Curse

Coverticus · Jul 20, 2009, 02:39 PM // 14:39

115 pages... so apologies if I have re-iterated points already made

But..

I can understand why people would like 7 heroes within their solo makeup. Putting Prophecies and Factions aside for now (since the hench builds are pants), Nightfall and GW:EN hench have half decent builds. For Normal and Hard Mode, you can do the majority, if not all, of NF and GW:EN with one human, 3 heroes and 4 hench. It just takes a little bit of a thing called patience and skill. I.e. using flags and microing the hero skills a bit from time to time.

Prophecies and Factions is a different matter and this is where yes, 7 heroes (or even just ONE more upped to four) would be very beneficial - certainly allowing the casual GuildWarian to do tasks within these 2 campaigns.

Also, what should be remembered, is the interface - maps (both radar and mini) as well as the hero bars would have to be tweaked (or a new layout presented). Think of trying to manage SEVEN heroes on a screen 800x600. Even 1024/1280 people would be struggling with this amount of clutter on the screen.

This will also take alot of work to develop and produce too - what would people rather have - 7 heroes or something new to whet the whittle? I would prefer something new, would make me come back for a bit to a stagnant game (others might take a look too).

Finally, this is just me but, presenting 7 heroes to the user basically will allow the player to throw their team in, kick back and let the AI do everything. Those with access to programmable keyboards/macro utilities, having 7 heroes will be something to salivate over - flag, G1,G2,G3,G4 - go get a drink, come back and pick up the loot.

And I know sending in the AI team can be done now but with 4HH/3H, it's a lot less predictable how it will turn out. And to me, thats kinda cheating. GuildWars becomes less of a MMO than it is now and becomes a point-and-click style affair of a management game. Heroes killed GW really, another 4 will just finish it off properly imho.

So I can understand why ANet say maximum of 3 heroes. Its an attempt at balancing a solo party. Yes... balance and GW in the same statement

There will be weaknesses in a team, be it H/HH or Guild/Alliance parties (unless the G/AP is, ah, made up of seasoned players hehe), so why should a player have access to 7 heroes than can VQ an area and thus not have to think too much in that area.

Summary: Bad idea but I.don't.mind - each to their own.

AngeliqueSynner · Jul 20, 2009, 02:56 PM // 14:56

It would completely kill person to person interaction.
Which, last I checked, was a goal of most MMO's.
If you don't like henchie AI or PuGing, then the best thing you can do is find a good guild. :]

Lishy · Jul 20, 2009, 04:20 PM // 16:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by AngeliqueSynner

It would completely kill person to person interaction.
Which, last I checked, was a goal of most MMO's.

Guild Wars is not an MMO, nor' was it designed to be. People who classify it as one have no idea what they're talking about.
And isn't person to person interaction already dead? When was the last time we saw people group for non-Vanquishing and non-Elite Areas or dungeons? Most guilds these days just don't care to group for things other than that.

The only down-side to 7 heroes is interface. But that would be no problem if they simply make the flag buttons circle the compass and let us re-size hero skill windows.

Imaginos · Jul 20, 2009, 05:47 PM // 17:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kain Fz

Guild Wars is not an MMO, nor' was it designed to be. People who classify it as one have no idea what they're talking about.
And isn't person to person interaction already dead? When was the last time we saw people group for non-Vanquishing and non-Elite Areas or dungeons? Most guilds these days just don't care to group for things other than that.

The only down-side to 7 heroes is interface. But that would be no problem if they simply make the flag buttons circle the compass and let us re-size hero skill windows.

some people group up for zquests though due to player stupidity I rarely do that either, along with my random play times/afk's.

Just recently I lost out on the bonus to two missions in nightfall due to other player stupidity. Oh and the waiting around...my GOD! First one person goes afk, so I afk at same time, I get back and they're still afk, then another person goes afk, and then 2 people quit, then we get 2 more and another person goes afk...you too can sit around for 30 min trying to get a group together for a mission. First time I'd pugged in a very long time and probably the last for a very long time.

Fact is other players don't listen. They do stupid stuff, they bring bad bars, they rage quit, they over aggro, some cuss a lot, and other things that make grouping with them unpleasant. I don't have to wait on heroes/henchmen. H/H don't quit if i have to afk. H/H don't cuss and whine.

7 heroes would only make the gaming experience for myself and others better.

refer · Jul 20, 2009, 06:24 PM // 18:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Imaginos

some people group up for zquests though due to player stupidity I rarely do that either, along with my random play times/afk's.

Just recently I lost out on the bonus to two missions in nightfall due to other player stupidity. Oh and the waiting around...my GOD! First one person goes afk, so I afk at same time, I get back and they're still afk, then another person goes afk, and then 2 people quit, then we get 2 more and another person goes afk...you too can sit around for 30 min trying to get a group together for a mission. First time I'd pugged in a very long time and probably the last for a very long time.

