Curse

Perkunas · Feb 09, 2007, 08:07 AM // 08:07

Thursday, a guildmate and I took our warriors out of Ventari's Refuge down to The Falls looking for Totem Axes. It took more than an hour of hard fighting and picking up decent drops along the way. We each picked up over 2k in gold, several purple items and a couple of gold items each and some runes. A black dye did drop for my guildmate, too. I did get a Totem to drop too. My guildmate was a bit aggravated at the time it took to get to The Falls, so he added his warrior and 2 monk heros. (I don't have NF.) We got from Ventari's to the Falls in just a few minutes. The drops along the way sucked. No runes, less than 500g each, 1 or 2 purple items each and no gold items. I did get another ToTem Axe. The first trip down netted me 7k+ after selling runes and other items. I netted <1.5k on the second trip. (Haven't sold axes, yet.) Heros/Henches make things faster and easier, but in coin (the bottom line) is it worth it?

cellardweller · Feb 09, 2007, 08:10 AM // 08:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kuldebar Valiturus

No, actually I already explained what I said. I am not debating the virtues of Heroes. However, I am comparing my experience in Guild Wars to my experiences as a long time player in other online games. I see trends in gameplay that weren't present when Guild Wars was released and I think the game has a social problem.

This thread is explicitly about punishing people for using heroes, if you're not debating this, then I'm not sure what your point is.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kuldebar Valiturus

It's all anecdotal, so it doesn't matter. I solely use Heroes and Henchies because they are the most efficient way to progress in the game. ANet has made it so. Serious players that want to move through the game will prefer to use NPC's as team members.

People can cough up exceptions about playing with guildees or live-in lovers but the majority of people that first log into Guild Wars will find a rather austere lifelessness.

So, cuting the psycho babble and saving it for observations of how people interact in-game would be more constructive.

Everyone I know plays in groups with people whose company they enjoy, so you're experiences are completely contradictory to mine and equally anecdotal. Clearly the truth lies somewhere in the middle.

I'm willing to accept that people on your end of the spectrum exist, but the solution is to move them up to the "happy end", not to punish the happy people till they join the ranks of the sad.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kuldebar Valiturus

Recap on a trend:

For people to play together they need to group together, it's not a shocker that they won't group together if they don't need to group together. And there we are.

People cooperate and are "nice' to each other when they need each other to accomplish things that they can not do on their own.

When someone needs to get to town and they have a choice between a car and mule, people will generally choose the car. Doesn't mean they always will, but over time the trend will lean toward the car...hands down.

People play online games for some very basic reasons:

-a sense of achievement (competence)
-freedom (autonomy)
-social connectedness (relatedness)

A game's long term success rests on meeting all three. Time will tell, it's not a static situation.

Not sure what cars and mules have to do with with the discussion, but yes helping people who want to get together find one another is a good thing. Punishing people who are already together is not a good thing.

freekedoutfish · Feb 09, 2007, 09:05 AM // 09:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

I'm rather a little lost on this one...I thought Heros were implemented because of the PUG problem. Is that incorrect? If so, were Heros a "failed idea"?

I dunno if anyone replied, but Heroes were added because people had been asking for better henches for ages.

Then once they added the amazing Heroes, the ungreatfull prats started winging they were too good and the were killing the PUG side of the game.

Thats gratitude for you!

Meat Axe · Feb 09, 2007, 10:28 AM // 10:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by cellardweller

Not sure what cars and mules have to do with with the discussion, but yes helping people who want to get together find one another is a good thing. Punishing people who are already together is not a good thing.

It was an analogy. He was pointing out the comparison between using heroes and PUGs. Heroes, being the "easier", more convenient and reliable choice I'm assuming were the cars.

freekedoutfish · Feb 09, 2007, 12:31 PM // 12:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kuldebar Valiturus

Everyone needs to realize that PuG's are even WORSE now because of HEROES/improved Henchies...because generally it is the least experienced and less skilled players that are trying to get into groups. So, now we have a self fulfilling predicament.
It isn't a sustainable situation.

