Curse

R!ghteous Ind!gnation · Sep 26, 2007, 06:00 PM // 18:00

I am bringing this petition to the forefronts of this thread because I feel extremely adamant about the issue. For various reasons I and many others have found that many players choose to play most of their time with a henchman/hero (h/h) build for the following reasons just to name a few:

1. With 3 stand alone campaigns and 1 expansion the player base is stretched so thin that there are many areas in each campaign that simply lack players to create a sufficient pug.

2. Heros/Henchmen allow you to multi-task IRL in case one needs to use the restroom/laundry/cook/whatever might pull you away from the computer without upsetting the others in the group.

3. In many (not all) pugs you will come across the so called wammo mentality and people running ridiculous builds that simply make no sense. Having heros where one can create the build or using henchman (moderate builds, but no complete noobs) helps to diminish the problem.

However we have all found that many times henchman simply do not cut it when the going gets tough. So for the following reasons I am petitioning for Anet to allow its avid fans to have 7 heros as opposed to the lowly 3 heros that we currently have.

1. Heros allow for player customization of the entire team. Creating a balanced group all running builds designed to synergise with the other builds allows for the user to not only think outside of the box but also to have a better understanding of each class even if that player is primarily one class.

2. Allowing for 7 heros in areas like FoW, UW, DoA, etc. allows the average player to reach otherwise unattainable goals that can not be accomplished in your standard pug and where henchman are simply not allowed.

3. Equiping 7 heros would be relatively expensive task to accomplish, however the reward would hopefully be met as well, thus providing equal risk with equal reward.

4. Having 7 heros allows the player to micro manage for all 7 heros providing more intelligent game play. (precasing protective spirit on the tank)

5. Having 7 heros doesn't discourage human gameplay at all. 1 player micromanaging 7 heros is less likely to be as successful as 2 players micromanaging 3 heros each and 4 human players micromanaging 1 hero each is even more likely to be successful and so on.

6. 7 Heros does not in ANY way unbalance the game. (8 Human players with custom skillbars is attainable already in a guild group and honestly better than 1 human and 7 hero custom skillbars.)

Finally, an addition to all of the aforementioned reasons why I believe that we should have 7 heros available to us is to promote out of the box style gameplay. I have been attempting to form an all paragon group now for about a month and a half. I personally feel that allowing a player to not only bring 7 heros but also 7 heros of any class would be optimal for the advancement of the guild wars community. This could be accomplished simply by allowing recruitable heros of any class at the Temple of Balthazar (or each chapters main outpost; Lions Arch, Kaineng City, Kamadan, and The Eye of the North depending on the class ie paragons and dervish could only be recruitable at Kamadan). This would allow players to not only have fully customizeable skillbars for each teamate in the group but also to try completely out of the box ideas such as an all paragon/warrior/necromancer/ritualist/whatever build. Using the Zaishen to accomplish this goal would provide the additional options to players with minimal changes/work for Anet and its teams.

Petition A:
So if you agree with me that 7 heros should be allowed please simply say /signedA or /agreeA or if you disagree: /notsignedA /disagreeA and give your reasons for agreement and disagreement.

Petition B:
Additionally if you feel that there should be additional recruitable heros to allow for out of the box/non cookie-cutter builds please /signB or /notsignB and as always please give feedback and your reasons for agreeing or disagreeing.

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

Thank you for your time.

R!ghteous Ind!gnation · Sep 26, 2007, 06:02 PM // 18:02

/SignedA

/SignedB

Im the OP of course I Sign both for all of the reasons above.

the_jos · Sep 26, 2007, 06:10 PM // 18:10

This topic has already gained large amounts of coverage on GWO, http://guildwars.incgamers.com/forum...d.php?t=463339.
That's 1200+ posts there....

Gaile's comments are also here on GWG: http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/s...php?t=10199654

No furter opinion on the petition.

R!ghteous Ind!gnation · Sep 26, 2007, 06:12 PM // 18:12

I realize that others have posted on the issue and that there have been other forums asking for the same thing... this is part of why i created this petition. Anet seems to care more about when official petitions are made than simply inquiries as to why we don't have say 7 heros already. This is a Petition not an open discussion of why we don't have them already.

Isileth · Sep 26, 2007, 06:19 PM // 18:19

/Signed A

/Signed B

I also suggest everyone reads the thread linked before they voice their opinion.
(http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/s...php?t=10201532) Incase anyone missed it.