Fact is other players don't listen. They do stupid stuff, they bring bad bars, they rage quit, they over aggro, some cuss a lot, and other things that make grouping with them unpleasant. I don't have to wait on heroes/henchmen. H/H don't quit if i have to afk. H/H don't cuss and whine.

7 heroes would only make the gaming experience for myself and others better.

you just get bad people. 7 heros would make the game forced heros for everybody, even if you didn't want to do it.

Improvavel · Jul 20, 2009, 08:31 PM // 20:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Terra Jim

115 pages... so apologies if I have re-iterated points already made

But..

I can understand why people would like 7 heroes within their solo makeup. Putting Prophecies and Factions aside for now (since the hench builds are pants), Nightfall and GW:EN hench have half decent builds. For Normal and Hard Mode, you can do the majority, if not all, of NF and GW:EN with one human, 3 heroes and 4 hench. It just takes a little bit of a thing called patience and skill. I.e. using flags and microing the hero skills a bit from time to time.

Prophecies and Factions is a different matter and this is where yes, 7 heroes (or even just ONE more upped to four) would be very beneficial - certainly allowing the casual GuildWarian to do tasks within these 2 campaigns.

Also, what should be remembered, is the interface - maps (both radar and mini) as well as the hero bars would have to be tweaked (or a new layout presented). Think of trying to manage SEVEN heroes on a screen 800x600. Even 1024/1280 people would be struggling with this amount of clutter on the screen.

This will also take alot of work to develop and produce too - what would people rather have - 7 heroes or something new to whet the whittle? I would prefer something new, would make me come back for a bit to a stagnant game (others might take a look too).

Finally, this is just me but, presenting 7 heroes to the user basically will allow the player to throw their team in, kick back and let the AI do everything. Those with access to programmable keyboards/macro utilities, having 7 heroes will be something to salivate over - flag, G1,G2,G3,G4 - go get a drink, come back and pick up the loot.

And I know sending in the AI team can be done now but with 4HH/3H, it's a lot less predictable how it will turn out. And to me, thats kinda cheating. GuildWars becomes less of a MMO than it is now and becomes a point-and-click style affair of a management game. Heroes killed GW really, another 4 will just finish it off properly imho.

So I can understand why ANet say maximum of 3 heroes. Its an attempt at balancing a solo party. Yes... balance and GW in the same statement

There will be weaknesses in a team, be it H/HH or Guild/Alliance parties (unless the G/AP is, ah, made up of seasoned players hehe), so why should a player have access to 7 heroes than can VQ an area and thus not have to think too much in that area.

Summary: Bad idea but I.don't.mind - each to their own.

And what is the difference to 2 players and 6 heroes?

Lishy · Jul 21, 2009, 12:30 AM // 00:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by refer

you just get bad people. 7 heros would make the game forced heros for everybody, even if you didn't want to do it.

What problem is that when a majority prefer to use heroes?
It's better than forcing people to group with those they don't want to group with: PuGs
And with guilds, you only take heroes if there's no human replacement anyways.

Friends>Guildies>Heroes>PuGs>Henchmen

Awex Mafyews · Jul 21, 2009, 01:01 AM // 01:01

In all fairness player interaction is fairly dead when it comes to grouping together for missions, except for Z-quests, so why not add in the option for more heroes? Maybe not even 7 just 1/2 more would help people enjoy the game more and surely that's what it's about?

Ec]-[oMaN · Jul 21, 2009, 01:06 AM // 01:06

The poll is rather disgusting, never thought I'd see it so one sided. Just goes to show which direction the game has gone over 4 years and what type of playerbase is left.

The very few characters I took through PvE I rather much be partied up with real people, I can see as the game and PvE loses it's appeal and lore and becomes a chore that people would want 7 heroes, still don't think it's the greatest choice. Seeing a poll like this 2 years ago would be rather interesting though compared to 4 years later.

Lishy · Jul 21, 2009, 06:26 AM // 06:26

This poll may be disgusting to you, but your post is disgusting to some of us here. See? I can make one-sided arguments and views too!

Anyways, all I can say is your thoughts on this matter is a little selfish, don't you think? If playing with others players is what the majority wanted, obviously we would be having more groups grouping. But the PLAYERS themselves CHOOSE to use AI because it's a BETTER EXPERIENCE.
Do you think they would rather be forced to play with dumbass firestorm warriors who cause nothing but stress? This is called an unnecessary limitation. And they suck, because it doesn't make the game more "challenging" or "harder". It just makes it more annoying.
You also say it loses its lore? Wait, what? Last I checked when you group, you're always rushed. With AI, you can take your time to read quest dialogue.