Doesnt your entire arguement rely on the assumion that PUGs which people want to join are looking for the best of the best!

Not everything in GWs which can be PUG'ed needs a specilised, elite, expert team to achieve it. Since most stuff can be completed using henches or heroes, then why do we need these expertise and highly attunded PUG groups?

Why cant noob players be allowed to join a PUG and just have a laugh and a bit of fun. Aslong as you feed them instructions and politely tell them how best to do something, then they learn.

I appreciate your view if your talking about elite areas like UW, FOW, SF or DOA. In those instances we do need specialised groups to achieve certain things.

But other areas dont. Most other areas can be done using any old PUG and mix of players. This is why I say its the elite, stuck up prats who ruin PUGing.

You can have someone who needs to complete a relatively easy mission, standing there trying to form the "perfect PUG" with "perfect memebers" and all the rest, when in actual fact any group could do it.

So instead of being all l33t and being stuck up their own arse, they need to just enjoy the game and let anyone take part and teach them.

grottoftl · Feb 09, 2007, 02:15 PM // 14:15

I wonder why the pro-PuG players don't blame guilds for the lack of PuGs, they had something to do with this too. if you didn't notice there a lot of players who exclusively play with their guildmates only now because of the bad experiences they had with PuGs

glountz · Feb 09, 2007, 02:46 PM // 14:46

/Not signed
To improve PUGS:
- Make a built-in audio device. You group, you're automatically added to the GWaudio's team list of the Group maker. If you don't have a micro, at least you hear what are saying those who have one.
- You can display every skillbar of your party and see their use exactly like you see currently heroe's one. So you can discard or improve bad skillbars, or see if the player that owns it plays it well or not.
- Only the group maker can draw on the minimap.
- Your ignore list has a capacity increased from 10 people to 1000 people.
Etc...

Otherwise, you could just join a guild.

Jetdoc · Feb 09, 2007, 02:58 PM // 14:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by cellardweller

These are very different beasts. In the case of vehicles, the car with multiple people is providing benefits for the comunity in lower congestion and emmissions.

Actually, providing incentives to those who choose to play with other players IS benefiting the community by expanding the number of people who are available to group with in a multiplayer setting.

Keeping the ability to play GW in many different ways (i.e. solo, single player with AI, multiplayer, or PvP) is one of the true values of the game. If I feel like taking about bunch of AI out and slaughtering some enemies, I can. If I want to see if I can solo a boss with no AI help, I can. If I feel like playing with others and dealing with that unpredictability, I can.

Unfortunately, only the last one is dependent upon the availability of other people in the game. Encouraging that availability is something that benefits the community.

freekedoutfish · Feb 09, 2007, 03:20 PM // 15:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by glountz

/Not signed
- You can display every skillbar of your party and see their use exactly like you see currently heroe's one. So you can discard or improve bad skillbars, or see if the player that owns it plays it well or not.

So just kick someone who enters with a skill-bar you dont like?

Thats kind of adding to the whole PUG l33t attitude that makes PUGing so bad. "You dont have what i want you to have, so get out". We need some amount of privacy to how we use our characters, otherwise people will order you to do things how they want and free-will goes out the window.

glountz · Feb 09, 2007, 04:11 PM // 16:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by freekedoutfish

So just kick someone who enters with a skill-bar you dont like?

Thats kind of adding to the whole PUG l33t attitude that makes PUGing so bad. "You dont have what i want you to have, so get out". We need some amount of privacy to how we use our characters, otherwise people will order you to do things how they want and free-will goes out the window.

This attitude is here anyway.
You can always ask for certain kind of skills to be taken with decent amounts of attributes for certains missions (daze or interrupts for Unwaking waters, for example). This way, you also can't be cheated by so-called healers who go 55, for example.
I don't know for you, but when I ask the help of my guild to perform a difficult mission my guildies finished on masters (Elite missions, Gates of Madness) I shut up and listen how they did.
When I go farming with my guildies to, say, catch a particular green, I shut up and take the build they need. I propose improvements if there's some to do.

