Curse

Dragasa · Sep 28, 2007, 03:40 AM // 03:40

[QUOTE=Loviatar][QUOTE]

wrong according to a person who actually knows

[QUOTE]

Quote:

actually it is the best way because they keep logs to see who and how many are playing any aspect of the game.

by playing they see that people like it

Dev Update

"Gladiator Title Revisions

After reviewing and discussing the feedback received by players, we've decided to make the following change to the Gladiator Title"

No business would ignore feedback from it's customers, and I don't think Jeff Strain's comments should be taken as meaning that Anet doesn't care or listen to what the players think. They obviously do listen, and do make changes, even ones that they once swore they'd never make. They can't make decisions based on data logs alone, they need feedback from the players to understand what and why changes need to be made. The argument of "Just shut up and play, Anet knows what's best" is ludicrous.

Thunder79 · Sep 28, 2007, 03:44 AM // 03:44

Just because someone plays the game does not mean they like every part of it. All player data they collect has the same weight...so they see general trends. They see people going solo or joining a player group. All they see is someone joining a PUG...they don't see that they have no interest in being in the PUG and are only there because they want to get that part of the game done. They may be able to collect chat logs and determine an individual PUG is more social than the rest...but do you honestly think they do that? No...of course they don't because there are far too many PUGs to monitor. They have no way to determining the intentions behind player actions based on data. You really think that is the best way to get your opinion across to the devs? lol...sorry but I'll keep posting on forums. Why else would they have a community team who responds to concerns of players on forums and other fan sites such as wikis.

Now can you come up with an actual argument against 7 heroes? How about taking a shot at Coyote's list instead of trying to hijack the thread.

Wrath of m0o · Sep 28, 2007, 08:01 AM // 08:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlackSephir

Jesus Christ, reopened thread!
Revolution on Guru! Nobody's safe!

Holy Mary, mother of God..Pray for our Heros.
Love this picture..
Its a picture of the Three people that dont want 7/8 Hero parties.

MirageMaster · Sep 28, 2007, 08:57 AM // 08:57

I want 7 heros and screw all others who dont!

the_jos · Sep 28, 2007, 11:40 AM // 11:40

Quote:

"Gladiator Title Revisions
After reviewing and discussing the feedback received by players, we've decided to make the following change to the Gladiator Title"
No business would ignore feedback from it's customers, and I don't think Jeff Strain's comments should be taken as meaning that Anet doesn't care or listen to what the players think.

What it does mean is that A-net steps in when there is an actual problem.
There were problems with the Gladiator Titles (hard to get a glad point).
Two I heard most in RA:
- People leaving after they got their glad point (leaving someone in a streak of 9 with a new team that made things uncertain).
- People leaving when there was no monk in the game.
I know too little about TA to really comment on that, however, the times I was there it was dominated by guild teams. Meaning quite hard for Joe Average to get a decent random team and win 10 times in a row.

There are probably more reasons, but I don't know them.

Now, A-net observed it, heard the complaints on the issue, noticed it was a real problem and decided to fix the problem.

Now to the 7 hero request.
I have yet to hear one 'general problem' that would make the use of 7 heroes a 'must have'.
The problems are specific for certain missions/areas.
When A-net designed those areas to be played with human teams (Deep, Urgoz's come to mind) there is no reason to complain about them.
It's the design of the area that calls for humans, not the absence of heroes.

This would leave a very few places where the 3 hero / 4 hench are not good enough.
If you want a change on those, state exactly what the problem is and why every reasonable combination of heroes and hench fails.
Hard Mode Missions that require a coordinated split are the ones with the most problems.
It's also not possible to split the hench, meaning the best split you can make is 3 heroes and one human + 4 hench.

If this is a problem (and it is in at least two missions) ask A-net for a solution.
I think it's more than fair if an area is well documented to cause problem for a lot of experienced players to request a fix.

However, having a handfull of missions that are too hard for one human and 3 heroes/4 hench to handle is no reason to demand 7 heroes.

On ChaoticCoyote's list.
Good list, no arguments here.
However, it only states why A-net's point of view might be broken and why more heroes are not a problem.
However, it does not answer the questions:
- What is broken?
- Why does A-net need to fix it?
- Is implementing more heroes the only way to solve this problem?
- What about players that don't have heroes at all (Proph + Factions only)?

