 25, 2007, 03:23 AM // 03:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Loviatar

optional not needed for playing the game and needing a better quality gamer than the average player that gets squashed in the first 5 minutes of entering then yells make it easier so i can do it because i paid for the whole game i should be able to do the whole game no matter how bad a player i am.

There's no one here saying that, so you can stop wailing and gnashing your teeth. No one is asking for "easier," all we're asking for is the option to play them at all. You don't like that idea, clearly. It's almost as though you think the only way people should be allowed to play the game is by grouping with people like you. I wonder why so many of us don't want to do that?

Anet advertised a soloable game. Introduce areas of the game that can not be completed solo and you're going to get a lot of complaining. They can hide behind "game experience may change" and whatnot, but that doesn't change the fundamental fact that all areas of the game are not soloable and that makes quite a lot of their players unable to realistically access them. Apparently their "make people play together" elementary school teacher mentality is more important than the fun of their players. We'll keep that in mind in evaluating their products in the future.

And you can give up on hearing the end of this for a long time. Again, all games end up one of two things: single player or dead.

Vinraith · Nov 25, 2007, 03:32 AM // 03:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

5 elite (and optional) missions out of the 50+ campaign missions, that's pretty minimal. Not to mention that there aren't any henchies in those outposts, a pretty big and clear indication that ANet really wants you to have to party with real people for it (all that coordination is really worth the time and effort: Them missions can be tough at times.)

Also, there are instances where people *have* been able to hero through them, so it's more a matter of getting creative.

Edit: FoW, UW, Deep, Urgoz, DoA...Okay, did I miss any? Hollah if I did.

It's up to the individual whether that bothers them, I suppose. Speaking for myself, it's disappointing to me to have the high level endgame content require significant advanced scheduling and be inaccessible to me on a regular basis. I end up having to play other games when what I'd like to be doing is playing GW, simply because the friends I would usually complete these things with are (understandably) busy with real life. I guess it's not a big deal for kids, and I guess kids comprise a lot of the user base, but it reduces the overall fun of the game for me.