Curse

Shady79 · Feb 22, 2007, 05:18 PM // 17:18

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><

OMG: PLEASE READ THE COMMENTS BEFORE WRITING YOUR OWN. THANK YOU.

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>

This is a brand new idea and it's 'alpha'.

Please do not just write /signed or /notsigned. Please discuss.

Adventurer - Features:

a) A new sort of NPC - henchs who have to complete OUR stories too

b) Primary and secondary class (like real players)

c) A full used skillbar (7 skills + signet or 8 skills) - unchangable

d) All possible kinds of race maybe

e) Weapons based on real player used skins (pimp adventurer with crystalline sword,.....)

f) An uncontrolable behaviour (they should work like Rurik)

g) Different behaviours (aggressive [even monks attack,...], careful, ...)

h) Creative, different effective class mixes (Minion Master Ranger and others)

How to play with an adventurer:

1. Adventurers random spawn in the first level 20 mission outposts of a campaign.

2. To join a mission with an adventurer, you need a group with at least X (I suggest 3) real players and heroes are NOT allowed.

3. Only one party at each outpost can add one of the different X (I suggest 4) adventurers there - he/she will leave if the party don't start the next X seconds (I suggest 10... the party should be complete when he/she joins).

4. At the successful end of each adventurer-mission, you will receive X gold (I suggest 2000) and a random event item. If your spawn is the next mission outpost, the adventurer will be in your party only for the next XX seconds (I suggest 120 here).

5. A mission is over when the adventurer dies, then the adventurer leaves and is free to join a new party and will NOT join a party with any member of your old party again for 24 hours.

6. Each death of a party member halves the received gold at the end for each party member.

7. Each death of a party member increases the chance that the adventurer leaves your party after the mission and can be added by another party (1 death = 5%, 2 = 15%, 3 = 30%, 4 = 50%, 5 = 75%, 6 or more = 99%).

8. A mission with an adventurer should be harder (but I don't know how atm).

9. /resign or an aborted mission in any other way works like the death of the adventurer (see point 5.).

Shady79 · Feb 22, 2007, 06:27 PM // 18:27

no post yet? no "good idea" or "bad idea cause of..." ?

It's thought as farming-replacement with PLAYING and therefore repopulating outposts. No stupid farming runs bots can do.

Dougal Kronik · Feb 22, 2007, 06:41 PM // 18:41

I like the Features of the Adventurer.

1. The random spawn is good.

2. Not allowing Heros can work, as long as you can use henchmen, and allow only one player requirement.

3. If the Adventurer spawns in the outpost, then allow any and all parties to use the Adventurer.

4. Remove the time limit.

5. Just get rid of this one entirely.

6. If this is a one shot reduction of half, regardless of number of party deaths, then it's good.

7. Remove this one.

8. Agree, but don't have the adventurer be retarded and the cause of his own, and the party's death.

9. The limitation of the Adventurer can't work.

Shady79 · Feb 22, 2007, 06:52 PM // 18:52

Sure, it would be difficult for anet. ;-) But "can't work" ... don't know.

It's important that there is no adventurer each outpost everytime, because else people would FARM single missions which are easier than others! That's very important.

I don't understand what you mean with 6

Dougal Kronik · Feb 22, 2007, 07:22 PM // 19:22

For point 6, if one or more party members die, then the gold reward is reduced by half for each member of the party.

Wasn't sure if you meant that or it was halved for each party member that died.

For point 9, I would actually remove point 5 as well, which would make point 9 moot.

The random appearance of the Adventurer is good, but have the Adventurer available to all players in the outpost, until the Adventurer leaves the outpost (spawn period is over).

Knightsaber Sith · Feb 22, 2007, 07:33 PM // 19:33

I'm not sure whether or not I like this idea yet. It's just that we already have hench 'n' heroes; it seems almost pointless to add a third type of npc you can take with you.

I really don't think I like the uncontrollable behavior part 'cause Rurik liked to run around like a moron aggro'ing everything in sight.

DeanBB · Feb 22, 2007, 07:53 PM // 19:53

So we get an NPC like Rurik who we must keep alive or be penalized, or are penalized for each death in the team? What's the point or advantage again, maybe I missed that? Why is this better than a hero?