Star Gazer · Sep 28, 2007, 12:23 PM // 12:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by the_jos

I have yet to hear one 'general problem' that would make the use of 7 heroes a 'must have'.

heres one: i want to do DoA (in which no henchmen are available), but I cant dedicate 7 hours of my time to one sitting. is that good enough for you? i paid for this high-end content, and I cant do it because I have a life?

Crowell The Fallen · Sep 28, 2007, 01:25 PM // 13:25

I would love 7 heros. I would be able to do DoA in my own time. Do UW and FoW in my own time. I would NEVER have to worry about leavers or crap like that. Ever attempted to clear and do all the quests in UW and FoW with pugs? Notice how you never actually accomplish it? I would even be able to test my own team builds for stuff like UW, Fow, Doa, the deep, etc and not have to worry about people raging at me and calling me a noob... etc...

Besides, its PVE... its not going to unbalance anything. It just gonna make it more easy or something.

Quote:

Originally Posted by the_jos

- What about players that don't have heroes at all (Proph + Factions only)?

People who don't own Nightfall don't get access to its features. For example, people who dont own Nightfall dont get to use Nightfall skills and elites. If people want that, they pay for it. Its that simple, and it is how its been since the beginning. If anything, it would be a better marketing point for Anet... another reason for the people without it to purchase it.

I fully support 7/8 hero teams for PVE.

lyra_song · Sep 28, 2007, 01:33 PM // 13:33

I made a photoshop of what 7 heroes will look like, posted it on that sardelac thread.

Just so you see what kind of technical hell it will be on the gui/interface.

This pretty much says "Casual player go to hell."

the_jos · Sep 28, 2007, 01:43 PM // 13:43

Quote:

heres one: i want to do DoA (in which no henchmen are available), but I cant dedicate 7 hours of my time to one sitting. is that good enough for you? i paid for this high-end content, and I cant do it because I have a life?

Let me guess.
No henchmen available, would that mean A-net intended that area to be played with other humans?

"I paid for this" as argument?
Did you? Seems to me you paid for a service A-net offers and calls Guild Wars.
Now you paid for a specific part of that service called Nightfall.

Now there is some content in Nightfall that the designers specifically made for people to team up (hence the lack of hench). The same with Deep and Urgoz's in Factions.
The design of those parts requires teaming up with at least one or two humans to have a full team.
That's a condition in the offered service.

"I can't play it because I have a life".
Well, don't we all have a life with choices to make?
You choose to do other things besides playing DoA.
Don't say it's not a choice.
You might have 100 other obligations that you think are more important than playing guild wars, but it's still a choice.
You could just say 'heck with them' and play guild wars.
However, there are trade-offs.
Your husband/wife may ditch you, your kids may hate you, your social life may go down the drain, your kids may hate you later, your boss may fire you because you are getting in late frequent.
Obvious reasons to not play GW 7 hours straight.

I already told in an other tread I had severely hindering RL obligations myself for a long period of time.
Not only in my spare time, but also while at work.
It was my choice to stay committed to my fiancee and help her as much as possible at that time and let some other things suffer, including work, social life and spare time.
Sure there would have been consequences if I did not stay committed and did not help, however it was still a choice.

So, in the end, you choose your 'life' to be more important than playing Guild Wars.
Well, fine with me, but don't complain about being unable to do /obtain certain stuff that take a lot of time to get.
That's a consequence of your choice!

Edit: adding comment:

Quote:

People who don't own Nightfall don't get access to its features. For example, people who dont own Nightfall dont get to use Nightfall skills and elites.....

You seem to miss the point.
A lot of people say "I can't do this/that because I have no full team of heroes".
Meaning things are broken from a H&H perspective.
Well, if those things are in Proph and Factions those, then the hench only players are even more left alone than the 3 hero/4 hench players.
For those players adding more heroes to the party is no solution.
And they also are customers of A-net.

7 heroes is a nice to have and not a must have.
If it is a must have game mechanics are broken at a certain point if it was not intended (see elite area discussion above), which can also influence people without access to heroes.
If that's the case, adding heroes is NOT the solution, fixing the game is!

lyra_song · Sep 28, 2007, 01:45 PM // 13:45

How is a hero group supposed to split on The Deep anyway...........

