Curse

lyra_song · Sep 28, 2007, 06:09 PM // 18:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChaoticCoyote

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.

Then why not just ask for better henchmen, thats a perfectly viable and not to mention DOABLE option.

Star Gazer · Sep 28, 2007, 06:11 PM // 18:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by lyra_song

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?

ok, please quit spewing random shit out of your mouth. This is PvE. Not PvP. It DOES NOT MATTER how quickly a veteran gets through a mission vs a newer player. Hell, its probably a good thing that they have some grounds to work on. Unlocked weapons? Please point me to the weapon creator for heros. I have yet to see that. Skill vs time spent arguement, is once again, bullshit. That aspect is geared towards PvP. PvE does not need skill. Please do your research.

Wrath of m0o · Sep 28, 2007, 06:58 PM // 18:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by lyra_song

Then why not just ask for better henchmen, thats a perfectly viable and not to mention DOABLE option.

We have already had 7/8 Henchmen parties..
This is not what we are asking for.
We have 25 Heros and can only use 3 of them...
Thats what we are complaining about.

lyra_song · Sep 28, 2007, 07:00 PM // 19:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Star Gazer

ok, please quit spewing random shit out of your mouth. This is PvE. Not PvP. It DOES NOT MATTER how quickly a veteran gets through a mission vs a newer player. Hell, its probably a good thing that they have some grounds to work on. Unlocked weapons? Please point me to the weapon creator for heros. I have yet to see that. Skill vs time spent arguement, is once again, bullshit. That aspect is geared towards PvP. PvE does not need skill. Please do your research.

Im sorry i missed a coma. You seem to be fixated on that error.

PvE skill does not matter? Then why are people on this thread complaining about crappy Puggers who have no skill in PvE as one of the reasons for wanting 7 heroes to begin with?

You are placing newbies in a very difficult position.

Theres no pugs. All they have are heroes, heroes which rely on their own skill pool and available weapons. Theres no one to learn from. Theres no improvement. Its all going to be frustration and grief for new players.

Adding 7 heroes is a very slippery slope. I have thought about this issue from more than 1 perspective. I've actually switched sides repeatedly. Its a very very thorny issue and a very dangerous one.

I see the pros and i see the cons. Do not misjudge me as hating on this idea for no reason. I'm quite adamant because i've studied the issue from both sides and i dont see the case strong enough for this change.

The concept that players should be allowed access to all content and play how they want is a mute argument simply because not all players can play the same way or do they have the same skill level.

Giving someone the option to do something while at the same time depriving that player of what makes the game intrinsically unique is a bad idea.

Star Gazer · Sep 28, 2007, 07:21 PM // 19:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by lyra_song

Im sorry i missed a coma. You seem to be fixated on that error.

There are no pugs. All they have are heroes, heroes which rely on their own skill pool and available weapons. Theres no one to learn from. Theres no improvement. Its all going to be frustration and grief for new players.

Adding 7 heroes is a very slippery slope. I have thought about this issue from more than 1 perspective. I've actually switched sides repeatedly. Its a very very thorny issue and a very dangerous one.

I see the pros and i see the cons. Do not misjudge me as hating on this idea for no reason. I'm quite adamant because i've studied the issue from both sides and i dont see the case strong enough for this change.

The concept that players should be allowed access to all content and play how they want is a mute argument simply because not all players can play the same way or do they have the same skill level.

Giving someone the option to do something while at the same time depriving that player of what makes the game intrinsically unique is a bad idea.

fixed your spelling error. please, do not flame on spelling if you cannot do it yourself.

no, I am not talking about 7 heros for general gameplay. I am talking about 7 heros for hardmode and elite areas (such as DoA). So please, once again, do your research.

Like you, I have seen both sides of the arguement. I have yet to see an answer which supports that there not be a change. The irony.

Yes, players do have places if they want to learn. Presear is one huge playground for people to learn. In Factions, there is an area where you can actually fight other NPCs to see if your skills work. In nightfall, there is also a training area. Hell, everyone even has access to the training area in the pvp section. So your validity about people not learning is their own fault. Not mine.

