Curse

speedtouch · Jun 21, 2005, 09:17 PM // 21:17

I was just playing Hall of Heroes when I told my party to put the warriors at the front (like a wall), even although I was the leader, 2-3 warriros stayed back while me and some other unlucky fellow got mobbed by about 6 enemys.We lost the match.

So I thought about how they could fix this, heres what I think would be enjoyable to alot of people.

People go to HoH or any other arena and sign up their name to a invite list with your skills on it.Any other person that hasn't put their name on it can automatically put you into their party.Once they get a full party they can start, the leader then has a view looking down at your party like in age of empires (but in a closer view).From there he can command all of your characters and skills.You can view from his view but you willn't have any control at all on you or anyone else, you could leave the game but your character will still remain playing for the leader, if you win and have left (map travel) you will not get a sigll.If you haven't left and you win 3 sigll will be sent to all the remaining players and into their inventory.This way you can just put your character on the list leave your keyboard for half the day and hope a leader picks you to their party and gets you a sigll.Your leader will be guarnteed a sigll if they win.

BTW:While going through HoH you can make suggestions for your leader and you can do missions and everything else while your playing for your leader but you willn't get a sigll.

My next suggestion is to have 1 vs 1 battles, and pet vs pet battles (with betting), im always wondering if I can beat my friends in a 1 vs 1 battle.

Epinephrine · Jun 21, 2005, 09:21 PM // 21:21

You can't possibly be serious, you control freak. Go play Warcraft 3.

drowningfish999 · Jun 21, 2005, 09:24 PM // 21:24

Sounds too much like a strategy game, and they would have to revamp the engine to allow leaders to control other characters and have a different view etc. Also, if you could just leave your game on and get sigils, what would be the point? There would be no skill needed, just luck if you get a good leader. The leader would also be totally overwhelmed with trying to control 8 characters at once, at battles would be boring for everyone except the stressed out leader.

Ascension · Jun 21, 2005, 09:31 PM // 21:31

Maybe you should try some FT DotA with a bunch of leavers - you'd be right at home.

speedtouch · Jun 21, 2005, 09:38 PM // 21:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by drowningfish999

Sounds too much like a strategy game, and they would have to revamp the engine to allow leaders to control other characters and have a different view etc. Also, if you could just leave your game on and get sigils, what would be the point? There would be no skill needed, just luck if you get a good leader. The leader would also be totally overwhelmed with trying to control 8 characters at once, at battles would be boring for everyone except the stressed out leader.

Isn't Guild Wars PvP nothing but strategy?Yes getting the leader to control other characters would be difficult but changing the camera isn't very difficult at all, I have made games before and it's very simple.The leader would ONLY fight other leaders that have chosen to play like this, and after you tell a target to attack they would keep attacking.
You only sign your name up to the list unless you don't want to go away from your computer.

I am serious

drowningfish999 · Jun 21, 2005, 09:52 PM // 21:52

You don't get it. Theres a difference between strategy strategy and RPG strategy. Yes guild wars is focused on strategy, player skills etc. But not on actual click and move type strategy, which is what Age of Empires is. Also, where is the fun for the players that are being used, they just watch, not very exciting IMO. People don't buy games just so they can watch their character be used by someone else.

And if you just pick a target and all the "players" attack it, that would be pointless and even less startegy-involved than what it is now. No chasing around monks, no split targets, no attacking non-targeted enemies.

This would be like changing Guild Wars so that you can player-kill in towns. Or so there are no more instances of areas. A huge change that isn't needed and doesn't go with the game.

speedtouch · Jun 21, 2005, 09:57 PM // 21:57

Ok Ok Ok its a bad idea

drowningfish999 · Jun 21, 2005, 10:08 PM // 22:08

Your 1v1 idea however is much better, and I really hope it gets added so I can crush some over-confident W/Mo's.

Lief · Jun 22, 2005, 12:55 AM // 00:55

1v1 would be almost as stupid........only randoms could work even then...it would be stupid...just my opinion.

drowningfish999 · Jun 22, 2005, 01:07 AM // 01:07

I think 1v1 would be fun because you would be forced to rely on your skills alone, not a monk's healing or a warrior's tanking ability. It would be based purely on your skills and yours alone.

eA-Zaku · Jun 22, 2005, 02:31 AM // 02:31

drowningfish999 your arguments are not sound.

First of all, a monk healing is a type of strategy that Guild Wars supports. Not only do monks have to manage their low energy well, but they also have to decide who to heal. More monks in the party = invincible party? Wrong, the trade off for that healing power is far less damage potential.

One on one relegates all monks useless. With the skills available to them, even a Smiting Monk won't be able to cut it 1v1. They will have to rely on their secondary profession.

If the idea is so great then why does it exclude an entire profession? Their are many viable strategies that Guild Wars SUPPORTS, as is seen by its game engine and even monster AI. These classes, while useless on their own, thrive when in an efficient, cooperative group. And that is what Guild Wars is all about. Not a stupid 1v1 arena. Team cooperation.

_Zen_ · Jun 22, 2005, 02:50 AM // 02:50

Though I do believe that some of your points are valid eA-Zaku, I do personal agree with drowningfish999. I think 1v1 would be a great addition to the game. All professions are supposed to be equal right? So how would the Monk be excluded? I personal play a smitting monk and I can tank pretty well as good as most warriors I've played with... only difference being, I can keep myself alive and don't have to rely so much on others to keep me healed up. I would guess that if they did include 1v1 in the future, you would see many monks try it out... not to mention doing well...
But thats just my opinion...

eA-Zaku · Jun 22, 2005, 02:58 AM // 02:58

Thing is if you can actually smite a W/Mo to death and keep yourself alive, then that still proves my point. Monks are overpowered then.

Aka · Jun 22, 2005, 03:05 AM // 03:05

Having a 1v1 option wouldbe great, even if it was bad for a particular class. Warriors could smash their egos against one another, mesmers could play chess with necros, and monks could do their kung-fu dance or something.

Seriously, more options are never bad, even if you don't use them. The can add whatever they want as long as they don't mess with balance too much.

I like the pet battle idea. Once observer mode is in, I think we might see some gambling even if it's not "supported."

Aaaaagh · Jun 22, 2005, 03:08 AM // 03:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by speedtouch

Ok Ok Ok its a bad idea

Hehehe. Maybe, but dayum was it funny to read.

_Zen_ · Jun 22, 2005, 03:12 AM // 03:12

Anything can be beat with the right mix of professions/ skill set... Not to mention the fact that everyone you play against is human and therefor they can make some pretty "dumb" choices (ie. El/Ra I grouped with earlier today who put all points into Air... and used nothing but Fire skills...) So before anyone gets the wrong idea, I'm not saying that my monk would be able to beat everyone... or even that I would only win out against people that make "dumb" choices... I just think I'd be able to hold my own...as could anyone with the right professions/ skill sets...
One other thing eA-Zaku (and I'm not trying to start an argument with you lol), my monk's secondary profession is ranger... so I wouldn't just be smiting the Wo/Mo... not really sure how I would fair against a Wo/Mo since I haven't compaired the skills yet... but I would at least give it a try! lol