Thats frigging impossible. No AI can match a human group on the tactics for that area....

Twonaiver · Sep 28, 2007, 03:37 PM // 15:37

i have to partialy concour with the jos, i want to be able to do the content where i cant go for lack of playin ppl, i never been to some of this places and i feel left behind, with the 7 heroes i might try and do them, so why dont we have it ?

plz give me my 7 heroes group

Star Gazer · Sep 28, 2007, 03:56 PM // 15:56

jos, it shouldnt BE about choice. Adding heros to be able to fill the party would allow me to do this...once again, the people who are AGAINST heros are trying to state that their game play is more important than mine. Look, I should not be punished because I have a life. Yes, it is a choice that I fully accept (hell, GW isnt everything), but that being said, I should not be punished from doing all that guild wars has to offer. Sorry, but you fail on the choice idea, try again plz

Diddy bow · Sep 28, 2007, 04:05 PM // 16:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by MirageMaster

I want 7 heros and screw all others who dont!

Impressive and well thought out argument you have there, however i have had no trouble with only having 3 heros. The game's difficulty and mechanics were also designed to only have 3. On top of that 7 heros would make it superior to human partys in every way at least now youve still got 4 hencies to drag along

.

Verek · Sep 28, 2007, 04:43 PM // 16:43

Quote:

7 heros would make it superior to human partys

Just one word for this statement: Bullshit!

Please explain how 8 Humans all using vent/Team speak/skype...etc is worse than that 1 human and 7 A.I. please tell me I'd really like to know?

lyra_song · Sep 28, 2007, 04:44 PM // 16:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Star Gazer

jos, it shouldnt BE about choice. Adding heros to be able to fill the party would allow me to do this...once again, the people who are AGAINST heros are trying to state that their game play is more important than mine.

Bullshit. If anything asking for 7 heroes is the most greedy and self centered request i've heard in a while.

I'm against this idea because of

-the technical limitations on the gui and overcomplication of game mechanics will turn Guild Wars into a Real Time Strategy Game. Not to mention how overwhelming micromanaging 7 AIs will be with flagging/aggro etc.
-the mission designs of the much more difficult areas of the game CANNOT be beaten by 1 player and heroes alone PURELY by its designs.
-the increased handicap on new players who have a much smaller skill pool for heroes.
-dramatically lowered incentive to socialize with other players.

Verek · Sep 28, 2007, 05:02 PM // 17:02

Quote:

-the technical limitations on the gui and overcomplication of game mechanics will turn Guild Wars into a Real Time Strategy Game. Not to mention how overwhelming micromanaging 7 AIs will be with flagging/aggro etc.
-the mission designs of the much more difficult areas of the game CANNOT be beaten by 1 player and heroes alone PURELY by its designs.
-the increased handicap on new players who have a much smaller skill pool for heroes.
-dramatically lowered incentive to socialize with other players.

1/ technical, gui...over complication...etc / Answer; don't use all 7 if you don't want to.

2/ Mission designs...etc / Answer; Well we will have to PuG or go with Guildies....again we don't have to use the heroes.

3/ Increased handicap, new players ...etc / Answer; don't really understand this point, why would this increase the handicap on new player? The content of guildwars hasn't changed.

4/ Dramatically lowered incentive to PuG...etc / Answer; Sorry but Heroes haven't and wont do this, the player base has already done this by itself, and why do I have to socialize, stop telling me what to do!.......sheesh

Star Gazer · Sep 28, 2007, 05:57 PM // 17:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by lyra_song

Bullshit. If anything asking for 7 heroes is the most greedy and self centered request i've heard in a while.

*cut the rest of the crap out. *

bullshit? let me break it down, so even the simplist of minds could understand.

1) I want to do DoA.
2) I have a family.
3) I have kids.

