Curse

IlikeGW · Oct 01, 2010, 09:25 PM // 21:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by fireflyry

7 heroes?

Bad idea is bad idea.

That will cheapen every title, guild, player, item, etc in the game.If they did such a thing they choose to really laugh at people that are passionate about this game and have played for hundreds, if not thousands, of hours to attain in-game reward(s).

They're not worth anything. Go try to sell your account on ebay, nobody will care. Things depreciate, especially videogames. Gamestop makes a killing on that fact.

It's time to give the game to the casuals. It's dead anyway, let them play content that they can't with empty outposts and no assistance. The game series is about being "for" every player, not for the elite.

Gill Halendt · Oct 01, 2010, 10:15 PM // 22:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

That is not what I read in the previous page.

Heroes are FAR inferior to the capabilities of a human player with cons+pve skills. Not even close.

No.

A 7-heroes party is just as capable (that is, being able to execute a specified course of action) as a full-human team. If anything, the difference is in efficiency, thanks to some prerogatives of human parties (be it human intelligence, coordination or simply PvE skills). Again, all you can do PvE-wise, you could do with a full-hero setup, maybe slower, maybe lacking access to some gimmick, but it's a fact you could do it. You can't do speed clears, yet you could potentially just clear the area, only slower. SCs don't really qualify as "playing the game" to me anyway, but that has nothing to do with this thread.

Sorry, capability ≠ efficience. I'm often accused of arguing semantics. Well, I wouldn't, if people wouldn't misuse terms and definitions that frequently.

Ayuhmii Shanbwa · Oct 01, 2010, 10:26 PM // 22:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skye Marin

PuGs are bad. Even inside my own guild, there are disconnections, emergencies, lag, and a lack of understanding on how certain builds work, or how to clear areas safely and efficiently at that level. Failing is frustrating. Clearly, high end content is not for them, and likely won't be even with 7 hero parties.

pugs being bad, i agree
there's something else i forgot, its when you said "failing is frustrating"

if people help/join, and the group fails, alot of times they will leave, as they have done it already

not forgetting about that i saw alot of people answering a bad way, IMO
like:
question: can you help with the wilds + bonus?
answer: sry, already done it

i had this is alot of guiolds i joined, only the good ones died, and the good people left, except for a few (a few compared to some years ago)

Quote:

Again, I know that developing games is hard (I'm a developer myself). I know there is no way to please everybody, but you can please some people some of the time. If Anet is really worried about the bottom line, then sell hero slots for cash money: 4 for $20, and that will easily pay for more GW:B developers, which would increase interest for the release of GW2.

please not paying for something like that, not all people have big wallets
and giving it for free will make people much happier, and dont forget the ones who become angry because they gotta pay for something happening ingame... i mean, we didnt have to pay for WiK
(i would feel bad if i gotta pay for that)

plz dont use the "no monthly fees" part as an excuse, i'm not comparing GW to any other MMO

besides, if they do it, alot of people will be happy to play GW again, and i'm sure at least half of em will buy more stuff in the ingame store to have more fun, like character slots or such

Skye Marin · Oct 01, 2010, 11:21 PM // 23:21

As much as I enjoy not paying for things, I would enjoy more frequent, better, constant Guild Wars 1 updates and support a lot more.

NerfHerder · Oct 02, 2010, 03:00 AM // 03:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gill Halendt

A 7-heroes party is just as capable (that is, being able to execute a specified course of action) as a full-human team.

You can't do speed clears, yet you could potentially just clear the area, only slower. SCs don't really qualify as "playing the game" to me anyway, but that has nothing to do with this thread.

Well, a spirit spammer solo would be just as capable as a full human team by those standards. Doing the same thing only slower is not the same as "just as capable." Thats like saying taking a random pug group with random builds into a dungeon is the same as a SC.