I'm quite sorry, but efficiency is largely more important than your little ego and your will to take arcane echo-echo-mending or frenzy+healing signet.
And generally, people ask for roles, not for particular skillset. A "tank" can be a warrior, but also of there is no harsh disenchant 55 monks, Eles, Rangers, 105Hp Dervish, etc.... A "Nuker" can be an elementalist or a FoC or SS necro.

Lack of efficiency is what refrains myself and many people to PuG. When people will be more efficient at PuGing than at Heroing, Heroes and Henchmen will disappear by themselves.

Effendi Westland · Feb 09, 2007, 06:05 PM // 18:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by NeHoMaR

Aeon221, don't worry, HARD MODE is coming!

(I hope that hard mode force to make pugs for success, I HOPE)

Same here, though if forced to pug because the area only allows for nuking/spellbreaker-bonded tanking then meh, we got a DoA already.

Burst Cancel · Feb 09, 2007, 06:24 PM // 18:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by freekedoutfish

So just kick someone who enters with a skill-bar you dont like?

Thats kind of adding to the whole PUG l33t attitude that makes PUGing so bad. "You dont have what i want you to have, so get out". We need some amount of privacy to how we use our characters, otherwise people will order you to do things how they want and free-will goes out the window.

If I make a party, I'm going to give everyone their bars. If they are unwilling to run the bar I give, or unwilling to ping their bar, they are free to find another party. We don't need any privacy in how we use our characters, this is a team game. If you feel like you need to hide your skillbar from your party, there is something wrong - either with you, or with your party.

Free-will never "goes out the window". You are free to leave any parties that require skillbars that you cannot or do not wish to use. And you'll never be 'stuck' in some part of the game for having an unpopular skillbar because of our heroe/hench system.

The community cannot be saved because it is not interested in saving itself. The problem isn't even a matter of playing ability - as most veterans would tell you, we really don't mind new players, provided that they're willing to follow instructions. The problem is that a lot of players are just terrible people in general. I don't know what it is about GW, but it certainly seems to attract more than its fair share of immature assholes, and *that* is what's killing the community.

Chris616263 · Feb 09, 2007, 06:45 PM // 18:45

I have an idea on how to making PUGing more attractive. A whole bunch of "uber1337" players should take a trip to ascalon, adopt every mending-shielding-hands-warrior/heal-party-spamming-monk/etc and TEACH THEM HOW TO PLAY.

I blew through Nightfall with heroes; as I'm sure many others have (who will agree that Nightfall is harder than prophecies and factions). Who wants to go back to the days of relying on people that claim "lolol I cen solo dis" and then die 3 seconds later? Especially in a campaign like Nightfall?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Burst Cancel

The community cannot be saved because it is not interested in saving itself. The problem isn't even a matter of playing ability - as most veterans would tell you, we really don't mind new players, provided that they're willing to follow instructions. The problem is that a lot of players are just terrible people in general. I don't know what it is about GW, but it certainly seems to attract more than its fair share of immature assholes, and *that* is what's killing the community.

^QUOTE OF THE DAY^

The community can get sucked into a black hole and die; and I would probably comment on how nice it is that there's no more town lag.

Kuldebar Valiturus · Feb 09, 2007, 07:02 PM // 19:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Burst Cancel
The community cannot be saved because it is not interested in saving itself. The problem isn't even a matter of playing ability - as most veterans would tell you, we really don't mind new players, provided that they're willing to follow instructions. The problem is that a lot of players are just terrible people in general. I don't know what it is about GW, but it certainly seems to attract more than its fair share of immature assholes, and *that* is what's killing the community.

/second this as Quote of the Day

I would also suggest that a game can start to attract players of a lesser quality when certain of its design mechanics allow people of a less cooperative nature to enjoy success in the game.

Chalk it up to social engineering gone wrong, what you encourage you will get more of, it's really simple.

TheRaven · Feb 09, 2007, 07:38 PM // 19:38

Well, I love to PUG in the game. I've stated that many times in various threads here. There are a lot of posters her though that have said they hate PUGs and play the entire game with Heroes/henchies. I believe that those people are missing out on an enjoyable part of the game, but that's their decision and I'm not going to argue that they should be PUGGing. I'm not referring to the folks that do everything with guildmates and friends either. They've found a good alternative to PUGs and are having a fun social experience that way.