Wrath of m0o · Sep 28, 2007, 07:28 PM // 19:28

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.

Actually,
Being against 7/8 hero parties is the most greedy and self centered thing ive ever heard.
Your reasons for not allowing 7/8 Hero parties, does not hold water.

lyra_song · Sep 28, 2007, 07:59 PM // 19:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Star Gazer

fixed your spelling error. please, do not flame on spelling if you cannot do it yourself.

I didnt flame you on spelling. Maybe youre confusing me with someone else.

Quote:

no, I am not talking about 7 heros for general gameplay. I am talking about 7 heros for hardmode and elite areas (such as DoA). So please, once again, do your research.

Yes, we are talking HM and Elite Areas like DOA, Deep, Urgoz.

But what point is it to add it to just those areas? Why not the whole game?

My answer to that remains the same. Having 7 heroes wont fix the fact that some of these areas REQUIRE people.

You want to do DoA? More Heroes wont neccesarily make you succeed in DoA.

Youll probably get more pissed that even with more heroes, its a slogfest.

Quote:

Like you, I have seen both sides of the arguement. I have yet to see an answer which supports that there not be a change. The irony.

Yes, players do have places if they want to learn. Presear is one huge playground for people to learn. In Factions, there is an area where you can actually fight other NPCs to see if your skills work. In nightfall, there is also a training area. Hell, everyone even has access to the training area in the pvp section. So your validity about people not learning is their own fault. Not mine.

Maybe you didn't look hard enough?

Guild Wars has content for many player types.

for example
Casual
Solo
PvP
Hardcore

A player has the option to play all of these types. However one player type does not have access to the whole game.

In order to have access to everything Guild Wars has to offer, you have to be a little bit of each player type.

By allowing heroes, the game offers soloists a different experience. Their gameplay style however...cannot be applicable to ALL sections of the game (The Deep for example). To give ALL sections of the game complete access to one player type, without giving access to the others, is very unfair, and part of that slippery slope.

Malice Black · Sep 28, 2007, 08:11 PM // 20:11

Keep the claws in people. Being civil cost you nothing.

Martin Firestorm · Sep 28, 2007, 08:13 PM // 20:13

I would like the option of 7 heroes. Not quite sure why that is not permitted. If its UI clutter, I see that as a non-problem since I don't have to display the hero bars, or all of them, at all times. If the perceived problem is that the 7 hero option would make grouping with live players less likely, I don't see how there could be much less PUG'ing than there is now. Having any heroes pretty well destroyed PUGs, and the few PUGs that are available these days are almost always bad. I'd prefer to take 7 heroes on those harder missions, though the hero/hench mix is fine for most of the game.

Vinraith · Sep 28, 2007, 08:23 PM // 20:23

Quote:

Guild Wars has content for many player types.

for example
Casual
Solo
PvP
Hardcore

I see what you did there.

There are two kinds of players along the relevant axis of discussion:

Solo
Group

Casual/Hardcore is a different axis and not pertinent to this discussion, and PvP has absolutely no bearing on this conversation at all.

Quote:

To give ALL sections of the game complete access to one player type, without giving access to the others, is very unfair,

I agree. Group players have complete access to ALL sections of the game, solo players do not. This IS very unfair.

New Buddha · Sep 28, 2007, 08:30 PM // 20:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by the_jos

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

.

what about them? then they have the option to buy NF or Gwen just like the rest of us that did and deserves the option to be able to use all our heroes.

Star Gazer · Sep 28, 2007, 08:34 PM // 20:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vinraith

I agree. Group players have complete access to ALL sections of the game, solo players do not. This IS very unfair.

QFT. Solo players do not have the option to get into the hardcore areas. Just to say, I am a hardcore player. I play whenever I get a chance. It is the inability of me sitting at the computer for more than 30 minutes at a time that is not allowing me to pug OR do the elite areas. I have 13 maxed titles (and no, they are not sweet tooth or drunkard and yes, they were ALL done with h/h), so I think that says something in itself. Just add the 7 heros. The community for me has nothing to offer, and I should not be forced to play with immature people, or people who want cookie-cutter builds.

lyra_song · Sep 28, 2007, 08:36 PM // 20:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vinraith

I see what you did there.