If we had 7 heros, the full player SC/Team and farm builds would be the same. And thats what most people complain about when some new imba build steamrolls through content. Yeah, some new 7 hero build may come along thats really effective, but it wont effect most players being able to get groups in already puggable areas(DoA, UW, PvP etc.).

The only content I could forsee 7 heros improving on is Vanquishing/Protector title type gameplay. Those are the areas where its toughest to get a pug group anyway. Other than that, solo players who H&H everything anyway would get a nice bonus.

7 heros would be less effective than 2 players and 6 heroes(which we already have). You dont have as many PvE skills and heros are pretty dumb. Sure, heros have lightning reflexes with skill use, but they arent able to use that advantage in an intelligent way.

Daesu · Oct 02, 2010, 03:52 AM // 03:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gill Halendt

No.

A 7-heroes party is just as capable (that is, being able to execute a specified course of action) as a full-human team. If anything, the difference is in efficiency, thanks to some prerogatives of human parties (be it human intelligence, coordination or simply PvE skills). Again, all you can do PvE-wise, you could do with a full-hero setup, maybe slower, maybe lacking access to some gimmick, but it's a fact you could do it. You can't do speed clears, yet you could potentially just clear the area, only slower. SCs don't really qualify as "playing the game" to me anyway, but that has nothing to do with this thread.

You are wrong. Heroes just dont have many basic human capabilities or efficiencies.

Heroes cannot see the wall infront of them so if you have ever used a spear chunker hero, you would notice that if the target is behind an obstacle he will keep hitting the wall instead of the target. They have no sense of line of sight. Heroes also run out of AoE damage a lot later than human players, heroes can also kill themselves when they have empathy, spiteful spirit or other punishment hexes cast on them.

Doing a SC slower just means it is weaker. In fact, just try to name ANY area that heroes can clear faster than a souped up human team with pve skills because there is none.

Furthermore, there are still many elite areas in the game that are a lot more difficult to clear with heroes than it is with humans. Try doing a full run of HM DoA with heroes.

Gill Halendt · Oct 02, 2010, 08:21 AM // 08:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

You are wrong.

You don't know the definition of "capability".

capable [ˈkeɪpəbəl]
adj
1. having ability
2. (postpositive; foll by of) able or having the skill (to do something)
3. being able to complete a task or execute a specific course of action.

can -> be able to -> (cap)ability

Heroes are not incapable, heroes are inefficient when compared to humans at accomplishing certain tasks. That makes them rather less competent than incapable.

Competence ≠ Capability

A hero not detecting a wall is not incapable. Their deficiency influences the overall performance of the team, but there's no doubt that you can just do what you're doing with a few little tricks. If you're using a build a hero can't manage properly and you don't bother to place that hero on the field or micromanage its skills, it's you hindering your team, but the team could potentially do the job. Nothing prevents it. The whole game is designed to be playable with AI support.

Furthermore, you're missing a very important point: 1:8 proportion.

Performance-wise, a 7-heroes team can't touch a full-human party - assuming the human party has enough competence and coordination to do well - , that's undebatable. The huge difference is that the loss in terms of performance is rather negligible, when you shave off the human presence by 1:8. Performance doesn't degrade by 1:8 (a balanced team can clear the UW in 3 hours, I really doubt it would take 24 hours for a hero team)

This is the point we were discussing. Let's say heroes can do, like, what, 60% of what a human party can do in terms of performance, because of their faults and the lack of PvE skills or whatever. That's achieved by just ONE person instead of EIGHT.

Would that be powerful? Likely so, when compared to the most obvious alternatives to this, that are not full-human parties but rather H/H parties and PuGs.
Would that be "overpowered"? Some people think so and so oppose to the implementation, I do not. But comparing performances of a full-human team isn't that significant as an argument against it.

Daesu · Oct 02, 2010, 09:30 AM // 09:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gill Halendt

You don't know the definition of "capability".

capable [ˈkeɪpəbəl]
adj
1. having ability
2. (postpositive; foll by of) able or having the skill (to do something)
3. being able to complete a task or execute a specific course of action.

can -> be able to -> (cap)ability

Heroes are not incapable, heroes are inefficient when compared to humans at accomplishing certain tasks. That makes them rather less competent than incapable.

