Curse

Jetdoc · Oct 23, 2007, 02:18 PM // 14:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

I actually probably wouldn't be suprised if they never noticed...

Honestly, it's kind of silly to say that most people wouldn't notice a feature of the game if they don't actively use it.

For example, I know that there is an option to watch GvG and tournaments, although I have never done it (nor would ever have the incentive to do so).

Isileth · Oct 23, 2007, 02:36 PM // 14:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by arsie

As it is, heroes are vastly superior to henchmen. Players without heroes are already vastly handicapped. Heroes also make most of Prophesies such a joke. I believe Anet realised this disparity, and is probably wise not to widen it anymore.

You say that like a group of 8 players cant already do that. A group of players can already go in with a build and smash everything with ease, its not the heroes that make proph easy. Its the new skills. Because its not like people couldnt take 8 players when only proph was out right?

So if people who team can and always have been able to take a fully custom team build why shouldnt solo players be able to?

SotiCoto · Oct 23, 2007, 02:54 PM // 14:54

Meh.

I want 7 Heroes.
Heck... I want 11 Heroes for the likes of The Deep too!

And I'm not going to justify it because it has all been said before and everyone is sick of it.... and plus it isn't going to happen.
But I still want it.

VanDamselx · Oct 23, 2007, 03:05 PM // 15:05

3 heroes is more than sufficient. If I'm not playing with a friend of mine, I fill it up with henchmen. I have found that henchmen fill that void quite effectively, if I know what I'm doing.

Isileth · Oct 23, 2007, 03:13 PM // 15:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by booooYA

3 heroes is more than sufficient. If I'm not playing with a friend of mine, I fill it up with henchmen. I have found that henchmen fill that void quite effectively, if I know what I'm doing.

However henchmen mean that a solo player is currently at a huge disadvantage.

Most dont even have 8 skills...
The builds are ok to godawful (Even when they are ok 1 set build for the whole game just doesnt work)

You are then forced into forming the rest of the team build into patching up what they fail to do. For example some of the monks dont have any condition removal. So even if I take hench monks I need to fit a condition removal elsewhere in my build. This really adds to the limitation.

Bryant Again · Oct 23, 2007, 03:14 PM // 15:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jetdoc

Honestly, it's kind of silly to say that most people wouldn't notice a feature of the game if they don't actively use it.

How many people knew about Party Search after it had been implemented?

But nonetheless, that's not my point. My point is that no one here has a real good argument or defense for/against more heroes, and we have no idea what the effects will be if more were implemented.

VanDamselx · Oct 23, 2007, 03:18 PM // 15:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isileth

However henchmen mean that a solo player is currently at a huge disadvantage.

Most dont even have 8 skills...
The builds are ok to godawful (Even when they are ok 1 set build for the whole game just doesnt work)

You are then forced into forming the rest of the team build into patching up what they fail to do. For example some of the monks dont have any condition removal. So even if I take hench monks I need to fit a condition removal elsewhere in my build. This really adds to the limitation.

Disadvantage? Hardly. I can finish some dungeons in the same time it takes 2 people with heroes or a good group of 8 people. I never find myself filling voids, I know which combinations work well to finish my task.

If anything 3 heroes makes the game more balanced. PvE is easy enough, 7 heroes might as well come with a skill that annihilates the entire explorable area you come into.

SotiCoto · Oct 23, 2007, 03:24 PM // 15:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by booooYA

If anything 3 heroes makes the game more balanced. PvE is easy enough, 7 heroes might as well come with a skill that annihilates the entire explorable area you come into.

Admittedly.... given that you only have 2 or 3 hero representatives of any given class in the game, and sometimes you might want more, there is cause to bring Henchies instead.

I just wish GW:EN had at least one Paragon henchie.

Gun Pierson · Oct 23, 2007, 03:25 PM // 15:25

My argument is pretty simple, more heroes equals more fun to me. I'm used to play with my gamebuddy and six heroes. Sometimes when he's at work, I just log on with his account on my spare computer and set up the team build and log his character off. I can experiment freely with teambuilds and that's awesome.

