Curse

tmr819 · Dec 07, 2007, 02:26 PM // 14:26

Some of the discussions in other threads got me to thinking about the way Guild Wars is designed in terms of missions, quests, and now dungeons with respect to player groups versus solo players.

I enjoy soloing in Guild Wars and for the most part that's how I play it, although I have also had great fun playing with a friend or two or with a full group of players through a difficult mission.

My general observation, however, is that Guild Wars seems (to me) to be designing its campaigns and now the expansion to be increasingly and particularly harder for players who prefer to solo with an h/h group. As a general rule, a group composed of two or more player characters is generally going to move faster and have an easier time of it for most missions and dungeons. I acknowledge the sense of that. But I sometimes wish I could ask the developers whether (and how much) they play test the content to evaluate its accessibility to solo players using just heroes and henchmen. The difficulty gap, in my opinion, for solo vs. group play seems to be widening.

The Heart of the Shiverpeaks mission is a prime example of, to me, a night-and-day difference between a solo-h/h group versus a player group. With a player group, this mission is not bad at all; with an h/h group it's a real bear. Many of the dungeons in EotN seemed designed this way as well.

In terms of "soloability" I see it as: Prophecies > Factions > Nightfall > Eye of the North, with Eye of the North being the least "solo-friendly" of the four. The apparent trend here makes me uneasy, I will admit, with regard to GW2 and the general direction ArenaNet seems to be headed.

In WoW, you CANNOT complete dungeons at your own level by yourself and there are no henchmen available, so you MUST form a group with other players or skip past the dungeon altogether. What makes the dungeons in GW so much better than those in WoW is that you can form your own group of NPCs and complete a dungeon on your own and at your own pace, if you want to. Will you still be able to do that in GW2?

GW2, from what I have heard, is eliminating the henchmen/Heroes. (Yes, I know about the Companion NPC, but I doubt that will replace the need for an entire group.) This change, more than anything else I have heard about the new version of GW, is what concerns me most.

For me, the henchmen and Heroes in Guild Wars are one of its best features. If they are eliminated in GW2 in favor of "enforced grouping to complete instanced areas", that will be a deal-breaker for me, since I can get essentially that (if I want it) in WoW.

I am curious to know what other players think about this.

Onarik Amrak · Dec 07, 2007, 02:46 PM // 14:46

Having companions doesn't necessarily mean the abolition of henchmen.

I don't see GW:EN as being the least solo-friendly.

It's more like a power creep. So it's more difficult.

It's just that, like all other parts of the game, it's easier when you have other real players with you.

Shadow Spirit · Dec 07, 2007, 02:52 PM // 14:52

I can see where you're coming from, but I think you'd agree that in comparison to other games, GW is still very solo friendly.

Just make sure to adjust your hero builds according to what you're doing and that should make things easier for you.

I hear you on Heart of the Shiverpeaks. No matter how much I yelled at them, I just couldn't get the h/h to pick up those darn barrels...

Jetdoc · Dec 07, 2007, 02:53 PM // 14:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmr819

My general observation, however, is that Guild Wars seems (to me) to be designing its campaigns and now the expansion to be increasingly and particularly harder for players who prefer to solo with an h/h group.

I solo almost everything without heroes or henchmen, so I'm not sure what the fuss is about...the game is relatively easy with a full party, whether it be with H/H or humans, unless you're in hard mode or in one of the elite missions/areas.

tmr819 · Dec 07, 2007, 02:55 PM // 14:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shadow Spirit

I can see where you're coming from, but I think you'd agree that in comparison to other games, GW is still very solo friendly.

Oh, I absolutely agree with you on that. I just hope it stays that way for GW2.

Dumb as they are, I will really miss the henchmen.

Shakkara · Dec 07, 2007, 03:00 PM // 15:00

I sincerely hope that GW2 will have all of it's content available for solo players. I quit WoW because I was forced to join a guild to get endgame equipment, this is not my playstyle.

