Curse

refer · Jul 10, 2009, 03:34 PM // 15:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by MagmaRed

Allowing for 7 heroes would make playing with other people completely unnecesary. Yes, some still would, but most wouldn't.

If I was able to use 7 heroes, I would. However, I would also find the game extremely boring, extremely fast, and stop playing soon after. I know that isn't the case for everyone, but I also know I'm not in a significant minority on that.

Exactly why I wouldn't like 7 heros to be implemented. People keep saying "full teams are always better than heros" but nobody would be able to make them. You can't even make a full non hero team now.

I played another game that was given an extreme easy button during the beta phase and max level was a joke... it used to really be something, but people just were getting them like nothing and the game was too short as a result. There needs to be some challenge, otherwise why play? If you want to play straight farming and start your fake gold collection, go to WoW.

mrvrod · Jul 10, 2009, 03:36 PM // 15:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by MagmaRed

Despite the arguements about how the game should be played, anyone who thinks this isn't a MULTIPLAYER game is smoking crack.

This isn't a multiplayer game anymore. Anyone who still believes that this game can and should be played from start to finish with pug's needs to take the "good old days" glasses off and take an impartial look around.

I exclusively play hero/hench, or all hero with a rl friend that I know I can trust. I am sick of the griefers you always meet when trying to pug. On the flip side, I'm also sick of being denied a slot in a group because I choose to play a warrior and am not perma, cryer, sabway...whatever the current PvX cookie-cutter flavor of the week is.

Creativity and individuality are no longer considered assets, unless of course, you're the only individual responsible for how creative each skillset is. I'll keep playing online with my rl friend, we have fun together. When he's not available it's h/h.

(If anet wants to keep refusing, maybe I'll ask my friend to log on quick, then end gw process when in dungeon/mission when he doesn't have the time to play, 6 heroes is better than 3)

Daesu · Jul 10, 2009, 03:38 PM // 15:38

Heroes are actually inferior, in game performance, to human players because:

1) They can't tell line-of-sight. So they keep shooting into the wall if the target is behind. This is why most effective hero builds are casters, but many dont know that this is due to their AI limitations.

2) They cant get out of AoE properly. The worst behavior are from the melee heroes who go in and out of AoE until they die unless you flag them, which demands you to manage them, while managing your own character. This is a pain, which you would not need to feel if you are with a human team in the first place.

3) They can't run most of the builds right. Otherwise we would see lots of SF Zenmai/Anton heroes wouldn't we? Check pvxwiki, how many builds are for humans and how many are for heroes. If many of those builds are also effective for heroes, they would have marked it as such. Also some builds require you to micro manage their skills while playing your own character, which is another pain that you would not need to feel if you are with a human team in the first place.

4) They can't weapon switch. Not a big deal for most builds but an issue with some where you need to weapon switch when encountering e-denial or when you need energy.

5) They can't carry quest items. On many missions, this is a pain.

6) They can't split well.

7) They can't use any PvE skills. This makes a HUGE difference in performance since these skills are the most overpowered.

8) They can't bring cons, which humans do at times, to help out their team.

9) They dont read wiki and are totally reliant on you to know where to go. I can go on but I will stop here for now.

Granted their reflexes are generally better, even though they are not perfect because they still do miss with their mesmer interrupts also. But with all these disadvantages outweighing that single advantage, I would say they have a much lower in-game performance potential than a good human player.

Why do people use H/H then? Because they are CONVENIENT as they dont require you to wait in town to form a team. In difficult areas, that convenience is offset by the difficulty of those areas, so most people still had to party up.

What about 7 heroes? I dont care, but they are still better than henchies so better than H/H. They will never surpass a good human team though.

refer · Jul 10, 2009, 03:43 PM // 15:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

Why do people use H/H then? Because they are CONVENIENT as they dont require you to wait in town to form a team. In difficult areas, that convenience is offset by the difficulty of those areas, so most people still had to party up.

Party up, as in 2 people? That isn't a party.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrvrod

This isn't a multiplayer game anymore. Anyone who still believes that this game can and should be played from start to finish with pug's needs to take the "good old days" glasses off and take an impartial look around.

I started Guild Wars just this year and pugged everything. It is way more fun. No glasses here.

Daesu · Jul 10, 2009, 03:45 PM // 15:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by refer

Party up, as in 2 people? That isn't a party.

Like I said, it is the balance between convenience and power, the players have to decide. It is faster to find just 1 more person than to find 7 other persons to form a team. But a full human team is still potentially stronger. If anything else, 24 PvE skills per team already makes a huge difference, otherwise SC teams wouldn't have been so much more effective compared to H/H teams.

refer · Jul 10, 2009, 03:47 PM // 15:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

Like I said, it is the balance between convenience and power, the players have to decide. It is faster to find just 1 more person than to find 7 other persons to form a team. But a full human team is still potentially stronger.

