Curse

Life Bringing · Mar 30, 2010, 03:16 AM // 03:16

I think the idea of 7 heroes is not applicable to most parts of the game. You can clear out every area but fow/uw/doa/urgoz/deep with just h/h. I would say that those 5 areas are the only places in which 7 heroes makes any sense at all

Regulus X · Mar 30, 2010, 03:33 AM // 03:33

If there weren't so many idiotic players that make PUGing look bad, PUGing would actually be a viable option.

In a perfect world... in a perfect world... ... ...

*wakes up* So, where's the 7 heroes option, Anet?

gremlin · Mar 30, 2010, 03:40 AM // 03:40

The positive effect for experienced players would be the fun of custom designing complete teams and the ability to do any area of the game with the party of their choice.
A party customised to the nth degree with weapons skills and tactics they wish with absolutely no chance of a human screw up wasting their time and effort.

New players would never get to play anything else or learn the finer points of play so the negatives would mainly affect them.
A lot is said about pugs and how bad they are an some of it is true, that is why its called Guild Wars you are supposed to get into a guild and play with them.
A year ago I would have said no to seven heroes now I don't think it matters too much.

I feel there are very few experienced players still working their way through the game missions.
So who is their to learn from, if the guilds and players who have had the game for ages are just in pvp or are farming resources and titles there is no one to teach the finer points of play.

So it wouldn't worry me if they did allow 7 heroes and in fact made more of them for variety.

RhanoctJocosa · Mar 30, 2010, 05:52 AM // 05:52

would be fun as hell

graVitii · Mar 30, 2010, 06:02 AM // 06:02

I would love this idea, as I prefer to solo my way through the game anyways. Good idea!

zwei2stein · Mar 30, 2010, 06:15 AM // 06:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by maxxfury

you can already 1+6 with 2 accounts...so it wouldnt be much different..

Actually, It would be quite different. No 4-paragons in team, no 6-necro teams.

upier · Mar 30, 2010, 06:55 AM // 06:55

End · Mar 30, 2010, 06:58 AM // 06:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by upier

If you are looking for the most efficient way to get though PvE, you still won't turn to the AI.

but you also won't turn to pugs xD

I think overall it would have pretty much no impact...people don't pug anyway...whats the difference between heros and henchmen besides being fast with more heros...O noes more time to watch house after getting done my goals for teh day...

btw hi upier...I luvs you...

upier · Mar 30, 2010, 07:28 AM // 07:28

**cosyfiep** · Mar 30, 2010, 07:38 AM // 07:38

it would be both positive and negative....more people might play, but they wont be playing with other people.
In my words...some of those heroes that I never use would get some play time

Wolf2581 · Mar 30, 2010, 11:10 AM // 11:10

For me it would be only a positive change. There are few things I do that require humans, and in those cases I have alliance members with me. Most of my accomplishments were done with heroes and henchmen.

As for the entire game, I imagine the people who are bad at PvE to begin with will only get worse. The availability of seven heroes would give the decent players even more of an incentive to avoid human groups.

Redvex · Mar 30, 2010, 11:42 AM // 11:42

/signed
I wanna 7 heroes and.........11 heroes in urgoz

Highlander Of Alba · Mar 30, 2010, 11:52 AM // 11:52

As I said some time ago in the debate for 7 heroes , yes I would like to be able to pick and choose what I wish to play.

Yes I could go myself and 6 heroes by using 2 accounts

But why give us 26 heroes altogether and the ability to only use 3

Mabe thats why they gave us the summoning stones , so theres extras.

Heres hoping it will come, yes we can all dream of what we would like

dagrdagaz · Mar 30, 2010, 12:05 PM // 12:05

I do like to be able to use more then 3 Heroes.
Using 7 Heroes sounds great, but 4 or 5 is nice to.

I can finally use Tahlkora as the Protection Monk!
With only 3 Hero slots, i am not gonna waste one on Tahlkora, but i do always have a Prot Henchie.

And Crystal Desert i would like better then, if i can use 5 Heroes there.
Playing in Crystal Desert with 2 crappy not-lvl20 henchies, awfull.

Yeah, i totally want to be able to use more then 3 Heroes, in PvE.