Navaros · Dec 07, 2007, 03:12 PM // 15:12

It's extremely easy to solo every single thing in EOTN in normal mode with Heroes/Hench, other than Cyndr in particular (although even that can be done, I did it myself with full H/H team other than me on my first try on the first day EOTN was out). Sure Cyndr is one example of things being harder with H/H, but that's the only semi-difficult thing to do with H/H in the whole EOTN game (other than HM). Therefore I disagree with the OP's claim that EOTN is harder to H/H with. All the GW games have a few zones where Heroes/Hench teams are made to have an arbitrarily more difficult time simply by virtue of Heroes/Hench not having the ability to pickup, hold, or drop mission-necessary items.

Speaking to the broader issue, it seems like Anet has made comments (in threads about allowing 7 heroes per player) to the effect of purposely somewhat gimping the players' ability to play solo in GW via the silly 3 Hero limitation to "encourage a social game". However, in my view that is the wrong stance to take. The original GW box states as as a selling point on the back of the box that you are allowed to play solo with henchmen if you want to. Therefore, to semi-gimp that choice after the fact with things like arbitrary Hero limits is wrong. To semi-gimp the abilty to solo in GW2 would also be wrong. Every player should have the individual choice to play how he or she chooses to in the spirit of how that was advertised on the original GW box. Not be shoehorned into partying with other players if they don't want to. Because GW in normal mode is an extremely easy game (any version of GW), this stuff isn't all that big of a deal in GW1 except for in hard mode where henchmen don't really cut it (that is not to say HM can't be done with H/H) and the 3 Hero limitation per player becomes extremely annoying "feature" of the game that serves no purpose. I know the official stance is that it "encourages a social game", but it doesn't really --- to circumvent this limitation, those who hate PUGs will still always hate and never join PUGs and will always "tough it out" with H/H instead of ever joining any PUG. Therefore all it really "encourages" or accomplishes is frustrating players.

Mineria · Dec 07, 2007, 03:22 PM // 15:22

Since the OP puts GW2 play-styles in question.

To limit the game down to particular play-styles won't fix things, its just an easy way out for the developers.
I think they should keep the current option, that you can go with a party of AI.
I don't get it, why they try to make things easy for theme self, instead of improving on the current AI.
I bet GW players have tried Baldur's Gate and other rpg's with AI party, and loved that this was brought into GW from day one.
Actually. I would like to see different kind of modes that are used for entering instances. From solo to full group with heroes to full group with players.
As well as reflect it with a wider variety of titles with which play-styles a character advances.

Eye of the North is h+h able with the exception of a dungeon boss that gives you the bomb.
Baron Geddon anyone?
Hopefully this will be auto scaled upon entering an instance depending on with what you enter an instance in GW2.
Some may say now: "But... that is a lot of coding blah blah blah.."
So what? At the end it will just give a better game in terms of pleasing a much wider variety of players then what currently is announced.

It's about time that Anet opens their eyes for a wider aspect, instead of scaling it to a narrow limit like so many others do.
Honestly, I thought wider thinking was once and still is the vision of the company.

cr00mz · Dec 07, 2007, 03:25 PM // 15:25

the difference between WoW and GW is that in WoW you dont have to do the instances to progress in the game (atleast not the 10-55 ones, even then you dont have to do the raid dungeons either) you can always pvp and get your items there. In GW you have to do all the missions (i think) but you dont have to do the bonuses/masters. but some of the missions can be quite hard even if you go only for completing it (not total completion) even with heros/hench. Or maybe its just me and i completly suck at this game

Shadow Spirit · Dec 07, 2007, 03:32 PM // 15:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mineria

Hopefully this will be auto scaled upon entering an instance depending on with what you enter an instance in GW2.
Some may say now: "But... that is a lot of coding blah blah blah.."
So what? At the end it will just give a better game in terms of pleasing a much wider variety of players then what currently is announced.

I couldn't agree more with this. Hopefully in GW2 the challenge will scale according to party size and level. Then everyone can play exactly how they want to.

bpphantom · Dec 07, 2007, 03:36 PM // 15:36

In any game where I cannot SK/Exemp I want it to be solo friendly. H/H did this admirably and I applud ANet/NCS for doing it. I started solo in GW around launch and after almost a year got a buddy to pick it up. He's got a few more to pick it up but we all mostly play solo. Sure, we have a guild and do a few things together, but since if I make a new character I can't do anything with them, I have to H/H it again.

