Curse

sterbenx2 · Jul 17, 2008, 02:50 AM // 02:50

I believe the theory behind the account based title change was to promote multi character play. This is the type of play GW used to have before titles, for those newer players who don't know.

The titles were discouraging me from playing other professions for sure. But, nowhere near as discouraging as having to outfit the heroes over and over again. Its expensive and time consuming.

One set of PvE heroes for all PvE characters, "Hero Unlocked" simply means you can now use this hero on this character.. It seems to be a logical change. PvP players have an option close to this already.

Konig Des Todes · Jul 17, 2008, 03:05 AM // 03:05

It's not hard to level a hero, equipment isn't always needed, you can do plenty of things with clean heroes as long as they have a weapon. Only thing that should be account based with heroes would be the armor unlocked.

/sign for upgrade armor to be account based, /notsigned for the rest.

dilan155 · Jul 17, 2008, 03:16 AM // 03:16

doest this mean no quests to get the heros or just that hero's armor is available from the start? if its the first one i think it will be better if once you use it for a hero its unlocked for al your heros, thus you have to get the heros through quests.

pumpkin pie · Jul 17, 2008, 03:35 AM // 03:35

in your dreams. I did not unlock all (edit :P) necessary heros on 6 of my character just so you can have it by QQ

/not signed :P~

sterbenx2 · Jul 17, 2008, 03:38 AM // 03:38

All the hero specific quests can and would stay intact. It would just work so you only physically have one Koss. Any upgrades or weapons you add to Koss would be on him no matter what character you decide to play. Like I said earlier. You wouldn't be able to use any specific hero until you complete the quest to get the "Hero Unlocked" message for that hero.

Puebert · Jul 17, 2008, 03:47 AM // 03:47

I think the armor and weapons should be account wide, but you actually have to earn it per character.

By it, I mean the hero.

ArralCloudwind · Jul 17, 2008, 03:47 AM // 03:47

Sounds like a good idea, and are they really making all titles account based because i heard that only HoM will be.
/signed

R.Shayne · Jul 17, 2008, 04:04 AM // 04:04

I never gave into the primary character thing and I enjoyed setting up my heroes. All my character’s heroes are set up exactly the same except my Monk and Ritualist since they use hero smites.

Goren – Hammer and KD (yeah pretty useless but fun to watch)

Koss – Conjure Ice Build.

Jora – Conjure Flame Build.

Master of Whispers – MM / Healing build.

Olias – Blood / healing build.

and so on, doesn’t matter which character Koss always has the same build and the same equipment.

I started doing this because it cut down on the confusion trying to figure out which hero is setup to do what and that cut down on my time in outpost and left more time for playing.

I was about to say not signed when I realized something, I have over 200 heroes. Everyone of them is runed out and everyone of them has perfect equipment (well perfect for their function), so I have to ask myself two questions, what was the cost of all this and how much time did I spend setting them up? Since I am a hardcore farmer and the fact I enjoye playing with equipment/builds, cost and time is not that big of a deal for me but what about casual players.

So I am going to say signed for the casual player even if it does mean my ranger is running around with Gwen's and Dunkoro's equpment setup as smites.

Lady Raenef · Jul 17, 2008, 04:08 AM // 04:08

Weapons and runes should be account. Levels and which heroes you have unlocked, shouldn't be however.

/signed for the most part.

KZaske · Jul 17, 2008, 04:13 AM // 04:13

I really disagree with this. Every toon that has heros has worked hard for them, I really think it should stay that way. I am not even sure I really like the idea of alltitles being account based for the HoM. I feel that account titles should be, yes. But individual titles should stay that way, lets not create a confusing mess.
/NOT signed.

shoyon456 · Jul 17, 2008, 04:19 AM // 04:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by sterbenx2

I believe the theory behind the account based title change was to promote multi character play.

Who said anything about titles becoming account based...? Anet said that the HoM was going to be account based, not titles themselves.

