Curse

the_jos · Sep 26, 2007, 09:26 PM // 21:26

Quote:

It speeds things up over standard h/h and is still significantly slower than a good guild group.

Well, you forget one thing there.

When playing with a guild group you need to organize things and that takes time.
A couple of days ago we did a spontanious FoW run and it took about 45 minutes to set up a team (getting people to join, deciding on professions, 'omg... I have homework. Cya', 'everyone has 3 hours at least to play?', 'Oh, I have to ask my mum', 'wait', 'Y, I can play').
Now take heroes.
Go to ToA 1, load heroes, load templates, go.
You just won 45 minutes.
Same story for spontanious vanquishing with a larger group.
Mind you that I'm in a dedicated HM guild, so people are willing to join quite often on spontanious events.

The only thing to avoid this is making a schedule, get enough people to sign up, appoint roles and builds and insist on people that signed up to join or get boot from guild (sounds like a PvP guild to me).
With a bit of luck you can start 15 minutes after scheduled time.
Since H&H allow for spontanious group setup, I will keep that as reference.

Once in an area the guild group will be faster.
But there is still 45 minutes to make up for the initial group setup.
Did you also calculate that in your 'significantly slower' statement?

Quote:

Im not certain why exactly your so adamantly opposed to allowing players to have another tool in their arsenal?

Oh, I am not opposed to an other tool.
I just know that if A-net even starts thinking about this again (which they probably don't) they need to dedicate resources to it (it's not as easy as it sounds to implement).
And since resources are limited, other things will not be done.
I can think of very few things that are less important than 7 heroes.
There is no need, only 'nice to have' and no-one has yet convinced me that this is a 'must have'.

R!ghteous Ind!gnation · Sep 26, 2007, 09:31 PM // 21:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by the_jos

I just know that if A-net even starts thinking about this again (which they probably don't) they need to dedicate resources to it (it's not as easy as it sounds to implement).
And since resources are limited, other things will not be done.
I can think of very few things that are less important than 7 heroes.
There is no need, only 'nice to have' and no-one has yet convinced me that this is a 'must have'.

The first valid argument of of the day award goes to the jos... even if the change was small it would take time away from other projects, imo the small amount of time would be worth it. iyo it wouldnt.

Isileth · Sep 26, 2007, 09:36 PM // 21:36

Yeah I must thank the_jos for continuing to post good arguments and in a sensible manner.

It really isnt a huge change. Its not as if they need to implement heroes all over again. They already have them. Yes it will take time, yes that time will be taken away from other things. But I really see that as time well spent.

This would benefit so many players. And would help keep the faith of casual players that Anet still cares about them. Long live skill>time.

PureEvilYak · Sep 26, 2007, 09:41 PM // 21:41

/signedA

Now, usually, I find a 3 hero team fine. Did most of the GW:EN expansion quests and dungeons (with the exception of a few of the harder ones) without too much difficulty.
However, it would be nice to have 7 heroes in Hard Mode. These are my reasons why:
When I get a chance to play with other people, I do so. Vanquishing is kinda lonely solo, I like to have company, and that extra bit of intelligence really helps. I even PuG occasionally.
However, the simple fact is that there are not always people around. Even in a large hard mode guild like the one I'm in at the moment, it can be a chore to find people to play with. So you HAVE to Hero it. Now, this is all very well for Ascalon, but what about other areas?
Take, for example, Vanquishing Kessex Peak. I went from ToA, with my 3 hero, 4 hench team. In fact, I killed over 80% of the foes, and still had no dp. I thought I was doing quite well.
That was when I came up to a group with three Shepherds of Verata. Now, I knew that these guys had Healing Hands, so I'd given my heroes high damage builds to counter it. After all, they weren't going to avoid the targets, AIs love to smash things. However, the henchmen were not the same. Oh, they had good build in the own way, yet in my oversight, I had forgotten that they did little damage. At least, not enough to stop healing hands working as a heal. Neither could I remove their weapons, to make the staff attacks, which would heal the monks for ~40-50 health, stop. In hindsight, I should have brought an enchantment remove. But it can be very frustrating to get that far and fail. And the optimal build (in my view) for the area is in fact a high damage build, as it renders the monks useless, where as an enchantment removal is just a counter.

