Curse

You can't see me · Nov 29, 2007, 04:16 AM // 04:16

BEFORE YOU GO ON LET ME REMIND YOU OF A FEW THINGS.

~Heros cannot carry PvE skills
~The maximum number of heros in the party bar is six. This idea would NOT change that. For more info, see bottom paragraph. The one that clearly says "READ THIS". Thank you.

Ever get in the middle of a hard dungeon, and some guy has to go mow the lawn?

Ever get right to the boss, and someone disconnects, and then leaves?

Ever get so close to having this mission done, then your monk rage quits?

Bottom line: Frustrating.

Now, it's not their fault, usually. Ragequitters aside, people have lives outside the game that need attending to. I should hate to see someone that puts the game over a distracting real life situation for the sake of some animated coin. But come on, when it happens, it punishes the entire group. When a monk leaves, come on, what gets done? You have to start over... not good. Rage quitters just need anger management classes, or to not join PuGs. Seriously, we don't need you.

My idea to stop this from impacting parties is simple.

When a person leaves the PvE environment, a hero is put in thier place, a hero that has the exact skills, attributes, gear of the leaver, and is under control of the current party leader. This is a fully controllable hero, and would function just as the other heros in the game.

~READ THIS~

The system would undeniably have to have some sort of stopper from having people abuse it. This is why the maximum heros implemented to a party would be six, counting the heros already present. No more could be added after this. This does not imbalence the system at all, as you can already have six heros by taking a friend with three, and your friend leaving the game.

Opinions? Post them here, but be sure to give them a reason.

Thank you for your time!

Seraphic Divinity · Nov 29, 2007, 04:27 AM // 04:27

wtb 2 leavers with this bar 500g each for HM vanquish

Ugoff The Unholy · Nov 29, 2007, 04:30 AM // 04:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seraphic Divinity

wtb 2 leavers with this bar 500g each for HM vanquish

I think the amount of potential good this could do overpowers a "500g leaver".

If this idea WERE to be implemented, I'd imagine they would use a henchman with the same primary class rather than a hero with a mirror build.

AuraofMana · Nov 29, 2007, 08:32 AM // 08:32

Why don't you just ask for 7 (11 for some areas) instead. It's going to end like that anyway. Heroes ruined the MMO in MMORPG of this game, might as well just murder it completely.

gremlin · Nov 29, 2007, 08:55 AM // 08:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by AuraofMana

Why don't you just ask for 7 (11 for some areas) instead. It's going to end like that anyway. Heroes ruined the MMO in MMORPG of this game, might as well just murder it completely.

Sorry but I think Heroes ruined nothing.
Players ruined the game because far to many of them became tyranical in their attitude to others online.

As players became more successfull at pve missions the game developers nerfed skills and builds and improved ai to make it harder.

This in turn made players obsess about the perfect party.

This had the effect of denying some players entry into parties because of character class or build.
They then turned to henchemen and later heroes, which is why its almost impossible to get a party in some areas.

The better players formed guilds and cooperatives to beat the game and earn titles and money.
Leaving the average player to struggle or use ai help.

In an ideal world we would just join together in parties and play, but players who decided to dictate character builds and others who wanted in game cash before ressurecting players etc ruined the game, not heroes.

Kratos Angel · Nov 29, 2007, 10:07 AM // 10:07

Hummm yeah this would lead to pay some leavers probably .... but the main problem I think is the implementation of that ...
Generating suddenly a hero instead of the player could be quite hard ... and having to lead your 3 heroes + 3 heroes of your "mate" + a hero that took his place .... this would probably cause GW to be slowed down .... furthermore, they would have to change their game so that a player can control until 8 heroes ... wow it will spam the screen he he.
So .... even if it was a good idea, I don't think it would be implemented one day ...

WinterSnowblind · Nov 29, 2007, 10:24 AM // 10:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by AuraofMana

Why don't you just ask for 7 (11 for some areas) instead. It's going to end like that anyway. Heroes ruined the MMO in MMORPG of this game, might as well just murder it completely.