There are two kinds of players along the relevant axis of discussion:

Solo
Group

Casual/Hardcore is a different axis and not pertinent to this discussion, and PvP has absolutely no bearing on this conversation at all.

No they are pertinent in the fact that these are player styles that people choose.

The grind factor in GW:EotN can be considered as completely optional and players have the option of choosing to play it or not. This fulfills the hardcore player type's content.

The casual player cant be expected to have access to the hardcore player's content.

Quote:

I agree. Group players have complete access to ALL sections of the game, solo players do not. This IS very unfair.

Maybe its not unfair, rather the design of parts of the game? Even if you added more heroes, it WOULDNT FIX THAT.

Star Gazer wants HM and Elite areas. Some of these areas are obviously NOT for solo-ers.

What is for solo-ists that group players do not have? Farming is one thing i can think of. The game heavily rewards soloing vs grouping in terms of loot.

We've had this from the VERY beginning. UW and FOW....no henchmen allowed.

New Buddha · Sep 28, 2007, 08:45 PM // 20:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by lyra_song

Then why not just ask for better henchmen, thats a perfectly viable and not to mention DOABLE option.

I agreed with this, and let us skill them the way we want. That works for me.

as for 7 heroes cluttering up the GUI.. make it so that we are allow to have only a few open and we get to chose which, we dont see the henchies so...

the_jos · Sep 28, 2007, 08:56 PM // 20:56

Quote:

We have already had 7/8 Henchmen parties..
This is not what we are asking for.
We have 25 Heros and can only use 3 of them...
Thats what we are complaining about.

Next request would then be "we have 25 heroes and can only use 7 of them"

For the sake of this argument I say 'screw PuG'.
People showed they don't care for PuGs anymore and want to change the game into a solo game (my WoW playing colleague laughed very hard when I told him people are demanding 7 heroes).

Seeing a lot of people seem to want what is close to hench with adjustable skillbars, let's focus on that. They don't want the advanced interface, just heroes they can adjust.

There must be a valid reason to do so.
Saying "I have 25, can use 3" is not enough.
There must be some things that cannot be done with the current 3 heroes/4 hench. It also must not involve a change in game design besides adding more heroes.
We talked about the elite areas before.
That's a no-go. Those areas are designed with human teams in mind.
Deep and Urgoz's have features that would be very difficult or even impossible to achieve with heroes.
Guildies say DoA would probably be possible with full hero team.
However, since the area was intended for play with other humans (hence the lack of henchies) and changing that would mean changing the core area design it's a no-go.

Now there are several other spots that are very hard with the current H&H setup.
However, those spots are limited.
And more important, at least one of those spots (Eternal Grove HM) is located on a continent without heroes.
Meaning people with Factions (+Proph) only are screwed when the problem is solved by adding more heroes.

Up to now, the most valid argument I have seen is the 'AFK a lot/I have a life' argument.
However again it is used a lot in combination with the 'human areas' mentioned above. And those were no-go.
Again, one has to ask if this is a problem that can only be solved with more heroes (and only be in NF or EotN, since Proph and Factions don't have inherited heroes).
Again, with a few exceptions, the answer would be negative.

So far I have still to hear an argument explaining why the current game is broken and this broken game can only be fixed by adding more heroes.
Not adjusting areas that don't support full H&H teams.

The community demanding the heroes has so far only been stating that they want heroes, but given no more than 'nice to have' reasons together with 'it will not harm anyone'.
While both are valid reasons, you are asking A-net to dedicate resources to something that is not a problem.
The only problems that are there concern specific areas/missions (again, not the elite ones) and asking for a solution for those problems is fair.
For example, Eternal Grove with hench only in Hard Mode would probably be almost unbeatable, so asking for a change of the hench there (or the mission mechanics) would be fair. The same for every other area/mission that is impossible to complete with hench only (as far as Proph and Factions are concerned).