Competence ≠ Capability

A hero not detecting a wall is not incapable.

It is starting to sound like you are arguing sematics. Fine, let me put it this way to you: "A hero is incapable of detecting line-of-sight".

Quote:

Performance-wise, a 7-heroes team can't touch a full-human party - assuming the human party has enough competence and coordination to do well - , that's undebatable. The huge difference is that the loss in terms of performance is rather negligible,

I say again, no it is not negligible, there is a HUGE difference in performance between the best human team and the best heroes team. Even if it takes an hour or 2 hours more to clear UW, that is a HUGE difference. If you completed a marathon and come in an hour later than the top runner, that is not a negligible difference in performance, ok? And your whole debate of heroes must be 8 times worse than humans in order for it be considered a "significant" difference to you, is just ridiculous and obviously designed to skew facts to a large degree so as to support your failing point.

Femmefatal · Oct 02, 2010, 10:09 AM // 10:09

Quote:

Quote:
Again, I know that developing games is hard (I'm a developer myself). I know there is no way to please everybody, but you can please some people some of the time. If Anet is really worried about the bottom line, then sell hero slots for cash money: 4 for $20, and that will easily pay for more GW:B developers, which would increase interest for the release of GW2.

I agree with this I would pay for extra hero slots but more inline with $2.50 each and not $5.00 each. I think Anet should get something for creating what a large margin of players are asking for. Everything shouldn't be "FREE' geesh never saw so many tightwads.

Ayuhmii Shanbwa · Oct 02, 2010, 10:43 AM // 10:43

i dont get why people want to pay, or do they just say it cuz they like to be nice to anet?

listen, buying something we're asking for, is asking for everything to be in ingame store
another problem is that alot of people cant get a creditcard, like myself
and i doubt anet wants to discriminate those people

why even starting on that subject? it wont be pretty if those who cant use creditcard/refuse to buy it leave the game as they gotta pay for it

if it would be a new expansion, then ok, cuz then we have much more, but every little thing having a price makes them look greedy and wont make others happy

note: not everyone is as rich as some of us

paying like 20 euro for 1 suggestion, which is a few years old, that'd be the day to quit GW for me, as i cant afford much, and i cant get creditcard as i have low income (i'm not allowed to get one with my income)

please anet, dont let me down with this

its not like they are losing alot of money, as the GW2 release will give em so much, and some people think they gotta pay alot of small extra's in GW2 if they do ask money for 7 hero teams

get real plz, think about everyone, not just your overgrown wallet

sry for this long post (is it?)

Gill Halendt · Oct 02, 2010, 11:36 AM // 11:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

It is starting to sound like you are arguing sematics.

I am, since people started quoting me when I said hero can do pretty much everything a human team can do.

They can. They just can't do it as efficiently and have faults that must be looked into, but there's nothing they're inherently disabled to, expect PvE-only skills.

Still, heroes can be runed, equipped with weapons, have a fully customizable skill-bar, can attack, retreat, can launch spells, you name it. They are as close to a human player as it can get.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

Fine, let me put it this way to you: "A hero is incapable of detecting line-of-sight".

So, flag it correctly on the battle field, et voila, your party is now perfectly capable of doing its job as intended.

A lot of human players are incapable to place correctly on the battlefield as well.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

I say again, no it is not negligible, there is a HUGE difference in performance between the best human team and the best heroes team. Even if it takes an hour or 2 hours more to clear UW, that is a HUGE difference.

Still not even comparable to the reduced "workforce" needed to achieve it. You can't deny that 7-heroes would hugely reduce the gap between H/H and 8-human teams. That reduction is deemed as excessive by some - not me, mind you - as it would give what is perceived as too much power to ONE SINGLE PLAYER.

