Curse

Carth` · Nov 15, 2006, 04:09 PM // 16:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by spellsword

People have been playing solo with henches long time before heroes and will continue doing so if thats what they want, so getting rid of the limit would only make it more fun for those who prefer that type of play. Those who like to team up with others could continue doing so. In the end, the choice is up to the players themselves. I think the more options we have, the better.

Come on, we both know that's not true. In Prophecies and Factions 90% of people did the following: first choice was guildies or friends, then you would go with a PUG, and as a last resort you would hench the mission.

In contrast, in Nightfall 90% of people played through using only henchmen and heroes. Maybe more.

See the difference? We've gone from 90% of people playing with each other, to only 10%.

Those who like to team up with others can't continue doing so. I am one of these people, and I play with heroes and henchmen. Why? Because it is so damn easy to, and because everyone else is. It's not about having more options if the option you add is so ubiquitous that everyone does it.

Using your fragile argument, I could say we should have the option to bring 2 elite skills. The people who want to play with 2 elite skills can have more fun, but those who still want to play with only 1 can do that.

Shaggeh · Nov 15, 2006, 04:14 PM // 16:14

Quote:

Come on, we both know that's not true. In Prophecies and Factions 90% of people did the following: first choice was guildies or friends, then you would go with a PUG, and as a last resort you would hench the mission.

In contrast, in Nightfall 90% of people played through using only henchmen and heroes. Maybe more.

See the difference? We've gone from 90% of people playing with each other, to only 10%.

Show everyone that you didn't make up these figures on the spot and then, maybe, you'll have a point. You don't know that 90% of people in Nightfall are solely using Heroes and Henchmen, it just feels that way, so stop trying to pass this off as a fact.

I, and many other people, do not spend time looking for a group when we get to a new town/outpost/mission area. We grab a group of Henchmen and Heroes and head on out. Heroes are not an atrocity, nomatter how much you'd like to portray them as one. Stop using flimsy arguments backed by statistics you've arbitrarilly made up, and try looking at this from a different perspective.

Kuldebar Valiturus · Nov 15, 2006, 04:22 PM // 16:22

Lest we forget there is a price to using Heroes (to a lesser extent Henchies)

Using them:

-automatically means the player is losing loot and gold drops.
-the player will spend gold and items to improve the Heroes.
-the player will probably forget how to play with real human player.
-will cause a social backlash like in that movie Artificial Intelligence and people will hunt the Heroes/Henchies down to destroy them with heavy machinery.

Carth` · Nov 15, 2006, 04:28 PM // 16:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shaggeh

Show everyone that you didn't make up these figures on the spot and then, maybe, you'll have a point. You don't know that 90% of people in Nightfall are solely using Heroes and Henchmen, it just feels that way, so stop trying to pass this off as a fact.

I, and many other people, do not spend time looking for a group when we get to a new town/outpost/mission area. We grab a group of Henchmen and Heroes and head on out. Heroes are not an atrocity, nomatter how much you'd like to portray them as one. Stop using flimsy arguments backed by statistics you've arbitrarilly made up, and try looking at this from a different perspective.

Of course I made that figure up, based on observation. Everybody knows I can't know that for sure, but it isn't hard to see that before heroes, people formed PUGs for missions. Afterwards, nearly everyone is using heroes and henchmen. That was my point, the numbers don't matter.

I am using no flimsy arguments, the person I was replying to was. I'm sorry you take this heroes thing so close to heart, but I don't see the ability to form a party of 1 human and 8 heroes as a good thing.

BahamutKaiser · Nov 15, 2006, 04:31 PM // 16:31

Most of the players are antisocial already, they don't want to play with others, they don't know how to behave maturely, and they either suck and can't admit it, or overly critical and can't tolerate weakness. Heros allow people who arn't Fit for cooperative play to solo without others, and leaves the friendly and mature groups open to meet eachother.