Signet Of Hell · Sep 26, 2007, 06:20 PM // 18:20

I disagree on all fronts. Guild Wars is meant to be an MMORPG, even though there are many arguments against that fact, and as one it should not be completely reliable on NPCs. Why do you think Henchmen are stupid? So people will want to play with other people, and whether you think so or not, playing with real people/friends is better company then a bunch of animated players that are built to spam their skills.

To allow people to do the whole game without the interaction of people, except in towns and such, defies the meaning of the game. Also, on another note, if you were able design a whole team, you could pretty much go through the whole campaign with ease. This shouldn't happen, its meant to be hard, and it being hard makes it more of an achievement when you finally complete it.

I am not a hardcore PvE'er, but this is my opinion.

EDIT: I just realized I voiced my opinion, but if no one is allowed to disagree in this forums its going to be pretty bias.

R!ghteous Ind!gnation · Sep 26, 2007, 06:23 PM // 18:23

I would also additionally like to point out that this would not effect PvP in any way. As there is a limit on both Hero battles and HA (being the only two forms of PvP that allow heros anyway.

Effendi Westland · Sep 26, 2007, 06:37 PM // 18:37

yawn.

didn't anet state there is no way they are going to implement it?

heck. Gaile even said the dev's asked her to never bring it to them again.

R!ghteous Ind!gnation · Sep 26, 2007, 06:45 PM // 18:45

The point is that the reasons that Anet has given for not allowing 7 heros have all been debunked.

List of argurments:
1. They say "7 heros is overpowerd" - Players > heros they dont nerf a 8 player group.

2. Interface would be cluttered - Its not cluttered now, make 3 standard and 4 heros that you cant choose what skill is used, or better yet let the player make that choice as we dont even have to see the hero skillbars right now if we dont want to.

3. Go play with real people - Many people already play 3hero/4henchman.. whats the difference other than improved player control? Also more importantly, Sometimes there just aren't real people to play with (its hard if not impossible to find a pure pug that can vanquish UW).

If you have any additional valid arguments i would be happy to refute any/all of them.

Vinraith · Sep 26, 2007, 06:48 PM // 18:48

/signed

It's been done to death. It's right, of course, and at this point Anet knows it's right, but until they give up the Kindergarten teacher "everyone should play nice with everyone else" mentality it's not going to happen. Forced multiplayer with strangers isn't my idea of fun, quit trying to force me to play the game that way. I play with friends when possible, but frequently it's not. My schedule simply doesn't allow for it. I'm not going to PUG just because Anet thinks they're "incentivizing" it by refusing to let me have a good solo party (and all I mean by "good" here is a couple of steps down in quality from a group of competent friends, the "unlabalanced" argument is gibberish). This business of having to push for single player rights in games like this is getting tiresome, when did games become about forcing people to be social?

R!ghteous Ind!gnation · Sep 26, 2007, 06:50 PM // 18:50

Vanraith, how do you feel about the second part of my petition?

Verek · Sep 26, 2007, 06:52 PM // 18:52

/so signed - stupid reason by anet for not introducing this feature, oh and if you don't know what they said it was some bullshit about wanting people to socialize, I mean....really......'Mummy says we've got to talk to one another and get along.' Idiotic!

Vinraith · Sep 26, 2007, 06:53 PM // 18:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by R!ghteous Ind!gnation

Vanraith, how do you feel about the second part of my petition?

They're not going to do that, and I don't know that it's a huge priority. 25 heroes is a pretty good pool to work from, there are 2 or 3 of every class in there. I'd agree that it'd be even cooler to have more than that, but it's incidental to the (far simpler) request to simply allow a full party of heroes.

So I suppose that, while I'm not opposed to B, I'm not strongly behind it either, hence why I didn't reply on that point.

Isileth · Sep 26, 2007, 06:57 PM // 18:57

This is why I hate having multiple threads on the same issue, people seem to refuse to read the other before they make a comment (especially when its 10+ thread like it is in this case).

So ill try and put down the main points here (Although It would be better to go and read the other thread to see all the points and opinions)

Basically this is to allow the casual player who doesnt have enough time to find a pug and do a mission, who has to afk multiple times (Has a young child for example) and doesnt want to inflict that on a pug etc (More in the other thread).

As it stands I have never been in an elite area of the game, I dont have enough time. If I had 7 heroes I could walk away and come back later and carry on.
I havent been in HM for the same reason, I just dont have enough time.

Now while we currently can use h/h they are vastly inferior to a pug. Even with 7 heroes it would be inferior to a pug.