I don't want to remove the henchies and I don't want bigger rewards for people that PUG. PUGGing is simply another way to play the game and the folks that use henchies exclusively shouldn't be punished. I think A-Net has already done plenty to encourage PUGs. We have the elite areas where heroes just can't cut it as well as humans and we will soon have "hard mode" which will probably require some form of human teamwork. None of these areas are required to finish the game though so if you prefer henching it you can and those of us who prefer PUGs can go to these areas and find a group.

I mean, let's face it. Some of the posters here that hate PUGs can get downright mean with their posts. Do you really want to PUG with these people??? I know I don't! Let them be.

At my core, when I start a quest, I want to feel needed. I want to contribute to the team. If I've never done a mission before, I'll take henchies so that I can take my time and learn the layout of the mission. I would only hinder a PUG. I also don't enjoy joining PUGs with Level 20s in them (Assuming I'm Level 15 or less). These PUGs don't need me. They are depending on the 20 to run the quest/mission. My level 12 character really cannot contribute to this group so I don't enjoy teaming with them. Usually if a 20 joins my low-level mission, I'll make up some excuse and leave before we start.

Basically there are many many different types of players in GW.
- Loners. Average skill players who prefer not to speak to strangers.
- Elitists. These folk only want to play with other Elitists. These are also the folks who want to win the mission/achieve the goal at all costs.
- Noobs. Beginners and/or folks who just don't have the talent to play well.
- Cliches. Folks who play only with known friends, never strangers.
- Socialites. Folks who are actively looking for PUGs and are doing the mission/quest solely for the PUG experience.

What we need is a way to easily find others that are in the same group as ourselves and adventure with them. The Cliches and Loners aren't a problem. You'll never encounter them in the game because they won't be joining your PUG and they won't be interacting with you at all. The PUGs instead suffer from the Elitists and Noobs that you pick up. These groups are better off sticking with their own, but unfortunately they are hard to recognize up front. It's only after they've joined a Socialite group and started causing trouble that they are identified.

the_jos · Feb 09, 2007, 07:53 PM // 19:53

Quote:

A whole bunch of "uber1337" players should take a trip to ascalon, adopt every mending-shielding-hands-warrior/heal-party-spamming-monk/etc and TEACH THEM HOW TO PLAY.

Well, that could be something.
I don't feel 'uber1337', but don't mind helping a starting player out on how to play a certain profession.
Don't think I could add real value to W/Mo's or Ele's (have not played those enough to really know them). But I think I can add value to starters on the other professions.

Perhaps A-net could introduce some 'boot camp' area's where new players can team up with more experienced ones to learn something.
Those area's don't give xp or gold, only playing experience.
Just make a NPC with various options like: 'I like to learn more about:' my profession, teaming up with others, various opponents and that kind of stuff.
The new player is then teleported to a group, a bit like RA, where an experienced player that signed up for the specified option joins them and explains how things work. He/she should have the option to see the skills and attribute points and 'unlock' them so the new player can change them to see the effect of the change. The experienced player cannot change them him/herself.
There could be various tasks depending on the choice the new player made.
For teaming up, there should be tasks that can only be solved by the whole team like standing on 3 different point to open a gate or getting skills in sync to kill a difficult enemy.
For learning the profession there could be some enemies for most professions or npc to heal/support (for the monks/rt's/P's).
Also strategies like kiting and basic energy management can be covered.
For learning the enemies, various professions could be introduced and the player can experience the damage attacks do (including more/less armor on the enemy). This also covers hexes and conditions.
A bit like the training area on battle island, only more interactive.

People are free to ask questions which the experienced player can answer, as long as those are in line with the option taken.

At the end, if all want, there could be the possibility to put the things practiced in action if the party wants to. Just let two groups fight each other, no deaths counting for survivor title. This also involves some location capturing and other tactical skills.
At the end, perhaps a small evaluation of what was good and what could be better discussed with both teams together. All same level, armor (depending on profession) and attribute point.
Players are free to leave whenever they want.