But nobody will make them since heros are still better. When was the last time you saw a full team? It's like justifying extremely conditional skills... yeah if that condition happens they work good, but 99% of the time the conditions aren't met so the skill will never be used.

Angel Killuminati · Jul 10, 2009, 03:50 PM // 15:50

A full team of heroes = no multiplayer game. The who purpose of the game is to adventure with allies and Guilds/Alliances. You wouldn't need the help of anyone with all your heroes kitted out - 7 alongside you.

Yes, some would say that's better than having pugs with rubbish builds, but it destroys the whole focus of multi player. What would you do then? The only interaction in game with other players would be pvp and trading. Adventuring through the pve landscapes would be single player for a lot of people.

It's sad really that people leave the real world to play games such as these, shutting themselves off from the outside world and human contact, only to want to avoid human contact in a virtual world as well.

I thoroughly enjoy helping people out and adventuring. Only yesterday I answered a question about where to go from Dragons Throat by a Dervish who had come from Nightfall. Nothing had appaeardd in the mission log. So I went to Nika in Bukdek Byway with him, then asked if it would be ok for me to help him progress a bit further because I was bored. I then travelled with him to Nahpui Quarter. With a full hero party, this seemingly normal and friendly interaction would be far less. People wouldn't bother teaming up when you have computer controlled allies by your side.

I'm a graphic designer by trade and therefore love computers helping me out. Their mechanical workings are a treat, helping me create shapes and geometric forms that otherwise would take at least twice as long by hand. Human mistakes and trial and error make life what it is. If you made a whole team of computer npcs alongside of you, with superhuman interupts etc, for me anyway, it would ruin the part of the human brain that moves around the battlefield in game, analysing the situation, finding the best place to attack; casting at enemies from behind a rock not allowing rangers to strike you.

Anyway I'm diverging. If you want a team of computer controlled players alongside you, opt for something like Final Fantasy (not the online version). Teaming up in towns and outposts, organising builds, chatting to players in game, helping out players by bringing your heroes to assist them is part of a good thriving PVE world.

Daesu · Jul 10, 2009, 03:51 PM // 15:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by refer

But nobody will make them since heros are still better. When was the last time you saw a full team? It's like justifying extremely conditional skills... yeah if that condition happens they work good, but 99% of the time the conditions aren't met so the skill will never be used.

SC teams are still popular for HM elite areas. My guild, and others, runs SC every night for instance. They sometimes join PUGs for SC too, although that has a lower success rate.

Clearing UW in under 15mins is something a H/H team can't even get close to, in terms of game performance. With such performance, who needs 7 heroes?

SC teams are full human teams, for those who do not know.

Targren · Jul 10, 2009, 03:52 PM // 15:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by refer

People keep saying "full teams are always better than heros" but nobody would be able to make them.<b> You can't even make a full non hero team now.</b>

Precisely why we need it. The problem has already arrived. People would rather play with three heroes and four only-marginally-smarter-than-oatmeal henchmen than spend 45 minutes trying to get up a PUG group for Riverside Province. They're ALREADY convinced they shouldn't play with other people, so extending the hero allowance won't change that.

Then you have the anti-hero players, those who have been around since beta who beleive the game should be PUGed from Pre-Searing to A Time For Heroes. 7 Heroes won't change their mind on that any more than 4 did and they will still spend the majority of their time spamming LFG.

Middle grounders:
Play with others when they're available, otherwise H/H. Some of them might change to all heroes, but those would be the ones who only play with marginally-smarter-than-marginally-smarter-than-oatmeal henchmen other players because henchmen suck that bad. If they don't like playing with others, forcing them to do so doesn't improve their enjoyment of the game.

And then the people who actively ENJOY playing with others (I'm think I'm one of these, at least for the first 5 minutes of any PUG. After that, it's a crapshoot, depending on how many map-penises show up) but also like doing their own thing which may not be the most popular pastime. It's not often you can find someone else going to cap Virulence at the exact time you're doing it, so you end up taking henchies as 4 extra braindead minions that you can't heal with BotM. This is also true for those missions that everyone loves to hate (Dzagonur Bastion, thou art the spawn of the abyss...). If you're lucky, you find another desperate wretch looking to do it in HM at the same time you are. If so, these players boot out General Morgahn and let the other guy in.

Honestly, any argument against 7 heroes that doesn't center around technical limitations falls squarely in the realm of trying to dictate how others play the game.

beaztor · Jul 10, 2009, 03:59 PM // 15:59

7 heros ftw, no more pugs woot i'm in.
I preffer to solo with henchies, alone or heros.
I find humans way too slow, unprepared or too gungho.
taadadadadadadaaaa
taadadadadadadaaaa
taadadadadadadaaaadaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aa

Gun Pierson · Jul 10, 2009, 04:11 PM // 16:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Angel Killuminati

A full team of heroes = no multiplayer game. The who purpose of the game is to adventure with allies and Guilds/Alliances. You wouldn't need the help of anyone with all your heroes kitted out - 7 alongside you.