I don't think that would pose a problem, but still, I don't see how comparing a ONE PLAYER SETUP to an EIGHT-PLAYERS SETUP to represent the former as much weaker than the latter is any significant. It's just stating the obvious, if anything.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

And your whole debate of heroes must be 8 times worse than humans in order for it be considered a "significant" difference to you, is just ridiculous and obviously designed to skew facts to a large degree so as to support your failing point.

My failing point, which is...?

Actually, I'm just questioning the relevance of an argument made on a comparison that's like comparing apples and oranges.

Actually here I only see people discarding a simple fact - 7-heroes party giving a huge boost to solo-players in terms of efficiency and capabilities - with an argument that makes no sense whatsoever. That is, who cares if 7-heroes parties are perceived as overpowered? Human parties are even more powerful!

So, wait, since detractors think 7-heroes would be overpowered and oppose to the implementation because of this, are you trying to say that 8-human parties are... even more overpowered... to contradict them? Oh man... What are people trying to prove here?

Do you feel it's entirely NORMAL to compare a ONE-PLAYER SETUP needing only ONE HUMAN PLAYER, to a EIGHT-PLAYERS SETUP?

Off course the latter is more efficient. It MUST be, since it requires EIGHT TIMES the people to work. Stating the obvious.

A comparison that makes sense is between other options for solo players, that is the occasional PuG and H/H.

EDIT - A single player would need to do the thinking for 8 characters. So, if you really insist supporting the idea by comparing it with human parties, you'd rather discuss the additional burden the fine-tuning and management (flagging, micromanagement, etc...) this supposedly "overpowered" full-heroes team would require to achieve comparably lower results.

Just comparing the final results is going nowhere.

fireflyry · Oct 02, 2010, 02:40 PM // 14:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crystal Of Winter

It happens in EVERY mmo, they increase drops/xp rates as time goes on to make it more appealing to new players, thus generating more money.

Totally agree but never....EVER...shit on the bread and butter that is your fan base.Offer incentives yes but allowing 7 heroes.....now.....is a slap in the face to the core players and will wreck the economy.

Period.

It's a bad idea.

Quote:

Originally Posted by IlikeGW

It's time to give the game to the casuals. It's dead anyway, let them play content that they can't with empty outposts and no assistance. The game series is about being "for" every player, not for the elite.

Seriously...get a clue.

MMO is based on economy .You have to have elite and set goals for players to attain to that are set in stone.If you can't comprehend the simple fact that MMO is pure capitalism your playing the wrong genre.

"Hey new MMO players....heres a million gold"

No.

Xiaquin · Oct 02, 2010, 03:28 PM // 15:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by NerfHerder

The only content I could forsee 7 heros improving on is Vanquishing/Protector title type gameplay. Those are the areas where its toughest to get a pug group anyway. Other than that, solo players who H&H everything anyway would get a nice bonus.

War In Kryta. Having to accept low level henchmen is a joke, and don't anyone dare say to just HM it, like it's easier that way. It's not.

I'd be happy with even a 5-hero limit to cover the areas where henchmen are not up to par.

Pleikki · Oct 02, 2010, 03:54 PM // 15:54

I hope they wont add possibility to add 7heros, it would completely kill Pugging!

and for 99% of things being doable with henchmen, why would they need tho?

Id say, Remove teh heros and add few new henchmens!

On side note. my 10.000th Post!!

fireflyry · Oct 02, 2010, 04:10 PM // 16:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by NerfHerder

The only content I could forsee 7 heros improving on is Vanquishing/Protector title type gameplay.

Exactly.

Those arguing for seven heroes seem completely unable to even contemplate, let alone comprehend, the effect this would have on the game as a whole while also ignoring and cheapening the effort, timesink and commitment the vast majority of long time players have invested to attain in-game reward.

Please...stop playing GW and stop supporting a game breaking change that turns GW into Dragon Age for scrubs.