Tullzinski · Mar 30, 2010, 01:50 PM // 13:50

positive - being able to steamroll the game.
negative - being able to steamroll the game.

Not like it matters much at this point. I would love to have minions and spirits galore, 3 nec heroes with 2 rits, a summoning stone, an asura summon spell, a few pets on top of it and 2 monks. Have Horde will travel.

mage767 · Mar 30, 2010, 02:32 PM // 14:32

ANET folks, you reading this thread? There is money to made here. Implement hero-packs in in-store today and see your company profits soar ... people are ready to throw in money for the extra level of fun ... it's the best gift (a free hero slot + buy up to 3 more slots) a GW PvEr can ask for this GW anniversay... so JUST DO IT!

Yawgmoth · Mar 30, 2010, 02:48 PM // 14:48

Nothing positive to be gained here and that should be obvious. Nothing. But a lot of terribad things instead:

1. It's a move in a totally wrong direction - instead of introducing even more incentives for multiplayer and providing means for players to group more easily it would be providing one LESS reason to play with someone else. Even in a "dying" game it's a terrible move.

2. It's only making the game easier for a solo player when the game isn't hard at all.

3. Selling actual game advantages in store is a completely horrible idea and would be the final nail in the coffin of the good old business model. What's next then? Maybe selling extra skill slots on your skillbar for PvE so you can wtfpwn everything even easier?

This absolutely terribad suggestion doesn't improve the game AT ALL, it's not an improvement of anything but just making it unnecessarily easier for a solo player. Easier is not better, especially when it wasn't any hard at all.

So it's clearly WRONG WAY.

Talking about actually improving the game, I'd much rather see them REDUCE the number of heroes in party per player to 2, that's a good number well balanced for 8 man teams and that's the number which should have been used from the start. With a limit of 2 per player heroes wouldn't hurt the game anywhere as much as they did, the game wouldn't turn singleplayer and tricks with using 2 or 3 accounts wouldn't be worthwhile. Heroes would still work perfectly for filling missing slots in human parties, which is important in a game with so much content and decreasing number of players, so their role would be retained.
Then add a global lfg system and it's pure win.

Redvex · Mar 30, 2010, 03:24 PM // 15:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yawgmoth

Nothing positive to be gained here and that should be obvious. Nothing. But a lot of terribad things instead:

1. It's a move in a totally wrong direction - instead of introducing even more incentives for multiplayer and providing means for players to group more easily it would be providing one LESS reason to play with someone else. Even in a "dying" game it's a terrible move.

2. It's only making the game easier for a solo player when the game isn't hard at all.

3. Selling actual game advantages in store is a completely horrible idea and would be the final nail in the coffin of the good old business model. What's next then? Maybe selling extra skill slots on your skillbar for PvE so you can wtfpwn everything even easier?

This absolutely terribad suggestion doesn't improve the game AT ALL, it's not an improvement of anything but just making it unnecessarily easier for a solo player. Easier is not better, especially when it wasn't any hard at all.

So it's clearly WRONG WAY.

Talking about actually improving the game, I'd much rather see them REDUCE the number of heroes in party per player to 2, that's a good number well balanced for 8 man teams and that's the number which should have been used from the start. With a limit of 2 per player heroes wouldn't hurt the game anywhere as much as they did, the game wouldn't turn singleplayer and tricks with using 2 or 3 accounts wouldn't be worthwhile. Heroes would still work perfectly for filling missing slots in human parties, which is important in a game with so much content and decreasing number of players, so their role would be retained.
Then add a global lfg system and it's pure win.

Reduce hero? lol
You say that is a dying game. People never pug as before.
Reduce hero and you kill seriously the game.

Xenomortis · Mar 30, 2010, 03:41 PM // 15:41

Running through the game with only the AI for company would become much easier.
Fail players would still largely fail and Vanquishes and HM missions become easier for those who can construct builds.

damkel · Mar 30, 2010, 03:43 PM // 15:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yawgmoth

Nothing positive to be gained here and that should be obvious....

Agreed. A global LFG tool would be nice, but the guild and alliance system already (sorta) solves that. And it's far more personal and team orientated compared to WoW's LFG which is impersonal and robot-like, just like the player base.