When A-net solves all problems in the game (take a peek in the bug sections on the various forums) they are free to implement changes like full hero parties.
But till then fixing something that is not even broken is just not right

Loviatar · Sep 28, 2007, 09:06 PM // 21:06

for the most part the only people demanding this are the hardcore pro farmers who want to farm the elite optional areas.

or who want to run the normal high end farming areas faster with fewer party members.

there have been several posts months ago stating that if they had 4 or 5 heroes they could dump all 4 henchmen giving them a party of 4-5 which would help dramatically in excluded high end items.

since this has already been decided at the top over a year ago and constantly reconsidered/discussed by the top people and turned down i think it is safe to say that they will not change a core game policy at this late date.

it has been discussed not once but many times and each time the answer has been a flat NO.

Quote:

And understand that this issue has been taken to the designers many times, and they have no intention of making major changes to the design of the game -- and to some of the core design objectives -- based on this request.

Quote:

Here is what I can offer, after speaking with James Phinney less than 10 minutes ago: The all-hero party is not under consideration at this time. The matter was discussed thoroughly during design, then was revisited again recently. Both extensive discussions resulted in the decision to not enable the all-hero party.

Quote:

This is a known request, and player input has already been stated many, many times. Every argument you have made, every comment you have posted, has been considered. Therefore, new or bumped threads, posts, emails, PMs, and petitions are simply unnecessary. If and when the topic is reexamined by the design team -- and that would be well down the road, if ever

Quote:

You may discuss what you choose to discuss. I do not presume to tell you to not continue to discuss this or any matter. But on this matter, we will no longer be commenting, and there is absolutely no interest by the design team is spending time reading the same comments, repeated ad infinitum.

Quote:

Nothing has been "gimped." Instead, the designers have elected not to boost things to an extreme by offering seven heroes. There is a vast difference between the two.

Quote:

I have answered the core question: "Can we have seven heroes." The answer is, "No, sorry, the design team does not feel that it is a good idea, that it will not be in the best interest of the game and GW community as a whole, to put this into effect.

this is not a maybe
this is not a were working on it
this is not a its under consideration

this is here is the answer from the people who make the decisions

BlackSephir · Sep 28, 2007, 09:22 PM // 21:22

Quote:

for the most part the only people demanding this are the hardcore pro farmers who want to farm the elite optional areas.

or who want to run the normal high end farming areas faster with fewer party members.

Cut the crap, boy. Grinding/farming makes me sick and I'm not doing that. Just because I don't enjoy PUGs means I'm 'pro farmer'? Wow, your tumor is growing nicely.
If you don't have anything to back-up your pathetic 'u want 7 heroes so u can farm moar lulz' then I'd suggest to leave.
On the other hand, if you have something to back you up then please, enlighten me. I'm waiting.

Quote:

this is here is the answer from the people who make the decisions

Breaking news- decisions can change.
Moar after this!

Vinraith · Sep 28, 2007, 09:53 PM // 21:53

Quote:

for the most part the only people demanding this are the hardcore pro farmers who want to farm the elite optional areas.

Wow, irrationality didn't work so now we're down to flat out lying and insults. Trying to get the thread closed so there won't be an opposition voice, presumably?

Verek · Sep 28, 2007, 11:16 PM // 23:16

I just don't understand the problems with having 7 heroes, this is PvE for Christ sake, what does it matter to anyone else.

We have PvE only skills, consumables, ghostly helpers, Title skills that increase with grind leveling....etc...etc.

Bottom line is, I don't want to PuG, all you Puggers....PuG Off.

Crom The Pale · Sep 28, 2007, 11:30 PM // 23:30

7 heros has absolutely nothing at all to do with farming.

In fact the complete oppisite is true, you get better drops with just 1-2heros.

7 heros is just an option we would like to make the game a little more fun. Just because you do not find playing with heros fun, don't tell us we can't enjoy it because we do.

If the extra heros would effect how you play the game, then tell us how?
If the extra heros would change how people play the game, then give us some proof?

I have yet to see anyone put up a real argument on how 7 heros would harm the game in a way that 3heros/4hench does not already effect it.