Curse

sosycpsycho · Jun 13, 2009, 06:01 AM // 06:01

I agree with magumared, but things like bundle items should not force you to party either.
heros and henchmen make this game a single player Rpg and bundle items don't change that.

/signed

Jugalo Dano · Jun 13, 2009, 06:16 AM // 06:16

/signed

Getting full teams of competent players these days is hard enough as it is. Atleast having this function will lessen the burden when you have no choice but to go at it with h/h.

Although, if something llike this were to be added, I think hench should retain the ability to override your hold command so they can cast ash spells. The ability to rush in draw aggro and use my sword would be worth having to re-target the bundle again.

Operative 14 · Jun 13, 2009, 09:18 AM // 09:18

/Signed

Gayala Hatchery where you have to carry the smoke pots was great fun on a Dervish by myself. <_<

Xsiriss · Jun 13, 2009, 01:56 PM // 13:56

/signed

For those who say 'but its a multiplayer game!1111', you shouldn't be handicapped further for playing alone, and use your godam guild if you're so keen on the multiplayer aspect. Half the guild wars community are casual players who just want to get through a missions and thus use h/h. Stop being selfish.

aoeclald · Jun 13, 2009, 04:43 PM // 16:43

I think it would be (hopefully) possible to do this. With the target crosshair button which you use a hero to lock targets on, you should be able to lock bundle items, such as flags, spear, urn, etc. When they pick it up, the crosshair is then replaced with the normal "Drop Bundle" icon. Very sensible, but unfortunately they didn't incorporate that.

/signed

Targren · Jun 13, 2009, 04:49 PM // 16:49

Since the game is not supposed to be solely multiplayer, and I too play a ranger, the bundle crap makes H/H missions range from annoying (Jennur's Horde) to nearly impossible (Arborstone).

/Signed, for the love of the gods...

Shasgaliel · Jun 16, 2009, 09:13 AM // 09:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by MagmaRed

Not gonna agree with this, even though I am annoyed with doing those missions with a class that needs the weapon to attack. Do we really want more reasons to play alone on a MULTIPLAYER game?

2 people is multiplayer already. Still 3 kegs are needed in HOS...

Signed

Jarus · Jun 16, 2009, 09:36 AM // 09:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by MagmaRed

Not gonna agree with this, even though I am annoyed with doing those missions with a class that needs the weapon to attack. Do we really want more reasons to play alone on a MULTIPLAYER game?

I was thinking about this as a reason not to agree with this idea. But then, I realized that I would still choose to play H/H anyway.

/signed

Abedeus · Jun 16, 2009, 09:50 AM // 09:50

Oh God yes.

I have playing my Ranger in missions with bundles, I can't attack or do anything...

MithranArkanere · Jun 16, 2009, 03:38 PM // 15:38

Yeah. By 'taling' to a hero the bundle you carry should be tranferred to the Hero. To get it back, you talk to the hero again, and done.

That bundle tranference should work also for all bundles but ritualsit ones, and between players too, not just heroes.

AmbientMelody · Jun 16, 2009, 03:40 PM // 15:40

So much I dislike heroes, I must agree with this.

/signed

That way you can finally fight if you are non-caster profession.

draxynnic · Jun 16, 2009, 03:57 PM // 15:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xsiriss

/signed

For those who say 'but its a multiplayer game!1111', you shouldn't be handicapped further for playing alone, and use your godam guild if you're so keen on the multiplayer aspect. Half the guild wars community are casual players who just want to get through a missions and thus use h/h. Stop being selfish.

Personally, I think the 'but it's a multiplayer game!1111' response is overblown anyway. Is it really such a problem to have a game that can be played single-player or multiplayer as you like, with a character that can be guaranteed to not having been tampered with by being stored on an official server?

Diablo 2 does it - from memory, playing on Bnet didn't stop you from being able to create a game that others couldn't join (just password it and don't tell anyone the password) - and the ANet team started with three Blizzard guys coming away from D2. Even WoW allows solo-ing, even allowing for the chance of meeting someone in the persistent world, apart from the raids and such (which, for GW, are the zones for which you can't take henchmen). Why should GW be any different?

On the topic: No in-principle reason not to do it, so /signed. However, I suspect it might not have been done in the first place due to interface issues, so, unfortunately, it might not be reasonably possible.

caballo_oscuro · Jun 16, 2009, 05:06 PM // 17:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by MagmaRed

Not gonna agree with this, even though I am annoyed with doing those missions with a class that needs the weapon to attack. Do we really want more reasons to play alone on a MULTIPLAYER game?

I see where you're getting at magma, but with the way people are playing the gamefor the most part anyway, i don't think this option's existence or not would be a huge pendulum swing either way.

I play Warrior mostly because I don't enjoy standing back to watch the action. It's a bit annoying that heroes are unable to carry these items. Can't see it being very much community affecting either way.

/signed btw

dilan155 · Jun 16, 2009, 08:30 PM // 20:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by MagmaRed

Not gonna agree with this, even though I am annoyed with doing those missions with a class that needs the weapon to attack. Do we really want more reasons to play alone on a MULTIPLAYER game?

even though i agree with you on this, there really isn't that many groups, even after the z quests etc etc. so unless somehow a lot of people started partying etc to restore back to multiplayer there is no point in denying suggestions like this.

that said i /agree with the OP's idea.

TalanRoarer · Jun 16, 2009, 08:36 PM // 20:36

/Not signed.
I believe that this is one of the ways that ANet want to encourage people to play together.

rick1027 · Jun 16, 2009, 10:13 PM // 22:13

/signed because even if you do get a group nobody wants to hold an item and its the big reason i dont play melee as much

Pistachio · Jun 17, 2009, 02:02 AM // 02:02

I see no reason why this shouldn't be allowed.

Marverick · Jun 17, 2009, 02:08 AM // 02:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by BenC777

/Not signed.
I believe that this is one of the ways that ANet want to encourage people to play together.

I Used To Care [Too]

But now I don't. /signed

You have Z-quests already, which do in fact make people group. This has never done anything other than force me to run Enraged Lunge pet builds.

Targren · Jun 17, 2009, 05:03 PM // 17:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marverick

I Used To Care [Too]
This has never done anything other than force me to run Enraged Lunge pet builds.

How do those work out in HM? I was playing with that idea to finally do Arborstone HM on my ranger...

Hyper Cutter · Jun 18, 2009, 01:40 AM // 01:40

/signed. I've wanted this ever since trying various missions with a physical character...