To quote myself from the other thread for ease:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isileth

Pugs can build 8 bars to counter the coming area, a h/h team can only customize 4. That is a huge difference on its own.
Then factor in the wasteful ints, refusal to move out of AoE etc and you can see why the current teams are hugely inferior.

Now take a team of 7 heroes. You can customize all 8 bars.
They still will waste ints, they will still stand in AoE, they wont kite, they wont stand in wards, they cant combo skills, they have general poor skill usage (MS cast when only 1 thing is left alive for example). The list goes on.

Can you see now why a pug is extremely superior to the current h/h setup and still has massive advantages over the 7 hero teams. Pugging would remain the better method, but it would increase solo to a point where its a valid option. And those that have to take h/h will actually be able to experience more of GW.

Basically this petition is about letting the casual player, be able to play the game how they want without being punished for not having enough time. The punishment here is that they are forced to go with h/h which extremely weak when compared to a decent pug and isnt even worth comparing to a guild/alliance group!
Having 7 heroes would improve this, would sitll be weaker than a pug however, but would allow the casual player to play all of the game how they want at the same level as a hardcore player.

R!ghteous Ind!gnation · Sep 26, 2007, 06:58 PM // 18:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vinraith

They're not going to do that, and I don't know that it's a huge priority. 25 heroes is a pretty good pool to work from, there are 2 or 3 of every class in there. I'd agree that it'd be even cooler to have more than that, but it's incidental to the (far simpler) request to simply allow a full party of heroes.

So I suppose that, while I'm not opposed to B, I'm not strongly behind it either, hence why I didn't reply on that point.

Thanks for your input. I just believe that it would promote many of the ideas that Anet seems to be attempting to promote (thinking outside of the box/nontraditional builds/individuality and creativity in player and team builds)

Winterclaw · Sep 26, 2007, 07:04 PM // 19:04

/signed on both

A while ago, I had a suggestion that Anet make a hero factory, where a player can create additional heroes using something similar to the character creation process. I think that if you gave everyone 7 free slots per account to use, and a template code for makeing that specific characater again so you can change them on the fly, this would allow people to have non-cookiecutter builds.

Isileth · Sep 26, 2007, 07:05 PM // 19:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Signet Of Hell

I disagree on all fronts. Guild Wars is meant to be an MMORPG, even though there are many arguments against that fact, and as one it should not be completely reliable on NPCs. Why do you think Henchmen are stupid? So people will want to play with other people, and whether you think so or not, playing with real people/friends is better company then a bunch of animated players that are built to spam their skills.

To allow people to do the whole game without the interaction of people, except in towns and such, defies the meaning of the game. Also, on another note, if you were able design a whole team, you could pretty much go through the whole campaign with ease. This shouldn't happen, its meant to be hard, and it being hard makes it more of an achievement when you finally complete it.

I am not a hardcore PvE'er, but this is my opinion.

EDIT: I just realized I voiced my opinion, but if no one is allowed to disagree in this forums its going to be pretty bias.

This is for the casual player, someone who doesnt have time to join a group. Some people can only play for 30-40 mins at a time. If they have to spend 10 mins forming a group that can mean they dont have enough time to do the whole mission. This is obviousely made even worse when you consider how long elite areas and dungeons can take.

Also how does a team of 7 heroes and 1 player running custom builds suddenly become more powerful than 8 players running custom builds?

You seem to forget that players can do everything and more than heroes can. A group of 7 heroes will never be more powerful than a decent team of players.

Also no one said you cant voice your opinion if you dont agree.
All I suggested was you read the other thread first. Since that contains all these arguments and I wouldnt have had to post them here for you

Please note that thread has views from people on both sides and has brought up some good discussion so its deffinately worth reading.

Winterclaw · Sep 26, 2007, 07:09 PM // 19:09

Quote:

This is for the casual player, someone who doesnt have time to join a group.

QFT. Besides, there are some areas in HM where I don't want henchmen because most of them have bad bars.

R!ghteous Ind!gnation · Sep 26, 2007, 07:15 PM // 19:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winterclaw

QFT. Besides, there are some areas in HM where I don't want henchmen because most of them have bad bars.

I totally agree here... also has anyone ever successfully vanquished an area in HM in a Pug... a true Pug? I would say that its extremely difficult for the average player to complete.

Craywulf · Sep 26, 2007, 07:15 PM // 19:15

I'd rather have the ability to have 1 or 2 of my own characters as support instead of 3 heroes or 7 henchmen.