So, your telling me, that because I have an outside life, and dont NEED (yes, the people who are complaining about socializing need to get out and see the sky every now and then) to socialize, that I cannot be allowed to do DoA, Deep, and Urgoz? Me being self centered? Ok peon, lets do this. While my wife is trying to get my attention, while my kids are screaming, let me join your group. Ill even be your monk. I will go afk on and off, and hopefully you will be ok. OH WAIT!! now the that the new /report feature is here, I cant even do that! Now I am stuck between Pugging and risking the multitudes of warnings, or I just cannot do it. Thank you for making sure the pugs get heard. GG Anet. GG.

Vinraith · Sep 28, 2007, 06:05 PM // 18:05

Quote:

Bullshit. If anything asking for 7 heroes is the most greedy and self centered request i've heard in a while.

How is not wanting to burden other players with having to leave in the middle of missions selfish? How is trying to force other players to have no other choice than to play with you NOT selfish? 7 heroes hurts no one, forcing people who can't or don't want to to play with others hurts everyone involved. PUGgers screw themselves by trying to force those of us that don't like to PUG to do so, all the while damaging our ability to enjoy the game.

I play with friends (who understand when I need to get up and leave the keyboard for a few minutes) and I play with H/H (who don't complain either). 7 heroes or 3 heroes, that's not going to change. 7 heroes makes it possible for me to play elite areas and various hard mode areas that have crappy henches when friends aren't around. That's it. It has no impact whatsoever on you.

lyra_song · Sep 28, 2007, 06:05 PM // 18:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Verek

1/ technical, gui...over complication...etc / Answer; don't use all 7 if you don't want to.

What if i want to? Shouldnt i be allowed to play how i want? Isn't that the bullshit notion all this is built on?

If 7 heroes were an option as a convenience, dont you see that in fact it turns into a hassle because of the increased micromanaging and lack of gui space to begin with. 3 heroes is already pushing it. You add 7 heroes and then pets and you get one RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GOed up interface.

You might as well just multi-box and macro multiple accounts....at least youll get ALL the drops to yourself.

Adding the option for more heroes forces a radical change in the interface as well as radical changes in the gameplay itself.

You move away from "Heroes as supplement for players" to "Players controlling heroe teams".

You move away from any sort of MMO experience to a 1 player game. And i dont think Anet wants to do that.

Quote:

2/ Mission designs...etc / Answer; Well we will have to PuG or go with Guildies....again we don't have to use the heroes.

The Deep. If all hero teams were allowed, how would you compensate for the design of that mission? It requires player coordination to deal with the puzzles.

What if i want to use all heroes? Why cant i play the Deep how i want to? Why doesnt Anet change the whole design of the level to fit my playing style?

Quote:

3/ Increased handicap, new players ...etc / Answer; don't really understand this point, why would this increase the handicap on new player? The content of guildwars hasn't changed.

No, but take a new player with Nightfall. A new player doesnt have a lot of things unlocked, so their first 3 heroes (Warrior, Monk, Dervish) would not be very well equipped.

My question to you is, how do you justify giving veterans a MASSIVE advantage via having a fully decked out team vs a newbie who has very little unlocked skills and weapons to begin with, in a game thats supposedly skill vs time spent?

Quote:

4/ Dramatically lowered incentive to PuG...etc / Answer; Sorry but Heroes haven't and wont do this, the player base has already done this by itself, and why do I have to socialize, stop telling me what to do!.......sheesh

Im not telling you what to do. Im telling you what youre doing and how such attitudes and behaviour is whats contributing to the overall downfall of this gaming community, if you can even call it that.

overall:
Some of this shit isn't designed to be soloed by one person. Deal with it. Adding more heroes WONT FIX IT.

ChaoticCoyote · Sep 28, 2007, 06:07 PM // 18:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by lyra_song

I made a photoshop of what 7 heroes will look like, posted it on that sardelac thread.

Just so you see what kind of technical hell it will be on the gui/interface.

(snipped image for brevity)

This pretty much says "Casual player go to hell."

Seven hero controls is completely unnecessary.

Right now, I can play with one human and six heroes, merely by using a second a count to "loan" three heroes to my character. Lots of people have shown how this is done in various threads. The "borrowed" heroes act like henchmen with custom skill bars.

No need to clutter the UI at all.

The current AI would work fine; the first three heroes "hired" would have control bars and individual flags, the rest wouldn't.

Beisdes that, I don't use the control bars much anyway. With good skill sets, Heroes don't need to be micromanaged.