I think 3 heros is a good balance between independance and dependance, with your 3 hero slots you can provide the essentials of your party with little need for outside help, but you still have 4 slots to fill and another developed team is better than henchmen. Still, the more freedom the better, without a need for player dependancy, only players who enjoy cooperation and know how to behave will play together, in all honesty, it eliminates much of the tension between whether your single character is effective enough for the party, and much talk about how human parties need kick functions and replacements for afk members, it truely meets the needs of several difficulties, whether you like it or not.

It is sad that people are so selfish that they woln't consider players because their party has a need to fill and they don't meet their ideal need, it is sad that players are too immature and inconsiderate to put proper effort into a mission or respect their fellow players, it is a problem and it can't be removed, alternatives are the ultimate remedy.

I agree that it would be easier if you could program all of your partners (Heros), but it isn't that hard to cooperate with as little as one or 2 other players and their heros to overcome much.

As a personal example, the first time I started a 4+ mission, the 2 human players both quit before the middle of the mission, one just quit because he went the wrong way alone and got killed, and the other racked up so much DP that he couldn't continue. Imagine that, a Dervish who can't survive even with 2 enchantment heavy super monks which can charge his energy like a power line.

The final truth is a perfectly coordinated skill setup is better than players 90 percent of the time, because the game is about cooperation, even more than skill. Players like to develope their own build and don't care to consider what is best for the team. Perhaps an elementist wants to go air magic even though the party is set up to reap strong defensive advantages with "Their On Fire". It doesn't matter how good an air elementist he is, he will not match the offensive and defensive advantage that party has with burning focused fire magic.

I'm all for gameplay difficulty, but they should not come in the form of disgruntal players and lack of support, one would hope if your good enough to beat the game, you would have players with you which can pull their end.

My best suggestion is new areas where several small parties cooperate with eachother in large scale battles. Simular to the Harvest temple or alliance battles, you would be in charge of your 4 man party (hero or otherwise), and you would be in the same instance cooperating with other 4 man parties, like seperate platoons in a battle. In an instance like this, even having 7 heros on your team doesn't relieve you of other players, and in such an instance, you may not even be able to choose your allies, they will just end up in the mission with you. I rather like the idea of open combat vs legions which would star several 4 or 8 man parties, and pit you in a battle to siege or defend or straight out open combat in the field. I would perfer more War settings, this is guild wars. OMG, I just thought, what if there was a new kind of guild battle which involved 4 teams of 4, vs 4 teams of 4......on and on and on.

Shaggeh · Nov 15, 2006, 04:39 PM // 16:39

Quote:

Everybody knows I can't know that for sure, but it isn't hard to see that before heroes, people formed PUGs for missions.

Before Heroes people either made do with Henchmen, which were terrible, or they simply felt forced to join a PuG. Making anyone feel forced to do anything in a game is a terrible thing, as it means they can't enjoy the game the way they like.

Quote:

That was my point, the numbers don't matter.

Then don't use them. Stating obviously incorrect numbers detracts from any form of credibility one may have when forming a post.

Quote:

...but I don't see the ability to form a party of 1 human and 8 heroes as a good thing.

No one would be forcing you to use them. They would simply be there for those that wish to grab a team and go. There will always be people standing about screaming for a PuG (I've completed the Nightfall and Prophecies storyline since Heroes launched, and I'm close to completing Factions again, and there are a great number of people screaming LFT in towns.), so, again, this doesn't really effect you.

Quote:

Heros allow people who arn't Fit for cooperative play to solo without others, and leaves the friendly and mature groups open to meet eachother.

Not everyone that uses Heroes/Henchmen are "[not] fit for cooperative play". The vast majority of players that use them have been through the story lines at least one time and are simply fed up with PuGs. So, if this statement is designed to make PuGs look like a bastion of civility and gaming prowess, it falls terribly short of doing so to anyone with even a shred of common-sense.

spellsword · Nov 15, 2006, 04:40 PM // 16:40

Quote:

But it is just another step on the fundamental balance issue. If you could carry around unlimited heroes, what would stop you from taking 11 heroes with you on the elite missions? then it would just get crazy after that!!!