#3 - if I wanted that I'd invite a PUG to do "gogogogogogo" and then leave.

Likewise the whole "leaves in 2 minutes" is lame, what's the point? People need time for a potty break, ID and sell, change build, etc. There is no sense of time in GW, why force it on players?

MithranArkanere · Feb 22, 2007, 08:10 PM // 20:10

Hm... with the current state of the game, removing heroes is a bad idea...

There are some NPC that 'adventure' on their own... Jatoro, Suwash...

It would be cool to find them in random spost of the world map, help them against a crowd of monsters, and receive a reward.

They could appear anywhere on the map, the more times you save them, the harder the things that spawn chasing them nxt time, and the better the reward for 'saving their life again again'.

If they die, they just spawn anywhere else at random, so you can't retry the same encounter.

This would be a good way to have surprises and rewards for those prepared for anything.

Shady79 · Feb 22, 2007, 09:03 PM // 21:03

@ Milthran: well... the thing is to repopulate MISSION outposts, that people can play them with other people... not with npc/heroes only.

@ DeanBB: a) rurik behaviour: cause it makes the mission more difficult - b) 2 minutes because other people would get the chance to play with the adventurer - but we can discuss about the time. all of those are just SUGGESTIONS. simply make better ones.

legion_rat · Feb 22, 2007, 09:28 PM // 21:28

adventures would be a good idea for certain dead areas esp in factions. But I like the idea of still using heros and one player being able to do them. As a sin i have trouble getting parties. I hero henched most of nightfall, but there are parts of factions i cant do because no one is there. I think some of the competive missions there should become explorable or use your idea and add adventures.

Over all good idea though. I didnt mind rurik so much if he would just STFU.

~the rat~

Shady79 · Feb 22, 2007, 09:52 PM // 21:52

rat... you will still be able to play all missions with heroes.... but without the reward from an adventurer npc then.

kazjun · Feb 23, 2007, 02:29 AM // 02:29

The adventurer seems like a hero with henchie leroy AI. The time limits seem unneeded, and if in 'dead' outposts I wouldn't rule out using heroes. But the biggest thing is the reward.

How much is the cash meant to be? Too much and people will just farm it, and they'll be very little actual pugging since the farmers will only accept guildies or other 'experienced farmers' to blast through the mission as fast as possible. So instead of an empty outpost you can't get a party in, you'll be in a full outpost you can't get a party in unless you are an experienced farmer or of the best farming classes.

Too little reward and no one would do it. Do you know what I hate the most in pve? Having to protect people who seem to wear pre-sear armour with 5 sup runes. Just having monsters sneeze at them are enough to kill them. The only protect and escort mission I actually liked was the odd bodies quests. Now I have to protect some leroy fool? Unless he's offering a big chunk of bounty he can just go and die. I don't really need a few plat, and I can get that easily elsewhere without the aggrevation. I'm pretty sure plenty would feel the same.

Not sure the idea would refill dead outposts, or even work. Sorry.

Shady79 · Feb 23, 2007, 11:39 AM // 11:39

lol you all dont understand my entire post.

you CAN NOT farm any mission because you HAVE TO complete mission 1 then mission 2 then mission 3.... you can't farm a single mission.

so kazjun you are not willing to play with newcomers? thats bad. I'm sure 1-2 newcomers will NOT ruin the success of a mission.

Oh and getting plat by playing the storyline >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stupid boring farming

freekedoutfish · Feb 23, 2007, 11:59 AM // 11:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shady79

This is a brand new idea and it's 'alpha'.

Please do not just write /signed or /notsigned. Please discuss.

Adventurer - Features:

a) A new sort of NPC - henchs who have to complete OUR stories too

You want to add NPCs to ALL missions?