So, to cut the long story short, I would like to get planning back please. Now that we have powerstones of courage and the like that remove the requirement for skill, the pleasure at seeing a well executed plan is all we have left.

bhavv · Sep 26, 2007, 09:41 PM // 21:41

Anet have already tested 7 heroes on their closed servers before deciding no, so yes it can be done, they just dont want their game to be fun.

Who is buying GW2?

Also Powerstones of Courage have completely removed skill required to play HM. I still havnt used them, but after being party wiped to 60% DP on the final mob in ascalon foothills and being forced back to the outpost (Earth + Fire elly enemies with Meteor + earthquake spam GG), Im not going to do anymore HM without them.

Oh, the reason for the party wipe was the nooblet called Alesia. Also would have been a lot easier If I could have replaced Claude with a mesmer. But I cant do that!

1) Remove the imba PVE consumables (And PVE skills too would be awesome)

2) Remove the sent back to outpost at 60% DP thing

3) Add 7 heroes

Return 'Skill' to PVE.

Isileth · Sep 26, 2007, 09:47 PM // 21:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by bhavv

Anet have already tested 7 heroes on their closed servers before deciding no, so yes it can be done, they just dont want their game to be fun.

Who is buying GW2?

Let me say I really like GW. Its a fantastic game.

But slowly they have gone away from skill>time.
PvE skill that while as people are quick to jump to arent needed do make you more powerful.
Titles in GW:EN that grant effects. Again not needed but make you more powerful.
Consumables that for those rich enough to keep stacks means they can never fail. Not needed. But with them you cant loose.

I will deffinately be looking at GW2 but should there be signs of this sort of thing I wont be buying. And that will make me sad. For GW is enjoyable. But being forced to grind to be on the same level as someone else is not.

Skill>Time

the_jos · Sep 26, 2007, 09:49 PM // 21:49

Quote:

Who the hell are YOU to tell me how I AM supposed to play GW?

Very important question indeed.
From A-nets perspective however it would sound like this:
<start A-net speak>
"Who the hell are you to tell us how we are supposed to build GW?"
.......
"We decided to implement certain parts of the game so they are human-only (elite missions) and made our game in a way to support teaming.
Human teams always had advantage over hench.
That's a core part of our game, called Guild Wars (not Hero & Hench Wars) for a reason.
What you are asking now from us is abandoning this core part of the game.
We implemented heroes for you to help you get things done without requirement of a full human group, since we noticed players were spreading more and more when we implemented Factions with it's split storyline.
Not as a full replacement of human players or to turn our game into a single-player one."
<stop A-net speak>

Isileth · Sep 26, 2007, 09:53 PM // 21:53

Actually jos Anet did advertise GW as a game you could solo and do just as well as someone who went in a team. So if they are now taking that stance then they screwed a lot of customers.

Personally I dont believe they said that with intention to punish those who take the solo option. Its just happened over time. As such I would hope they would balance the 2 options.

BlackSephir · Sep 26, 2007, 09:55 PM // 21:55

How about response to AN?
"We've paid for your game. The majority wants 7h."

Quote:

That's a core part of our game, called Guild Wars (not Hero & Hench Wars) for a reason.

I already talked about this.

Quote:

Third thing- GW was advertised to allow to play with friends OR AI controlled players (then henchmen, now also heroes).

gremlin · Sep 26, 2007, 10:01 PM // 22:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by bhavv

Anet have already tested 7 heroes on their closed servers before deciding no, so yes it can be done, they just dont want their game to be fun.

Who is buying GW2?

They are a games company not a religious cult, of course they want it to be fun.

Win awards, be widely played, beat the competition and grow steadily till they offer a replacement.
Even then they want a few more years out of is as a money spinner.

I am only guessing here but we either choose to believe arenanet are ignoring feedback that doesnt fit in with the corporate plan or that they do listen and implement what they can when they can.

We only know one side of the story we give loads of feedback to them they give little feedback to us in comparison.

Might be nice for an official post on a thread saying we have listened to what's been said and then what their plans are.
ie
Already been considered and our intent is *****
Didnt think of that will look into it etc etc

GW2 yes of course GW one has been a great success so far and I have put more playing time into it than any other game so far, and at my age thats a load of games.

PureEvilYak · Sep 26, 2007, 10:06 PM // 22:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by the_jos

"We decided to implement certain parts of the game so they are human-only (elite missions) and made our game in a way to support teaming.