They could just disable them for elite misions, same as you can't take henches into the underworld.

Quote:

using two monk heroes and a monk hench i can pretty much solo anywhere. in the places with two monk henchies, its just ridiculous. i'm a RANGER, i shouldnt be able to sit and tank with four henchies healing me. Taking more heroes would just mean i could bring more monks or whatever. i felt that the game was more balanced withour heroes, but they are a welcoem addition. if you were to have unlimited heroes you would need to get rid of henchies in order to keep the game difficult.

Taking four PC monks would have the same effect though, so if it is unbalanced, it isn't the heroes fault.

Quote:

Using your fragile argument, I could say we should have the option to bring 2 elite skills. The people who want to play with 2 elite skills can have more fun, but those who still want to play with only 1 can do that.

The comparison is flawed, having two elites would be unbalancing, as the game is designed with only one elite per player in mind. Without the hero cap, you still would be limited to X players for the given area.

Quote:

Of course I made that figure up, based on observation. Everybody knows I can't know that for sure, but it isn't hard to see that before heroes, people formed PUGs for missions. Afterwards, nearly everyone is using heroes and henchmen. That was my point, the numbers don't matter.

I have henched most of prophecies and factions, and I know I am not the only one. If people use hero/henc, its because they want to solo, for whatewer reason. I see no reason not to make it more enjoyable for those people.

kaya · Nov 15, 2006, 08:41 PM // 20:41

/signed

There are many reasons why people hench this game. As for me i do it cause my gaming time is limited and i dont have the time to sit around and wait for a group to get together, when i can just grab henchies and go. I can play the game at my own pace, which in the end gives me more out of my game. So, in otherwords i'm gonna continue to hench regardless.

The only thing adding an unlimited hero option will do, it let me customize my game even that much more. I think it's a great idea, and should be implimented. I dont think it's gonna change how gw is played. Those that like to hench the game will continue, but will have the option to do it with their heros. Those that like to play in parties will also continue to do so. I honestly see no downside to adding this option.

EternalTempest · Nov 15, 2006, 08:55 PM // 20:55

/not signed

Even after being removed from a human pug (the took me as a fire ele, then kicked me after I flashed my skill bar as requested) and a lame excuss we needed a healer after I mentioned I can change my skill bar had EVERY ele skill from Cantha/Tyria and 70% of elona ... srry end rant.

I think it would be over kill.

The Hand Of Death · Nov 15, 2006, 09:14 PM // 21:14

No.

/notsigned

guinevere · Nov 15, 2006, 09:52 PM // 21:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bankai

I really hate this idea. Why? Because Anet didn't want Heroes to be used for complete soloing. You're supposed to team up with 2-3 other guys and fill in the black spots with heroes.

/extremelynotsigned

reads my mind

its not a solo game

make friends, ask guildies to help

Griev · Nov 15, 2006, 10:01 PM // 22:01

/signed because I hate PuGs. If I play with other people its with friends/guildies.

Thallandor · Nov 16, 2006, 01:36 AM // 01:36

3 Heros per player is balanced as it is for the moment. As much as i would like to have my party entirely made up of Heros, its not likely to happen for the following reasons:

1) Anet has previously mentioned they envision that 1 player +3 heros X2 will be able to make up for a full party so there will still be some form of interaction btwn players. (though these days most are just 1player +3 heros +4 hencies going at the game.)

2) There are too many Whiners about NF turning the game into a single player online game or that they cant find groups cause no one is willing to babysit them through more difficult missions or no one is willing to listen to their BS and look at their drawings on the mini map or to rage quit from etc.

3) As mentioned, Heros AI can be tweaked by players to become extremely powerful builds hence contribute to unbalancing issues and the mob AI will need to be readjusted again.