NOOOOOO bad idea! NPCs in missions are bad, bad, bad, bad, bad.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shady79

b) Primary and secondary class (like real players)

c) A full used skillbar (7 skills + signet or 8 skills) - unchangable

d) All possible kinds of race maybe

The race thing is dandy!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shady79

e) Weapons based on real player used skins (pimp adventurer with crystalline sword,.....)

f) An uncontrolable behaviour (they should work like Rurik)

Again basically adding an NPC to a mission is a bad idea, especially when you can control them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shady79

g) Different behaviours (aggressive [even monks attack,...], careful, ...)

h) Creative, different effective class mixes (Minion Master Ranger and others)

So their builds are random? There are times when you want a set build in a team player or to atleast know what class they are.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shady79

How to play with an adventurer:

1. Adventurers random spawn in the first level 20 mission outposts of a campaign.

2. To join a mission with an adventurer, you need a group with at least X (I suggest 3) real players and heroes are NOT allowed.

You'l allow henches but not Heroes? Im not liking the anti-heroe stance as I love heroes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shady79

3. Only one party at each outpost can add one of the different X (I suggest 4) adventurers there - he/she will leave if the party don't start the next X seconds (I suggest 10... the party should be complete when he/she joins).

Its not fair to put people under time contraints like that, they could need to be AFK for good reason.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shady79

4. At the successful end of each adventurer-mission, you will receive X gold (I suggest 2000) and a random event item. If your spawn is the next mission outpost, the adventurer will be in your party only for the next XX seconds (I suggest 120 here).

Creates easy gain of gold which we DONT need and random event items will end up on the market again creating easy to sell items.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shady79

5. A mission is over when the adventurer dies, then the adventurer leaves and is free to join a new party and will NOT join a party with any member of your old party again for 24 hours.

So unbelievably NOOO. Missions or quests where you are dependant on keeping an NPC are the worst part of GWs. It removes your focus from the mission, the monk has to keep them alive. Yout cant use AI as they wont heal them. And more often then not, they die.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shady79

6. Each death of a party member halves the received gold at the end for each party member.

DP is bad enough, we dont need penalties on gold loots from death. Death is something you cant avoid in missions and it happens alllll the time. You cant avoid it. If we had this constraint, the monks would be under alot of preasure to keep an NPC alive AND the entire team.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shady79

7. Each death of a party member increases the chance that the adventurer leaves your party after the mission and can be added by another party (1 death = 5%, 2 = 15%, 3 = 30%, 4 = 50%, 5 = 75%, 6 or more = 99%).

Again with more penalties on death. What have you against dying?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shady79

8. A mission with an adventurer should be harder (but I don't know how atm).

Going along with added penalties on death and the fact it ends if the NPC dies, it would be harder anyway.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shady79

9. /resign or an aborted mission in any other way works like the death of the adventurer (see point 5.).

My god nooooo!!!!

The adventurer idea is okish, but the simple fact is that we DONT need it. Adding an uncontrollable NPC to all missions is a very bad idea. They are the scurge of an RPG or MMO, as they die 90% of the time and wonder off.

We have Heroes, which pretty much doe exactly what your suggesting, they offer control, modable builds, weapons and runes. They do exactly what you want but 100 times better.

I dont get how you can be anti-Heroes, but you want to add NPCs to missions?

Shady79 · Feb 23, 2007, 12:07 PM // 12:07

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA freekedoutfish sorry but that's just stupid what you have written.

PLEASE READ THE RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GOING COMMENTS.

Quote:

rat... you will still be able to play all missions with heroes.... but without the reward from an adventurer npc then.

You MAY NOT EASILY FARM any mission with an adventurer. That's why I suggested different penalties. It makes the mission HARDER. Come on... with heroes any mission would be easy as hell (MM hero, nuker hero, 3-4 monks).

freekedoutfish · Feb 23, 2007, 02:01 PM // 14:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shady79

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA freekedoutfish sorry but that's just stupid what you have written.

PLEASE READ THE RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GOING COMMENTS.

Excuse me?

Was there any need for making comments like that? Your not going to gain much favour with your ideas if you reply with comments such as that, and im getting the distinct impressions your trying to start a flame war yourself.

Also I did read your entire post and quite frankly, if I has missunderstood something then it is due to your lack of explaining your idea correctly.

There was no need for the lengthy swearing or you puposely writing "read engine" just to look clever.

To sum up your idea, you want randomly spawning NPCs in lvl20 mission towns, who you can take along with you because there arent enough people in the towns to use.....

If you choose to do so...

