Curse

pamelf · Mar 24, 2008, 01:59 PM // 13:59

What I really don't understand is why people are so against 7 heroes because it will stop people pugging, when we already have the option to fill our bars with henches... :S If we didn't have that option I'd say yes guys, you have a point, but given that we at no point need to add real players to play through this game, not allowing 7 heroes is really just being stubborn to a decision they made too early.

Jetdoc · Mar 24, 2008, 02:00 PM // 14:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coloneh

why is there a thread for this? she didnt say anything...

It gives a reason for those that want seven heroes to post in a new, shiny thread, when almost everything that needs to be said about the topic is already here...

http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/s...php?t=10201532

I'd summarize what the arguments in that thread are pretty concisely, but that would simply perpetuate the arguments pro/con 7 heroes in this thread as well.

Fried Tech · Mar 24, 2008, 02:04 PM // 14:04

I see them nerfing UB from -2 energy degen, to -4 energy degen. Just to shut people up.

Shadowlance. · Mar 24, 2008, 02:29 PM // 14:29

I'm glad the thread was added. Even if Gaile's answer is patently ambiguous, at least it gives those of us that want 7 heroes a slim hope since this issue is on their radar, and she didn't give a flat out "no".

And just to re-add my opinion (posted a few times in that other thread):

My real life schedule gives me small blocks of time for gaming. Therefore I'm AFK a lot during quests/missions. To avoid being rude, I rarely PUG. I'm almost exclusively a H/H player. Therefore whether we have 3 heroes or 7 heroes, I will still be a H/H player. 7 heroes would increase my enjoyment of the game though, and therefore I'm in support of the idea.

R.Shayne · Mar 24, 2008, 03:14 PM // 15:14

Read every single page and no one has yet to put up a single argument against seven hero or usran other then whine, whine, whine, I want to play with other people. If you want to play with other people then join a guild that does pve and organizes outings.

I have tried Ursan once, didn't like it because it takes something away that I enjoy, trying my own builds out to see how they worked. But guess what if you don't like Ursan there is a simple answer - don't join that group.

I haven't joined a pug since prophecies and stop doing that halfway through the southern shiverpeaks but due to a desire to get a celestial compass joined two pug groups for UW Clear - first one was none ursan and three left before the first 20 minutes was up, went on to finish three more quest but then two more left. Second group was an ursan group and one person killed the whole thing by taking every quest that showed up. Both are prime examples of why you should never pug; Away from keyboards and people that don’t understand how the missions work.

Until they start changing henchmen builds to be more effective after pvp updates then henchmen will always be a second to last choice. Last choice is to pug.

Bryant Again · Mar 24, 2008, 03:15 PM // 15:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yoshikuni Mahsu

*snip* Its simple; Although 7 hero's still wouldnt be able to beat human/ursanway, its enough to take any high end area in PvE. And because of that, anyone can just get there and slap the stuff together and do a HM DoA run with 0 preparation time, while a human/ursan would take half hour/hour to organize.
The consequences of farming such areas so easily are pretty obvious.

A half-hour to organize Ursanway? Unlikely. As of right now it's currently the quickest and easiest build to set-up in the game: six people with Ursan Blessing on their bar and two monks, then gg. Don't forget that Heroes aren't without their consequences. They may be smart to a degree, but they only use about 1/3 of skills and builds properly. You can't just give them any build, you have to set them up with something their AI can handle.

zwei2stein · Mar 24, 2008, 03:21 PM // 15:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by lyra_song

Yandawar, i dont see how playing with seven heroes is NOT steamrolling your way through the game.

Also you dont know how to play with the other heroes, whats having more heroes going to do for you but be more of a liability?

If you want to get better and learn the game and accomplish something, then play the game.

What good is a hero ele if you dont know how to play as an ele in the first place for example?

You dont wanna use Guild wiki but you want a crutch using 7 heroes? Thats very hypocritical.

I think he was clear: HE wants to take some heroes for fun and some other in order to make sure he can actually play. That has little to do with steamrolling throught game, i guess he is of breed of people who would take henchmen over hero anyday if they liked that hench.

He is not playing to get better at pwning ai or to accomphis stuff, he is just enjoying himself.

I know that this is currently foreign to lots of people when title hunt it at rage, but point of playing GW is fun.

Turtle222 · Mar 24, 2008, 03:32 PM // 15:32

Why do you need 7 heroes? 3 is good enough. Anet allowed only 3 heroes so you don't run a chain pve team and also experiment with more than just dunkoro/zhed/olias...livia/olias/MoW

Instead, blame yourselves for not varying your heroes from time to time.