Anyways, Guild Wars is a Co-rpg and not an MMO. No matter what you say, it was marketed as a simple multiplayer rpg that players can CHOOSE who they want to group with, be it your friends or the ai.
Allowing 7 heroes, possibly with even PvE skills, is probably a good option for the game. Why? Because it is the player preference

Grouping with other players should be something fun. Not a mandatory source of annoyance and stress.

Also, over 1k votes. Woot! I win the bet!!
Time to get 7 heroes working, anet, for the quarterly update!
IT'S CRUNCH TIME!!!!!

I know you see this thread, anet. So you better go prepare your soft drinks, coffee, and ice tea. Cuz' it seriously looks like crunch time

Mexay · Jul 21, 2009, 07:49 AM // 07:49

I'm pretty much split down the middle. 7 heroes would be great, as I'm doing Guardian of Tyria, finding a party for a mission, let alone in hardmode is just a plain pain in the ass. Henchmen are just plain useless, they need to be updated. However 7 heroes could also make PUGs LESS than they are now (That DOESN'T mean people wouldn't form them, they still would, but there WOULD be FEWER). 5 heroes would be nice, it would work well for me as I would prefer 8 players than 1 player and 7 heroes, but 3 players and 5 heroes is better, to me, than 1 player and 7 heroes.

On another note, the concept (with 7 heroes) of 2 MMs, 1 player, and pets and other heroes is nice BUT...

3 MMs + 1 Player (with a pet, asuming they aren't an MM themselves), 2 healers, 2 Spirit Bombers (all heroes having pets) = 46 AI + Spirits (on average about 3 - 8 per Spirit Bomber) so that means 49 - 54... this would however mean major lag.

I would like to have 7 heroes because PUGS are EXTREMELY hard to find, especially in HM missions.

The whole concept about it completely killing PUGs is bull shit. It wont kill them just like Ursan didn't kill PvE (groups that didn't want ursan didn't use it... trust me, they were around).

Lishy · Jul 21, 2009, 08:32 AM // 08:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mexay

The whole concept about it completely killing PUGs is bull shit. It wont kill them just like Ursan didn't kill PvE (groups that didn't want ursan didn't use it... trust me, they were around).

Difference is, Ursan provides an advantage. Heroes provide a convenience. There's a huge difference, unless I'm mistaken.

That said, I'm still waiting to hear about anet's crunch time of implementing 7 hero slots.

mage767 · Jul 21, 2009, 08:41 AM // 08:41

The number of heroes obtained should be tied to Guardian title.

Guardian of Tyria = +1 hero
Guardian of Cantha = +1 hero
Guardian of Elona = +1 hero
Legendary Guardian or Legendary Master of North = +1 hero

Done, 7 heroes obtained, but it will need some work!

YunSooJin · Jul 21, 2009, 09:11 AM // 09:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by mage767

The number of heroes obtained should be tied to Guardian title.

Guardian of Tyria = +1 hero
Guardian of Cantha = +1 hero
Guardian of Elona = +1 hero
Legendary Guardian or Legendary Master of North = +1 hero

Done, 7 heroes obtained, but it will need some work!

Guardian is too easy. Should be the Vanquisher title. :P

daraaksii · Jul 21, 2009, 09:16 AM // 09:16

They better give out the Source Code of the game.

Awex Mafyews · Jul 21, 2009, 10:56 AM // 10:56

How about 7 heroes but only in hard mode? To be honest even a rubbish pug in normal mode can usually get through a mission quite easily so 7 heroes isn't needed for that at all, but in hard mode where its hard to find a pug let alone a good one it would b fairly useful to have the option of 7 heroes.

Accursed · Jul 21, 2009, 12:02 PM // 12:02

No, sorry, I don't want to be an anti-social player in this game like the rest of you who agree with this ridiculous, seven hero idea.

Highlander Of Alba · Jul 21, 2009, 03:08 PM // 15:08

Thats the point to the post above

Nobody wants you to be anti social.You play the game as you wish nobody is forcing you or anyone even to play with heros never mind hench.

Thats the point its your choice
I mean seriously 26 heros and allowed 3 its defies logic

Sure even anet knows guys use 6 heros with dual accounts ect.

All I can add is keep it front page news and mabe yes mabe somebody will suggest a way to implement it.

Its that to maximise profits.We have seen that appearing re panes .name change ect.The game is over 4 years old and since Aion releases on 23rd Sept
we may see some sort of content on Guild wars once that is running.

I for one would like to see it implemented, keep on trucking guys

Painbringer · Jul 21, 2009, 03:11 PM // 15:11

At this point in time Yes since we are on auto pilot till GW2 comes out. The economy has been hosed by PVE skills so whats left to save.

Yawgmoth · Jul 21, 2009, 03:20 PM // 15:20

That would clearly be a move in a WRONG WAY.

They should be encouraging multiplayer activities more instead, because it's not a single player game and it's pretty sucky as one.

I'd much rather like to see a limit to 1 hero per player, max 3 in a team than something as ridiculous as 7 heroes.