I speak for myself only but playing with h/h doesn't satisfy me as much as playing with 6 heroes, point. And the reason to play this wonderful game is to have fun.

So 4 heroes or 7, I welcome them all.

Isileth · Oct 23, 2007, 03:30 PM // 15:30

I really must disagree with you booooYA, there is no way the AI hench or hero can compare to a decent player.

Heroes stand in AoE
Heroes dont kite
Heroes waste interrupts on skills like flare then let MS cast
Heroes will waste skills like MS when there is only 1 thing left alive
Heroes cant combo skills
Heroes cant automatically maintain enchantments
Heroes cant use some skills properly (Skills with conditions such as ZB, WoH, SoS etc)
Heroes cant use pve skills
Heroes dont remove the more powerful hexes and conditions first, they will happily remove bleeding from a backline while a frontline is blind.

Now im not saying you cant complete the game with h/h, I have completed all 3 campaigns and GW:EN with h/h. That doesnt change the fact that there is still a disadvantage.

However when you enter HM you start to see it. That charge warrior really starts to become a huge disadvantage. Having to take an extra monk just because you want some condition removal. Taking an SS warder even though you really want a BS. Having monks blow their energy in seconds because they dont know how to use ZB and then having no form of energy management at all.

The list of reasons goes on.

VanDamselx · Oct 23, 2007, 03:40 PM // 15:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isileth

I really must disagree with you booooYA, there is no way the AI hench or hero can compare to a decent player.

Heroes stand in AoE
Heroes dont kite
Heroes waste interrupts on skills like flare then let MS cast
Heroes will waste skills like MS when there is only 1 thing left alive
Heroes cant combo skills
Heroes cant automatically maintain enchantments
Heroes cant use some skills properly (Skills with conditions such as ZB, WoH, SoS etc)
Heroes cant use pve skills
Heroes dont remove the more powerful hexes and conditions first, they will happily remove bleeding from a backline while a frontline is blind.

Now im not saying you cant complete the game with h/h, I have completed all 3 campaigns and GW:EN with h/h. That doesnt change the fact that there is still a disadvantage.

However when you enter HM you start to see it. That charge warrior really starts to become a huge disadvantage. Having to take an extra monk just because you want some condition removal. Taking an SS warder even though you really want a BS. Having monks blow their energy in seconds because they dont know how to use ZB and then having no form of energy management at all.

The list of reasons goes on.

Now im not saying you cant complete the game with h/h, I have completed all 3 campaigns and GW:EN with h/h. That doesnt change the fact that there is still a disadvantage.

However when you enter HM you start to see it. That charge warrior really starts to become a huge disadvantage. Having to take an extra monk just because you want some condition removal. Taking an SS warder even though you really want a BS. Having monks blow their energy in seconds because they dont know how to use ZB and then having no form of energy management at all.

The list of reasons goes on.[/QUOTE]

Obviously that's your opinion. I roll as a monk so the monking issue doesn't bother me at all.

I'm certainly not comparing the AI with real players. Heroes and henchmen were meant to be a substitute for real people and that's exactly what they are. I'm not by any means saying they're equivalent, but if you can't find a monk and you just want to get rolling, you add a hero. Any competent player should not have a problem rolling with henchmen/heroes.

You may see a disadvantage, I do not. As I said previously, 7 heroes would make PvE even easier than it already is. You're arguing why there should be 7 heroes but then you're saying why they suck. Obviously the reason you stated above is why you have to micromanage some heroes, it would be hell to micromanage 7 of them and worry about your own bar at the same time.

Isileth · Oct 23, 2007, 03:48 PM // 15:48

So your saying if you dont want to pug, you make do with something that you agree is weaker?

7 heroes would make pve easier than 3 heroes and 4 henchmen deffinately. Wouldnt make it easier than 7 other players however.

And going beyond that it limits the builds a solo player can use.
What if I want 8 specific builds? What about any full custom team build?

I cant.

Now with a team of players you can do that, so why cant the solo player?

And as for arguing for them then stating why they suck. Yeah they do, but they are so much better than henchmen. Thats the key point.

VanDamselx · Oct 23, 2007, 07:35 PM // 19:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isileth

So your saying if you dont want to pug, you make do with something that you agree is weaker?