Yandawar · Mar 24, 2008, 03:35 PM // 15:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by zwei2stein

i guess he is of breed of people who would take henchmen over hero anyday if they liked that hench.

Thanks for getting what I was saying.
And yes, I frequently take along Sogolon because of this. He has all the best lines, and is way humble to boot! ^_^ I suspect that if we had seven heroes, I'd still play six heroes and one hench because of him.

Sefk · Mar 24, 2008, 03:50 PM // 15:50

There is another argument that hasn't be used:

soon, gw2 will be out. Then how will you EVER find a pug? Everybody is now playing gw 2, Let's say you want to play gw again so you have fill your hall of monument. What will you do? Watching henchies dying?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yandawar

Cool looks and a background story?

Remember: casual player. We're very shallow in what we care about.

And casual players don't have time to wait 2hours in an outpost to get a whole team.

Beside that, if you use a hero, you will have to learn how to skill it. If you don't like to learn it, use henchies, but don't use heros.

KennyC · Mar 24, 2008, 03:50 PM // 15:50

My opinions on 7 heroes and Ursan Blessing

1. Ursan = Ridiculously overpowered and game destroying in that elite areas that were originally designed to be difficult (Elite) are made very simple and easy. Anyone with 2 hemispheres can see this. A HUGE hundred bladed nerfbat needs to be used on Ursan Blessing as soon as humanly possible.

2. 7 Heroes = I am neither for or against this proposal. But ask yourself this. Will it have the same or a similar effect that Ursan has had in that it makes the game infinitely easier? Will it further reduce the multiplayer aspect, less instances of humans grouping together to play? If not then I dont see why we cant have 7 heroes. If it does either of these 2 things then its a very bad idea.

Darkobra · Mar 24, 2008, 03:58 PM // 15:58

How do 7 heroes suddenly stop people wanting to PUG but 3 don't? If people have been using 3 heroes and hench, they're obviously better than a random group of 4 warriors, 3 monks and a minion master.

-Sonata- · Mar 24, 2008, 04:15 PM // 16:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Turtle222

Why do you need 7 heroes? 3 is good enough. Anet allowed only 3 heroes so you don't run a chain pve team and also experiment with more than just dunkoro/zhed/olias...livia/olias/MoW

Instead, blame yourselves for not varying your heroes from time to time.

I think there's more to it than just that

Now I'm not "for" having 7 hero's. I've managed the game just fine with 3 hero's and 4 hench when applicable. If it stays at 3He+4H to the end of time it wouldn't matter one bit to me. However, I'm also not exactly against the idea either.

Just with the introduction alone of Hero's, I find it hard to believe that the makers of the game didn't realize they were somewhat making their henchmen a little obsolete. I can remember just starting Guild Wars with proph, making it all the way to Riverside with hench only, over the course of a few months. That was the first mission in which I felt like Hench alone would never get this done. I ended up Pugging it, which was fine, but I still wondered why the hench felt so weak all of the sudden.

I can't imagine myself only henching the Ascension missions. I'm sure others could do it, but I know I couldn't.

Yes, they still help, they can still get the job done, but they're missing the toughness and control (runes, weapon choices, manipulated builds, flagging, etc) you get with heros.

I wonder if any statement has been made, or idea given, that perhaps Henchmen need to be buffed up some.

Anyways, back on point (I know I ramble sometimes, or all the time). I'm also not totally against 7 heroes due to the fact we have 20+. Now I do mix mine up, a lot, but it's still a bit hard to mix and match 20+ heroes in 3 slots; especially for some of us who don't have the funds to rune and weapons equip all of them :P (Although I do have 90% of them all beefed up).

Not sure if there's much of a question that 7 Heroes would certainly make PvE a ton easier than it already is, or that people will "Breeze through the game". But let's face it; People already breeze through the game with runs - whether those runs are to a place, or a mission itself.

If 7 heroes came, I know I'd still PuG when I have the time. I'd still do things with my guildies, I'd still tag-a-long with random people just doing odds'n'ends questing.

Sure, I can see how the abiltiy of adding 7 heroes would be quite nice in certain circumstances and I often wonder why it hasn't been done already, especially with so many heroes made available. However, I'm not totally advocating for 7 heroes to be put in.

If it ever does, I'd be fine with it. If it doesn't, I'm fine with that too. It's no more of a breeze than paying someone 500g to do a mission.

I already enjoy what I can do as it stands right now and I enjoy the challenges I'm currently working on. It's why I'll stand right on the fence with this issue.

lyra_song · Mar 24, 2008, 04:41 PM // 16:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yandawar

Thanks for getting what I was saying.
And yes, I frequently take along Sogolon because of this. He has all the best lines, and is way humble to boot! ^_^ I suspect that if we had seven heroes, I'd still play six heroes and one hench because of him.