Yes, some would say that's better than having pugs with rubbish builds, but it destroys the whole focus of multi player.

The multiplayer part of this game can be found in PvP and they always welcome new players. Besides that, people would still have the option to coop with friends in PvE, nothing will change on that part.

I already play with 6 heroes alongside if I want, but I think everybody should have the option to play with more than 3 heroes in a simple practical way, without using 2 accounts or bothering friends to use theirs.

refer · Jul 10, 2009, 04:24 PM // 16:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gun Pierson

The multiplayer part of this game can be found in PvP and they always welcome new players

Yes, if you run [current meta build found on PvX].

Gun Pierson · Jul 10, 2009, 04:29 PM // 16:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by refer

Yes, if you run [current meta build found on PvX].

Like the meta builds for pve? UWSC to give one example.

Monk of Myst · Jul 10, 2009, 04:31 PM // 16:31

Here's my take on this:

Would I like to use 7 heroes? Sometimes.

Yes, I do agree that in some cases, the person would be too powerful with their heroes, however, I would like to pose a challenge to everyone who says no, we shouldn't because the game's designed for a group of human players:

Find an all human group (Yes, a PUG without heroes or henchies) to achieve the explorer title who will not sit there and whine that "It's taking too long" or "Can't we just go for something like Skill Hunter where we can just buy tomes?" and who is available at all times of the day and night. Are you going to find this PUG? Most likely not. Most people are too lazy to go for the titles the old fashioned way (in other words, getting off their rear ends and actually doing it, not paying someone to do it for them).

I understand A-Net's reasoning for limiting the number of heroes, however, it was their fault for introducing tomes and designing a game for the lazy player. My other argument, if we can only use 3, when why do we have so many heroes? It's not like it's going to take 10 minutes to change the hero's build. If they only wanted us to use 3, then they shouldn't have given us so many heroes.

Nodakim · Jul 10, 2009, 04:54 PM // 16:54

No.
Its an MMO,or CORPG if you like it more.
Cooperation,players.
Not heroes.

You already can do everything with 3 heroes and henches.

garethporlest18 · Jul 10, 2009, 05:06 PM // 17:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Angel Killuminati

It's sad really that people leave the real world to play games such as these, shutting themselves off from the outside world and human contact, only to want to avoid human contact in a virtual world as well.

Uh did you ever think that the reason they want to leave the real world and avoid people in a virtual world is because they are tired of seeing the people (and their opinions)? You could say "Why not play a singer player game?" Well I would answer that, this game has what they are looking for, there isn't a single player game that is Guild Wars.

Quote:

Anyway I'm diverging. If you want a team of computer controlled players alongside you, opt for something like Final Fantasy (not the online version). Teaming up in towns and outposts, organising builds, chatting to players in game, helping out players by bringing your heroes to assist them is part of a good thriving PVE world.

Teaming up with players is not something I really want to do. I rather play by myself with heroes, and talk to people in towns. Or through whisper while I'm doing that. I don't really like having to play with people though. I like having full control of what I'm doing, not partial. This game would survive with 7 heroes.

Daesu · Jul 10, 2009, 05:16 PM // 17:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Angel Killuminati

A full team of heroes = no multiplayer game. The who purpose of the game is to adventure with allies and Guilds/Alliances. You wouldn't need the help of anyone with all your heroes kitted out - 7 alongside you.

Yes, some would say that's better than having pugs with rubbish builds, but it destroys the whole focus of multi player. What would you do then? The only interaction in game with other players would be pvp and trading. Adventuring through the pve landscapes would be single player for a lot of people.

If you really intend to socialize, you dont have to PUG, just strike conversations with people in town. To PUG means taking risk with random people whom you have handed them the power to make your next 30mins of mission miserable. There is no need to risk the success of your mission by relying on the temperaments of little 12 year olds. There are many other safer ways to socialize on the Internet or out of the Internet.

In other words, if you want to play with humans, it is better to play with the people that you know and trust, then heroes, then random pugs. There is some wisdom in not trusting all strangers because not all strangers are worth your trust. If you dont value your mission, then go ahead and take that risk, otherwise it is a roll of a dice whether you would succeed or not, with strangers.

We are not anti-social, we are just not naive enough to trust all random strangers.

Just4Fun · Jul 10, 2009, 05:29 PM // 17:29

give us 7 heroes or take them ALL out including henchmen. /Done

Mad Lord of Milk · Jul 10, 2009, 05:36 PM // 17:36

7 heroes = OP as hell, they'd have to generate new areas that could actually challenge a 7-hero team

Mordakai · Jul 10, 2009, 06:01 PM // 18:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mad Lord of Milk

7 heroes = OP as hell, they'd have to generate new areas that could actually challenge a 7-hero team

Yeah, although really isn't the game easy enough already?

I'm really not sure it would make much of a difference.

This thread has made me kinda depressed, actually.