The only difficulty is bad behaving people.
The experienced player could have a kick and mute option, but it's worse when the experienced player is behaving bad. Don't know how selection for this should be.

This 'boot camp' is not mandatory, it's just an extra feature for the people that want to learn somewhat more than the initial quests offer.

TheRaven · Feb 09, 2007, 08:09 PM // 20:09

Nice idea, but I believe that the game already has this feature. It's called guildmates.

Most guilds are willing to help out newer members with any areas they need help in.

cellardweller · Feb 10, 2007, 01:22 AM // 01:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Meat Axe

It was an analogy. He was pointing out the comparison between using heroes and PUGs. Heroes, being the "easier", more convenient and reliable choice I'm assuming were the cars.

Then the analogy is flawed for this case because the suggestion is not PuGs vs Heroes, its human groups vs Heroes. In which case a car (the simple and convenient hero option) and an F15 (the more powerful people option requiring more preperation to use) would be a better fit.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jetdoc

Actually, providing incentives to those who choose to play with other players IS benefiting the community by expanding the number of people who are available to group with in a multiplayer setting.

Keeping the ability to play GW in many different ways (i.e. solo, single player with AI, multiplayer, or PvP) is one of the true values of the game. If I feel like taking about bunch of AI out and slaughtering some enemies, I can. If I want to see if I can solo a boss with no AI help, I can. If I feel like playing with others and dealing with that unpredictability, I can.

Unfortunately, only the last one is dependent upon the availability of other people in the game. Encouraging that availability is something that benefits the community.

What you described doesn't benefit the community, it benefits the small niche that enjoys playing with strangers. It provides no benefit for guild groups, people that play out of phase with the timezone or people that just prefer to be alone.

I'm getting to the point where I'm just repeating myself now, so I'll just summarise my position one more time.

The suggestion in this thread was to make people play with strangers by punishing them for playing with exclusively guildies/AI. This suggestion is extrememly value laden in that it is pinned on the premise that PUGing is somehow the superior way to play and should be rewarded. It would harm the vast majority (as I see it) of the comunity that have no interest in PUGging.

The only way to help Puggers without hurting the rest of the community is to make it easier for Puggers to find one another via matchmaking services.

CDittric77 · Feb 10, 2007, 03:24 AM // 03:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Burst Cancel

If I make a party, I'm going to give everyone their bars. If they are unwilling to run the bar I give, or unwilling to ping their bar, they are free to find another party. We don't need any privacy in how we use our characters, this is a team game. If you feel like you need to hide your skillbar from your party, there is something wrong - either with you, or with your party.

Free-will never "goes out the window". You are free to leave any parties that require skillbars that you cannot or do not wish to use. And you'll never be 'stuck' in some part of the game for having an unpopular skillbar because of our heroe/hench system.

This seems a contradiction to me....a team game where the all-knowing veteran tells someone how to do something to align with what they feel is a 'successful' approach to a game.

I don't care what skills a person brings on their mission - they are allowed to bring whatever they choose. Heaven forbid if I actually have to learn how to adapt my play style to create success in any given mission or quest if someone uses a non-traditional build.

Bring it on, I say; innovation and invention happen in part when we don't force everone to conform

Burst Cancel · Feb 10, 2007, 09:23 AM // 09:23

It's not a contradiction because I'm not telling people how to play the game in general. If people aren't happy with my skillbars, or take offense at being dictated a bar to play, they are more than welcome to join a different group where they feel more comfortable. It's better for everyone that way.

I dictate skillbars because it reduces confusion and because I know what works. Is it possible that someone else knows a better way? Sure. Do I care? Not at all. If I'm leading the team, I'm going to do it in a way that's as straightforward and painless as possible, and that means giving each person their bar and (if necessary) telling them exactly how to play it. Similarly, when I join other teams, I ask if there's a bar they want me to run, and I'll run it unless I think it's extremely stupid, in which case I will point it out. If they insist on me running a bar that I don't want to run, I will do what I have encouraged everyone else to do: leave.