In hard mode, elite missions, and the God Realms, I would choose a bunch of real people over heroes any day of the week. I joined a HM guild for explicitly that reason. However, for the harder stuff, there are not always people out there to team with, and frankly, while a lot of the henchman builds are good in their own way, I don't want to have to build my team around them. And most players can do most normal mode things without other players anyway, even if they removed heroes completely.

bhavv · Sep 26, 2007, 10:08 PM // 22:08

If you actually want a more recent reply from gaile, here it is:

(The last line)

Diddy bow · Sep 26, 2007, 10:10 PM // 22:10

/notsigned

Most things are already pretty easy. And this misses the point of the "controll factor" over heros as you cant really controll 7... And this would once and for all end teaming

.

Isileth · Sep 26, 2007, 10:12 PM // 22:12

@bhavv

With enough support plans can be changed

@Diddy

It wouldnt be the end of teaming. Those that prefer to team with real players will carry on teaming with real players. Those what would prefer 7 heroes will get to use what they want and those that pug get to do what they want.

Solar_Takfar · Sep 26, 2007, 10:20 PM // 22:20

/signed

Even though I don't think this petition is going to change Anet's mind. Well, we can always hope.

BlackSephir · Sep 26, 2007, 10:20 PM // 22:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diddy bow

/notsigned

Most things are already pretty easy. And this misses the point of the "controll factor" over heros as you cant really controll 7... And this would once and for all end teaming

.

1. People who don't want to team up are already doing that.
2. 7h + 1 player will never by stronger than 8 players
3. About control- use your imagination. You have 4 buttons to control h/h around radar, just add 4 more

Gattocheese · Sep 26, 2007, 10:25 PM // 22:25

The designers are saying no, and thier the ones who can dictate the way you play. I think i will start a petition thread to close this petition thread. lolz

the_jos · Sep 26, 2007, 10:26 PM // 22:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by bhavv

...... but after being party wiped to 60% DP on the final mob in ascalon foothills and being forced back to the outpost (Earth + Fire elly enemies with Meteor + earthquake spam GG), Im not going to do anymore HM without them.

Oh, the reason for the party wipe was the nooblet called Alesia. Also would have been a lot easier If I could have replaced Claude with a mesmer. But I cant do that!
....
Return 'Skill' to PVE.

Just ask in (y)our guild who has soloed that particular area with H&H and what team build hey used. I'm sure some have done that.

Let me think on a build I would use there.
Depending on own profession.
Probably BHA ranger with epidemic (unlinked mesmer skill).
Prot monk with Life Bond and PS (use on tank).
Optional hero: Second ranger with barrage to disrupt as many foes as possible when dazed.
Optional hero : Tank/Warrior (since you can't use a hench tank without flagging both hench).
Optional hero: Powerblock mesmer
Optional hero: Ele with Maelstrom (and perhaps ward of stability, but heroes like to kite a little too much for wards).
Optional hero: SS necro with 2 interrupts
2 hench, probably monk and ranger.

Sure, a full 6 hero team would be better, but it's not impossible to vanquish that area solo.

Quote:

Actually jos Anet did advertise GW as a game you could solo and do just as well as someone who went in a team.

Could be, but that's not what my box says.
It says 'Join with friends or play solo with a band of skilful henchmen.' (seems there is a typo on my box).
Could be because the only box I see this fast is the SE box of my second account.
Now we can argue about the skillful henchmen with Alesia's warrior mode bhavv mentioned.
However, the hench were good enough for normal mode.
People started to hench their way through the game(s) because they were better than the average PuG.

Now we have hard mode.
This requires more skill from the player but should also be supported with henchmen up to the task.
Now the question is: are they?
If they are not, we have a henchmen problem.

Now I can think of several HM missions where the hench are probably not up to the task, specially masters. Eternal Grove comes in mind first.
This mission is already hard in NM with a hench team.
So if it's impossible to complete this mission HM with hench only, there is good reason to complain.

The same could be true for other Prophecies and Factions HM missions.
If those cannot be done Masters with hench, there is reason to complain.
But it's not solved by adding more heroes, since people with only Prophecies or Factions do not have heroes.

Faer · Sep 26, 2007, 10:26 PM // 22:26

Your petition was denied by the developers before you could even make it. With respect for their wish that the issue be dropped, I am closing this thread.

Have a nice day.