Personally I prefer Herta. Aka HURTA. She's hilarious.

You're reminding me of Final Fantasy 6 where certain characters say different things depending on who you have in the party, as such, its fun trying different combos to see what they say.

However the main storylines of the heroes occurs in cinemas and quests (with mandatory heroes), and rarely in the actual gameplay. Theres no actual changes to the battle chatter since the heroes dont interact with each other.

The critical flaw of nightfall is actually that, we HAVE to have have heroes in certain levels. We cant just beat certain quests or missions and see stuff, we HAVE to bring heroes along. What if I wanna do the quest with people? Thats one more slot that I can't have. This was fixed in EoTN thankfully.

With me, i prefer playing with the heroes I like, since the game's difficulty doesn't really stop players from beating it with just henchmen, I can get away with bringing 3 rangers or whatever.

Molock · Mar 24, 2008, 05:12 PM // 17:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gun Pierson

Yes ofcourse, nerfing Ursan would be the easiest way for Anet to settle the contradiction imo. I do hope though, they'll allow 7 heroes just for more fun.

I used to be against 7 heros.. now I'm all for! I loaded up all my heros with runes and weapons, I want to use them all now and no longer have to rely on incompetent people who leave 1/2 through.

I used to be against Ursan.. and still am! I wish it was nerfed to hell. Make Ursan (at max rank) +10 armor, +100hp and increase recharge on all the skills. Furthermore, make it so Ursan skills don't work with LB or other similar titles.

Selket · Mar 24, 2008, 05:29 PM // 17:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by KennyC

My opinions on 7 heroes and Ursan Blessing

1. Ursan = Ridiculously overpowered and game destroying in that elite areas that were originally designed to be difficult (Elite) are made very simple and easy. Anyone with 2 hemispheres can see this. A HUGE hundred bladed nerfbat needs to be used on Ursan Blessing as soon as humanly possible.

2. 7 Heroes = I am neither for or against this proposal. But ask yourself this. Will it have the same or a similar effect that Ursan has had in that it makes the game infinitely easier? Will it further reduce the multiplayer aspect, less instances of humans grouping together to play? If not then I dont see why we cant have 7 heroes. If it does either of these 2 things then its a very bad idea.

So you're saying that they should nerf ursan - one of the only reasons people are willing to play with each other, as heroes can't equip the skill. While not allowing 7 heroes because that would reduce the amount of people playing together?

Ursan is the only reason I (and pretty much everyone else I know) tolerate pvers.
o ok.

quickmonty · Mar 24, 2008, 05:57 PM // 17:57

She said nothing to answer the question.

So this is a(n other) thread about ............................... nothing!

KennyC · Mar 24, 2008, 06:08 PM // 18:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Selket

So you're saying that they should nerf ursan - one of the only reasons people are willing to play with each other, as heroes can't equip the skill. While not allowing 7 heroes because that would reduce the amount of people playing together?

Ursan is the only reason I (and pretty much everyone else I know) tolerate pvers.
o ok.

I said I'm neither for or against 7 hero parties if it has no detrimental impact on gameplay.

My point with regards to Ursan was that Elite areas are supposed to be hard and not ridiculously easy, thats why it needs a nerf. As for your inability to tolerate pvers without Ursan, thats a personal problem that you need to sort out yourself, not one that can be fixed with a game update. Might I suggest therapy?

Gregslot · Mar 24, 2008, 06:53 PM // 18:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by KennyC

I said I'm neither for or against 7 hero parties if it has no detrimental impact on gameplay.

My point with regards to Ursan was that Elite areas are supposed to be hard and not ridiculously easy, thats why it needs a nerf. As for your inability to tolerate pvers without Ursan, thats a personal problem that you need to sort out yourself, not one that can be fixed with a game update. Might I suggest therapy?

Whoa! Nothing to do with the thread but i have to say this:

OUCH!

One thing i really enjoy is a response that disables an type answer until the next thread, and that was an Elite one.

You, sir, are a Mesmer.

adding something to the topic: Ursans are bad, heros are cool... yay!

Sp3tzn4z · Mar 24, 2008, 09:22 PM // 21:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

I am very sorry that I don't have more to share on these two subjects. Oh, and I am about the least political person you'll meet, so I'm not trying to hint, or suggest, or pretend there is anything other than what there is. Which is, right now, nada. Sorry. Thanks a lot for understanding.

I don't wanna be rude or anything but that looks like the subjects are beeing avoided. I know there are alot of things beeing done at Anet but i think alot of people would like a answer and nada just doesn't cut it. And sry for that because you are my most favourite person that has something to do with GW.