Another "Heroes ruined the game" complaint? This has been discussed so many times before, it's not even worth it, take it to one of those topics. Bottom line: Heroes were essential to keep Guild Wars going, we'd have far more problems, and people complaining without them.

Even before Nightfall came out, how long would it take to form a decent party, with Monks? No heroes = not fun.

mystical nessAL · Nov 29, 2007, 11:19 AM // 11:19

Just punish the leavers, scare them, not replace some random hero, lol. No offence, you seems like a nice guy but this idea is surely wierd. :P

Evil Genius · Nov 29, 2007, 11:30 AM // 11:30

I think it is a great idea, provided game mechanics can support it.

Quote:

Just punish the leavers, scare them, not replace some random hero, lol.

I think I have heard that idea before. The OP points out people should not be punished for unexpected events in real life changing their plans.

arcanemacabre · Nov 29, 2007, 11:47 AM // 11:47

It's a perfectly fine idea. I suggest one tweak - the heroes that replace the leavers are not controlled by anyone. Effectively, they would be like henchies, without the ability for micro management, wouldn't show up in the inventory, though they would respond, just like the heroes that are left with you if someone else controlling heroes leaves.

Also, they would have to be kinda non-descript heroes, perhaps cross-chapter henchmen like Mhenlo and Aidan, etc - not heroes we already have.

/signed

legion_rat · Nov 29, 2007, 12:11 PM // 12:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by gremlin

Sorry but I think Heroes ruined nothing.
Players ruined the game because far to many of them became tyranical in their attitude to others online.

As players became more successfull at pve missions the game developers nerfed skills and builds and improved ai to make it harder.

This in turn made players obsess about the perfect party.

This had the effect of denying some players entry into parties because of character class or build.
They then turned to henchemen and later heroes, which is why its almost impossible to get a party in some areas.

The better players formed guilds and cooperatives to beat the game and earn titles and money.
Leaving the average player to struggle or use ai help.

In an ideal world we would just join together in parties and play, but players who decided to dictate character builds and others who wanted in game cash before ressurecting players etc ruined the game, not heroes.

You are much nicer than I am. He was bitching about heros in another post and I went on a rant.

As for the Op. Maybe a Hench of the same proff and build but not controlled. he/she just tags along.

~the rat~

Woop Shotty · Nov 29, 2007, 03:01 PM // 15:01

pve skills on heroes for a small leaver fee? Or sometimes you do want players to leave and no replacement.

dread pirate fargus · Nov 29, 2007, 03:27 PM // 15:27

hmm i think it should just be a henchman of the same profession.

so if your monk leaves mhenlo joins your party.

lessens the blow of rage quitters but leaves no room for abuse.

im also concerned wether this would change attitudes to where ragequitting is acceptable.....

WTB ursan blessing henchman 1k

woot you could take 7 ursan heroes to DoA

Woop Shotty · Nov 29, 2007, 04:01 PM // 16:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by dread pirate fargus

woot you could take 7 ursan heroes to DoA

And maybe for the first week Anet could accidentally make drops still fall in the name of the human leavers so that you can pick em up after a little while!

Phoenix Tears · Nov 29, 2007, 08:24 PM // 20:24

the ideal MMORPG would have no stupid heroes and no henchmen..the ideal MMORPG would be played only by players ...because thats the thing, what makes a MMO a real MMO and wherefore MMOG stands for...