/shrug

I hope GW2 maintains the same level of solo friendliness. I don't think I should be able to do everything Solo, but things that require a team of humans should be optional.

Bryant Again · Dec 07, 2007, 04:05 PM // 16:05

GW:EN actually feels the *most* H/H friendly to me. Since the campaign isn't organized in any fashion, it becomes a bit harder to find a group for a particular part of the main quest.

That aside, I haven't had much difficulty in any of the dungeons with H/H.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmr819

GW2, from what I have heard, is eliminating the henchmen/Heroes. (Yes, I know about the Companion NPC, but I doubt that will replace the need for an entire group.) This change, more than anything else I have heard about the new version of GW, is what concerns me most.

For me, the henchmen and Heroes in Guild Wars are one of its best features. If they are eliminated in GW2 in favor of "enforced grouping to complete instanced areas", that will be a deal-breaker for me, since I can get essentially that (if I want it) in WoW.

I think they've stated that there won't be a required party size for missions. That said, I think the party system they have in GW is flawed. It's sure fun, but having to have an 8 person party for *everything* is a little irritating.

And just to put it out there, not saying that you said that, heroes and henchies are not an innovative design decision. They are a neccissity or else Guild Wars would've lost a lot of players.

Mordakai · Dec 07, 2007, 04:10 PM // 16:10

There are ways GW2 can get around hecnhies:

In instances, monsters can be scaled to whether you're in a group or not.

In persistant areas, you should be able to fight alongside people who are there, without need to group.

It will be interesing to see how they do persistant areas, how will the inevitable "Hey, I'm farming this area, get out!" disputes be settled?

Pyrea · Dec 07, 2007, 04:21 PM // 16:21

Hi

I definitely agree with the OP that WE should have the choice whether to team up with other players or go solo. Personally I usually always go solo, as it suits my play style better. On any char I work on, I always clear the area (for cart title) and with missions, again area needs to be cleared fully. And sometimes halfway through a mission or area, I sometimes take a break. This cannot be really accomplished with PUGs. Most of my friends haven't been online for a while so taking a H/H group suits me fine. It would be much better to have a full 7 hero party rather than taking 4 henchmen, and especially since i've outfitted all my heroes with proper gear etc.

With regard to the difficulty of EotN i disagree. I managed to complete all quests, missions and dungeons (in NM) with no real problems. HM though is more challenging obviously, but by being persistant most can be donw solo...

Adding the ability to have 7 heroes though would be much better for all imo.

N E D M · Dec 07, 2007, 04:34 PM // 16:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Navaros

It's extremely easy to solo every single thing in EOTN in normal mode with Heroes/Hench, other than Cyndr in particular (although even that can be done, I did it myself with full H/H team other than me on my first try on the first day EOTN was out). Sure Cyndr is one example of things being harder with H/H, but that's the only semi-difficult thing to do with H/H in the whole EOTN game (other than HM). Therefore I disagree with the OP's claim that EOTN is harder to H/H with. All the GW games have a few zones where Heroes/Hench teams are made to have an arbitrarily more difficult time simply by virtue of Heroes/Hench not having the ability to pickup, hold, or drop mission-necessary items.

Speaking to the broader issue, it seems like Anet has made comments (in threads about allowing 7 heroes per player) to the effect of purposely somewhat gimping the players' ability to play solo in GW via the silly 3 Hero limitation to "encourage a social game". However, in my view that is the wrong stance to take. The original GW box states as as a selling point on the back of the box that you are allowed to play solo with henchmen if you want to. Therefore, to semi-gimp that choice after the fact with things like arbitrary Hero limits is wrong. To semi-gimp the abilty to solo in GW2 would also be wrong. Every player should have the individual choice to play how he or she chooses to in the spirit of how that was advertised on the original GW box. Not be shoehorned into partying with other players if they don't want to. Because GW in normal mode is an extremely easy game (any version of GW), this stuff isn't all that big of a deal in GW1 except for in hard mode where henchmen don't really cut it (that is not to say HM can't be done with H/H) and the 3 Hero limitation per player becomes extremely annoying "feature" of the game that serves no purpose. I know the official stance is that it "encourages a social game", but it doesn't really --- to circumvent this limitation, those who hate PUGs will still always hate and never join PUGs and will always "tough it out" with H/H instead of ever joining any PUG. Therefore all it really "encourages" or accomplishes is frustrating players.