4) If we were able to have a unlimited full Party of Heros, we will see even more PvP hate threads all over the forums QQing over how HA is broke.

So what i am saying is:

/Signed even though we know its not gonna happen.

Tide to Go · Nov 16, 2006, 02:21 AM // 02:21

well then the game would be too easy it already is easy enough with regular hench. So hey, we survived without them, this is just a little boost

-.- · Nov 16, 2006, 02:32 AM // 02:32

Increase max to 5 Heroes.

ken71880 · Nov 16, 2006, 04:35 AM // 04:35

I agree with many of your orginal points. I do not think we should have unlimited Hero advancement. I do think we should be allowed to have as many Hero's as we can have in a party - 6 party members, 5 Hero's or 8 paryy members then 7 heros. I may be wrong, but I do not think we could ever have all the henchmen thus we still have to choose. Someone stated that the game would be easier if we could use 7 henchmen, I disagree with that as well. Has anyone tried to control 8 characters at the same time. I have (with three) and it is very hard to control one heroe (especially in the middle of a battle)

Sli Ander · Nov 16, 2006, 04:37 AM // 04:37

Aside from other comments, logic,etc. Lets assume they change this to unlimited heroes

1) Do you really want to micromanage 7 heroes skills in a battle?

2) Wouldn't they have to add more buttons to be able to direct heroes? That would be more clutter around the compass.

3)More people will complain that their heroes take up valuable cash and drops.After all, who has to equip the heroes...you do. And if you want the heroes to have nice stuff, you're paying more.

4)Pvp would be ruined because it would be "commander of uber interrupt bots" vs the same.(I don't pvp, but I've read that there seems to be a bit of trouble concerning heroes in pvp already. I'd like to keep the player in player versus player)

5)Since you now have a team of super interrupt heroes, a squad of beastmasters or whatnot, what possible reason do you have to play? What challenge could the game in its current state possibly afford you? Unless you simply want to mow down everything in your path like grass before a lawnmower, the AI would have to be upped.

6)If the AI is upped to accomodate the Heroway players who are bored, what becomes of people who still wish to pug or simply have human interaction? Will they be forced to go Heroway for the ability to survive in an area designed for the reaction times of computers?

Now I know there are holes in some of these statements, but frankly I am very very tired. Please just look at the possibilities when you ask for changes like this, as the consequences could be quite drastic if taken to the extreme. What you are in fact proposing is to allow RTS play in a multiplayer online rpg. This game was designed to be played by multiple people, which is why there are limits on heroes, whose abilities and tweakability would unbalance play.

Henchman are not limited because you must adapt to their skills, not the other way around. Henchman and a hero/hench team are great for when you don't have time to play with others, or don't feel like it. But to increase the limit would simply exacerbate the problem of having solo playability in a multiplayer game.

What I mean by this is: Henching the game was challenging. You had to work hard to play without humans. Heroing and henching is slightly less challenging due to skill tweaking possibilities, but still requires knowledge of skills/builds and the ability to use the npc's to their fullest. A full hero team under the direction of a human would not be challenging, because of the ability to fully tweak every single build. To play you would simply have to create templates; every time you hit a possible snag you would change the team build to take advantage of the area's 'weakness', a luxury you don't have with henchies and seldom have with pugs.

Instead of attempting to figure out how to play and beat the area that has you stumped, you would simply click a few buttons, change to a fotm hero build and continue mindlessly clicking. No skill involved, no thought involved. Last I heard this game was about skill>time played. Last I heard it was Guild Wars, not Hero Wars or Template wars.

Try not to take anything in this post personal, as I'm attempting to play devil's advocate here, despite my biased opinion on the matter.

But that's just my two cents

Kool Pajamas · Nov 16, 2006, 05:45 AM // 05:45

/signed

I usually play with all henchies anyway because the pugs are usually so bad, so I dont see any difference besides making the game easier and more fun.

sifung · Nov 16, 2006, 02:46 PM // 14:46

/notsigned