MASSIVE MULTIPLAYER ONLINE GAME

GW is still called a MMOG ..not a Massive NPC Online Game (MNPCOG)

so much to this topic and Anet will never learn that ...in kind of GW1

even in GW2 we get not rid if this crap...they want give a a dumb Companion System in exchange for Heroes/Henchmen >.>

Once too dumb to make the right system..ever too dumb ...

sigh

hopefully Anet will learn more from their failures of GW1 for a better GW2..then the thing about this here >.>

You can't see me · Nov 29, 2007, 08:36 PM // 20:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kratos Angel

Hummm yeah this would lead to pay some leavers probably .... but the main problem I think is the implementation of that ...
Generating suddenly a hero instead of the player could be quite hard ... and having to lead your 3 heroes + 3 heroes of your "mate" + a hero that took his place .... this would probably cause GW to be slowed down .... furthermore, they would have to change their game so that a player can control until 8 heroes ... wow it will spam the screen he he.
So .... even if it was a good idea, I don't think it would be implemented one day ...

The latter paragraph, the one that said "Read this please" in all caps, explained why this would not happen....

You can't see me · Nov 29, 2007, 08:38 PM // 20:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by dread pirate fargus

hmm i think it should just be a henchman of the same profession.

so if your monk leaves mhenlo joins your party.

lessens the blow of rage quitters but leaves no room for abuse.

im also concerned wether this would change attitudes to where ragequitting is acceptable.....

WTB ursan blessing henchman 1k

woot you could take 7 ursan heroes to DoA

What do I have to do to get people to read this all the way besides posting in all caps READ THIS.

I explained in the idea that the maximum would be six heros per party. You can already do that by having a friend with 3 leave. It would change nothing.

Oh, and I also mentioned that the heros would function AS NORMAL HEROS? This means NO PVE SKILLS.

READ.

tmr819 · Nov 29, 2007, 09:18 PM // 21:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phoenix Tears

the ideal MMORPG would have no stupid heroes and no henchmen..the ideal MMORPG would be played only by players ...because thats the thing, what makes a MMO a real MMO and wherefore MMOG stands for...

MASSIVE MULTIPLAYER ONLINE GAME

GW is still called a MMOG ..not a Massive NPC Online Game (MNPCOG)

Sounds like WoW or EQ may be the "ideal" game for you.

I think the henchmen/heroes are one of the very best features of GW, one of the things that really set this game apart from the rest.

As to the OP's idea, I think a hench (not hero) of the same class would make more sense. While not a "duplicate" of the player that left (skills, attributes), it would nevertheless lessen the blow of losing someone from your team. Thus, if your RP smiting monk left, he/she would be replaced with a generic Menlo-type healing monk. Not as good as the original player, but still better than an empty slot.

3D House of Beef · Dec 04, 2007, 08:01 PM // 20:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phoenix Tears

the ideal MMORPG would have no stupid heroes and no henchmen..the ideal MMORPG would be played only by players ...because thats the thing, what makes a MMO a real MMO and wherefore MMOG stands for...

MASSIVE MULTIPLAYER ONLINE GAME

GW is still called a MMOG ..not a Massive NPC Online Game (MNPCOG)

so much to this topic and Anet will never learn that ...in kind of GW1

even in GW2 we get not rid if this crap...they want give a a dumb Companion System in exchange for Heroes/Henchmen >.>

Once too dumb to make the right system..ever too dumb ...

sigh

hopefully Anet will learn more from their failures of GW1 for a better GW2..then the thing about this here >.>

Guild Wars marketed itself as a Competitive Online Role Playing Game. Not as a MMORPG. From the official site:

Quote:

Guild Wars Synopsis

Join a New Generation of Online Roleplaying

Guild Wars takes the best elements of today's massively multiplayer online games and combines them with a new mission-based design that eliminates some of the more tedious aspects of those games.

Doesn't claim to be a MMORPG, takes the best elements of...
Also...

From the official wiki

Quote:

CORPG stands for "Competitive Online Role-Playing Game". Guild Wars was the first game in this genre, since the term was coined by ArenaNet.

So don't get caught up in what you think Anet should be serving you up for your MMORPG needs, when what you bought was a CORPG.

Age · Dec 04, 2007, 08:58 PM // 20:58

The only reason you would get leavers is if they turn out to be a bad PuG group if they were good no one would leave.