In addition, heros for every char you have would be imbalanced, as lv3 chars in ascalon should not have lv 20 heros. It would be ok if the heros were set at the same level as the character though.

HawkofStorms · Jul 17, 2008, 04:39 AM // 04:39

/notsigned
Titles are not going to be account wide. The HoM is. Do your research next time.

Improvavel · Jul 17, 2008, 04:59 AM // 04:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by shoyon456

In addition, heros for every char you have would be imbalanced, as lv3 chars in ascalon should not have lv 20 heros. It would be ok if the heros were set at the same level as the character though.

If you are lvl 3 is ascalon with heroes you have friends with time to run you around. They might as well power level you to level 20.

And people are saying equipment and runes. Which means your lvl 2 koss will have a superior vigor and 15^50/+30 hp weapon, but it will still be a lvl 2 koss.

Since I can add a superior vigor and that equipment to a lvl 2 koss or myself, dont see how imbalanced it would be.

/signed - just give me a week notice so I can take off hundreds k´s equipments/runes from my heroes. And I wont care about all those customized weapons

Thizzle · Jul 17, 2008, 05:18 AM // 05:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by shoyon456

Who said anything about titles becoming account based...? Anet said that the HoM was going to be account based, not titles themselves.

In addition, heros for every char you have would be imbalanced, as lv3 chars in ascalon should not have lv 20 heros. It would be ok if the heros were set at the same level as the character though.

As for those who say it would be imbalanced because you would have level 20 heros with you. I have a very simple solution... don't let them get those level 20 heros until they actually unlock them in game. It's funny because you can travel at level 10 to Eye of The North and get loads of XP without any heros helping you along. They also give you level 20 heroes. I'm wondering why anyone would bother worrying about a level 3 in Ascalon getting power leveled.

I'm totally for reputation titles being account based and heros as well. What does it matter if a level 3 who has already played through the game on another character gets those heroes? You could easily put limitations on this problem by automatically making it so if a character is not over level 10 they cannot accept players into their group with level 20 heroes. You could even do what I said above and also make it so you don't get those totally outfitted heroes until you unlock them by playing through the storyline. It gets boring playing the same character sometimes and I really don't bother playing more than 1 character because I'm simply not going to buy the weapons, runes, and anything else they need just to use my heroes or make them worth using.

RavagerOfDreams · Jul 17, 2008, 05:46 AM // 05:46

I am assuming that when you started a new char all hero levels would be 1?

/notsigned

i don't want to level them all up from level one. I would prefer to get them at 15+ makes my life easier. Would spend more time leveling then actually getting the heroes.

MirkoTeran · Jul 17, 2008, 06:07 AM // 06:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by HawkofStorms

/notsigned
Titles are not going to be account wide. The HoM is. Do your research next time.

This.

Also; bad idea.

Aldric · Jul 17, 2008, 07:07 AM // 07:07

Account wide hero's would have been a better solution to Hero's when NF was introduced rather than have a set with every character. Okay you can run them unequiped but even cheap stuff adds up if you have 10 characters

It could have been designed fairly simply I think so that you would still have to complete quests to unlock the Hero and not use them for power levelling etc however I don't really see how , without a major change to GW , it could be reverted to account wide now.

pamelf · Jul 17, 2008, 09:23 AM // 09:23

Agreed with weapons, runes, armours etc being account based, but I still think we should go through the normal skills to UNLOCK them on each character.

BlackSephir · Jul 17, 2008, 10:21 AM // 10:21

I wouldn't mind- buying runes, weapons etc for your heroes on your every pve char is a pain in the ass. Just another obstacle that AN put in the way of people who want to play multpile chars.

RedStar · Jul 17, 2008, 10:30 AM // 10:30

/notsigned

Not all of my chars have the same use for Olias or Zhed or Rahza (If you did meant that all chars on a account use the same hero).