The logic of people seeing this as a good idea is baffling, and usually selfish.So you want a reward in one month that took a veteran player six plus months to attain, then sell your loot in spamadan safe in the knowledge you never had to interact with any other player?

Hardly rocket science guys.

NerfHerder · Oct 02, 2010, 04:10 PM // 16:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by fireflyry

Offer incentives yes but allowing 7 heroes.....now.....is a slap in the face to the core players and will wreck the economy.

Do you mind explaining how 7 heros will wreck the economy? Heros didnt wreck the economy when they were introduced, 2 players and 6 heros is acceptable? But, adding one more hero to your team is imba and will ruin the economy/game? I think people are giving heros way too much credit.

@Xiaquin
I thought of how 7 heros could benefit GW:B content after I posted, but thought my post was already long enough. And I agree.

Sidenote: People who like to Pug will always Pug and people that like to solo will always solo. If 7 heros is added, I wouldnt expect to see any changes in Pug availability.

fireflyry · Oct 02, 2010, 04:33 PM // 16:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by NerfHerder

Do you mind explaining how 7 heros will wreck the economy?

lol

No offence but if you can't initially comprehend or foresee such an obvious and blatant outcome any explanation I could give is largely redundant.

Daesu · Oct 02, 2010, 04:39 PM // 16:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gill Halendt

So, flag it correctly on the battle field, et voila, your party is now perfectly capable of doing its job as intended.

Thus wasting time when you have to watch over them! It takes away attention from general strategy and co-ordination which a human team can proceed with.

Quote:

A lot of human players are incapable to place correctly on the battlefield as well.

We are talking about maximum capabililties and potential of a human team vs a heroes team here. Not your one-off bad luck with pugs.

Having 7 heroes would be balanced because a full human team generally takes longer to form than a 7 heroes team. BUT a full human team is A LOT stronger than a 7 heroes team so there are still pros and cons for both options.

Even with 7 heroes, I would still prefer a good human team, if I can find them because they more powerful, efficient, and capable. All you need is to learn how to make friends or join a good guild like I did. Beside many elite areas are still not suitable for a full heroes team to clear all because they are just too tough (e.g. DoA HM). This already shows the vast superiority of a human team vs a heroes team.

BlackSephir · Oct 02, 2010, 04:39 PM // 16:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pleikki

I hope they wont add possibility to add 7heros, it would completely kill Pugging!

Fun fact: solo players, such as myself, either do stuff with h/h or don't do it at all. If it ain't h/h-able, I ain't doing it.
You think I'm going to get into a smelly pug full of bad players with even worse skillbars and no common sense because I can't do something? Think again. I never joined pugs. Not when there were only henches, not now when we have 3 heroes and I won't pug if they add 7 heroes. Simple?

Seems like it's easy to get 10k posts if you just randomly press keys.

Quote:

No offence but if you can't initially comprehend or foresee such an obvious and blatant outcome any explanation I could give is largely redundant.

lol, you're gonna have to try harder- talking silly stuff and going "everyone knows that, duhhhh" is funny and grants you cool points, but not credibility points.

Quote:

Offer incentives yes but allowing 7 heroes.....now.....is a slap in the face to the core players

Hohoho, this will be good.
First, who are, core players? People who started GW with the beta? Or maybe peeps who got Proph on day one?
Second, how it will be a slap to the face, hm?
And no, "it's obvious, i ain't gotta explain, lulz" isn't a valid argument.

fireflyry · Oct 02, 2010, 04:51 PM // 16:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlackSephir

lol, you're gonna have to try harder- talking silly stuff and going "everyone knows that, duhhhh" is funny and grants you cool points, but not credibility points.

My rebuttal was sound.

Cool points seems to be your off-topic prerogative.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlackSephir

First, who are, core players? People who started GW with the beta? Or maybe peeps who got Proph on day one?

Obvious.Time investment.

I gather your an advocate for the cheapening of that.

Ok.