The glass is half empty for you
My glass is half full
Your solo ability is not partly gimped with 3 heros , it is buffed above 7 regular henchmen.
Besides this would get confusing

JellyBelly · Dec 07, 2007, 04:37 PM // 16:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmr819

I enjoy soloing in Guild Wars and for the most part that's how I play it, although I have also had great fun playing with a friend or two or with a full group of players through a difficult mission.

I like to clear areas at my own pace as well... and since I have kids at home most of the time, there are lots of occasions when I have to step away for a few minutes at a time. Which is a pain if you happen to be in a group, since its not often that everyone needs a 5 min break.

Its very frustrating when you're in a group and someone invariably says "Aw man someones at the door/brb phone" etc.... so I try not to ever do that because of my kids. Missions that require 2 or more players to complete (w/ bonus) at times, have to wait for the kids to be in bed, or at school, before I even attempt to start them.

Just my $0.02.....

Bryant Again · Dec 07, 2007, 04:56 PM // 16:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mordakai

There are ways GW2 can get around hecnhies:

In instances, monsters can be scaled to whether you're in a group or not.

In persistant areas, you should be able to fight alongside people who are there, without need to group.

I feel like the persistant areas will be aimed at 1 player and 1 companion (not a big deal because if you choose to not have a companion you get a buff) with the instances being scaled to party size like Hellgate: London. Even though that game itself isn't terribly hot, they are going in a good direction.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mordakai

It will be interesing to see how they do persistant areas, how will the inevitable "Hey, I'm farming this area, get out!" disputes be settled?

Farm instances, yo.

Bryant Again had to edit this post three damn times to not make himself look stupid.

Quaker · Dec 07, 2007, 05:41 PM // 17:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmr819

My general observation, however, is that Guild Wars seems (to me) to be designing its campaigns and now the expansion to be increasingly and particularly harder for players who prefer to solo with an h/h group.

Well, it seems to me that EotN was supposed to be harder than the previous areas. A team of human players, (provided they are good players, etc.) is usually better at the quests/missions than a solo player with H&H. So naturally, as the areas ramp up in difficulty, it's the H&H teams that will run into trouble first. But I don't see any particular attempt to make things harder for solo players - after all, just making a dungeon require two things to be done simultaneously would do it.

At any rate, I've been through EotN with H&H (in Normal Mode) with 5 characters so far (Ranger, Mesmer, Assassin, Dervish, and Warrior). Some parts were difficult, and required me to rethink some of the groups and their skills/equipment - but isn't that the way it should be?

Lately, I've been doing dungeons with my Ranger with H&H in Hard Mode, but I haven't done Heart of the Shiverpeaks yet (in HM).

mazey vorstagg · Dec 07, 2007, 06:11 PM // 18:11

The difference is, in WoW most of the game (except dungeons) can be done solo, only grouping for end chain quests or dungeons. The same is true for GW, I've done almost everything with H/H (solo) and not found it hard. I did the whole of slaver's HM with H/H and it wasn't a problem.

I can't see the future, but in GW2 I suspect there will be a more solo side to the game. They said something like, go solo or halve your power and take a companion. I bet it's something like you can be a really powerful ele, or a pretty decent ele with a hero monk to help. I doubt though that anything but dungeons will require a group of people, it'll be a solo game.

Edit--------------------------------

And about the 7 hero argument again. It's not about a social game, the reason we don't have 7 heroes is because it wasn't planned from the beginning. 7 heroes would make most of proph and factions an absolute cakewalk, even in HM. It would be silly, that's why we don't have 7 heroes.

TheHaxor · Dec 07, 2007, 06:19 PM // 18:19

Movement to change the name of GW2 to WoW2 (sounds like WoW2 from all I've heard).

Guild Wars has changed a lot since Nightfall. Nightfall was nearly the worst expansion in the history of any game I've played (for many different reasons). It almost totally eliminated the need for other players, thus PuGs suffered. How the hell are you going to make friends in this game if you just play with AI all the time? Unless you want to farm elite areas efficiently, there is not need for other people.