7 heroes would make pve easier than 3 heroes and 4 henchmen deffinately. Wouldnt make it easier than 7 other players however.

And going beyond that it limits the builds a solo player can use.
What if I want 8 specific builds? What about any full custom team build?

I cant.

Now with a team of players you can do that, so why cant the solo player?

And as for arguing for them then stating why they suck. Yeah they do, but they are so much better than henchmen. Thats the key point.

Yes, that's precisely what I'm saying. Henchmen and heroes were never intended to directly replace humans as they have, but rather be a last resort type of thing.

It certainly would make things easier than having 7 people because at least your heroes will abide to what builds you'd like it to use. When I roll with a friend and we use all our heroes, it is incredibly easy to vanquish even the toughest areas. When my friend isn't available, I make do with henchmen and there is no issue. Having anymore than 3 heroes would make PvE even a larger joke than it already is because people bitch about "too hard" it is (THK, anyone?).

Red Sonya · Oct 23, 2007, 08:11 PM // 20:11

I've done just fine with 3 heroes and 4 henchies all throughout all the chapters. There is no NEED for 4 more heroes. Besides you want a reason why? Because dressing out heroes is EXPENSIVE and if you gave people more heroes then the next crowd to whine would be those that can't afford to dress the extra dolls to keep up with the jone's. So, therefore there is the reason there should be no more heroes, it's too expensive and casual players can't afford the extra cost to dress and outfit them. I rest my case your honor, what's that you say? We win? Case dismissed!! Great thank you your honor.

elektra_lucia · Oct 23, 2007, 08:38 PM // 20:38

Yes, I think you should be allowed 7 heroes but I think it's ABSOLUTELY annoying that for infusers who use number pad, hero doesn't count? So, if I press 1 to select self, 2 to select next player down (a hero) it actually goes to a person and not the hero? That annoys me... Perhaps they have changed it.

If anyone here agrees with that let me know, unless it's been changed of course. I just would like that fixed really badly, lol.

Isileth · Oct 23, 2007, 09:06 PM // 21:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by booooYA

Yes, that's precisely what I'm saying. Henchmen and heroes were never intended to directly replace humans as they have, but rather be a last resort type of thing.

Actually yes they are. GW has always been advertised as a game you can play in a team or go with AI.

And while you currently can there is a huge disadvantage to playing solo. 7 heroes makes the game no easier than 8 players so I cant really see that as a valid reason against them.

As for the cost Red Sonya, considering they come with armour all you need to supply is runes and weapons. Well you have crafter and collector weapons so the cost there is minimal and runes are fairly cheap as well.

1 run through a campaign is more than enough to cover all the costs.

Jetdoc · Oct 23, 2007, 09:26 PM // 21:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

How many people knew about Party Search after it had been implemented?

Within 1-2 days after it was implemented? Very few.

Within a couple of weeks after it was implemented? Almost everyone.

Bryant Again · Oct 23, 2007, 09:45 PM // 21:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jetdoc

Within 1-2 days after it was implemented? Very few.

Within a couple of weeks after it was implemented? Almost everyone.

Yeah after they had to pretty much enforce it ("wts xxx pm (Party Search)", "LFG for Mission (Party Search)")

See? Just like the heroes argument. Neither of us have evidence enough to support our claim. That, or we say we have evidence that contradicts one another. Going no where but downhill.

Jetdoc · Oct 23, 2007, 09:55 PM // 21:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Neither of us have evidence enough to support our claim. That, or we say we have evidence that contradicts one another. Going no where but downhill.

Absolutely. IMO, it's always dangerous to make changes in a black box when you really don't know what the impact could be to the game, positive or negative.

Bryant Again · Oct 24, 2007, 12:19 AM // 00:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jetdoc

Absolutely. IMO, it's always dangerous to make changes in a black box when you really don't know what the impact could be to the game, positive or negative.

Just gonna quote you and agree some more.

That's really the only logical point why ANet won't do this, and it's taken a while for me to notice. Sure, it'd be real fun to have 7 heroes, but I don't know how bad/good the repercussions/benefits will be.