You cant use heroes (who fix that problem anyway).
You have to endure extra penalties from dieing such as less gold as reward.
You have to ensure the life of the NPC or it ends.
You want to add a feature where if you die too much during the mission, the NPC wont let you use him again (why would you re-do the mission unless it failed?).

The only benefit is this gold and rare item reward, which in turn is bad because it creates an extremely easy way to repeatadly make gold and gain a rare item.

Adding easy ways to make large amounts of gold are not good ideas. If you understood the game you would know that. The market is completely messed up because we have a minority of rich players. Adding more gold doesnt help that.

How ever is we assume this is a one off each time, and it only rewards you once each mission. Then its not a good enough insentive, because you gain gold and items from drops anyway during the mission and your not going to repeat the mission twice.

Your idea is flawed and pointless, but somehow I dont expect you will accept that since criticism isnt something you can obviously handle.

Your entire idea is pointless because we have Heroes. Heroes and henches fix the issue of low numbers of players in towns. They fill the hole. Adding more AI to use is NOT an option, because we already have effective AI to use.

You want these NPCs who reward gold at the end of the mission because you dont want to share gold drops. You want the full wack yourself. And you want to be quaranteed a rare item, instead of relying no drop rates between players.

Your idea is purely to make it easier to gain gold and rare items.

Why are you playing an RPG/MMO if you dont like having to grind and pick up drops to make gold?

The extra difficulty that your trying to add by using an NPC and adding extra penalties for death dont make the mission any harder. They make missions more frustrating.

Difficulity isnt added by adding penalities and punishing us for mistakes. Difficulty is added by making the AI better.

But I would be have been open to a debate about this had you not spoken to me so rudely. But now I couldnt care less about your views. Your idea is simple stupid and not needed. We have AI to help fill spaces and adding more will not help.

Quite frankly, anyone who would suggest adding NPCs into missions has no idea what their talking about. I dont know a single person in the game who likes using NPCs who have a mind of their own.

Every single mission or quest in GWs that asks you to escort or help an NPC is flawed. They all suck because either the NPC moves too slow, agroes everything in sight, dies 90% of the time, or wonders off while your still fighting.

NPCs in missions are the last thing we want. Any experienced, long running GWs player would say the same.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shady79

You MAY NOT EASILY FARM any mission with an adventurer. That's why I suggested different penalties. It makes the mission HARDER. Come on... with heroes any mission would be easy as hell (MM hero, nuker hero, 3-4 monks).

You want to add penalities because it would be harder to farm during missions using your NPC?

What possible logic is there to that? Why would you punish us and make a mission harder because we cant loot as well?

Your making no sense. There is simply no need for this. And as I said, adding your penalties does NOT make the game harder, just more frustrating. Having to spent every second watching an NPC instead of what your doing is not fun. Having to watch your health meter every 2 seconds is NOT fun.

You have no room to breath.

Thomas.knbk · Feb 23, 2007, 02:41 PM // 14:41

So, why would people take this 'adventurer' that they can't control over one of their heroes that they can give the exact same skill bar, but that they -can- control? Because he has a Crystalline Sword? think not. Because it makes the mission more challenging? people tend to go with things that make thngs easier over things that make them harder.

Even if it would be possible, I highly doubt it will be a succes, and even more if it will repopulate dead mission outposts.

Warwulf · Feb 23, 2007, 06:40 PM // 18:40

I thought the ultimate solution to empty outposts was having henchies and heroes?

I don't understand why anyone would want to take an NPC you CAN'T control over one you CAN. I'd take my Dunkoro over Mhenlo, Alesia, Jamei, etc any day. Even if they're only level 15. I prefer being able to control their skills and how they use it.

Having NPCs whose skills are random and you can't know/predict/change is a bad idea, imho. You might end up with an MM where there are no corpses... or end up with a protection and a smiting monk, but no healer.

The reason some outposts are dead is because when people beat a mission, they move on. Outposts that don't have a mission/quest to do in them (or missions that have already been completed at maximum level) are not going to be popular.

/notsigned - Sorry. :x

actionjack · Feb 23, 2007, 07:08 PM // 19:08

With the Heros and the Hench... just no sure why it is needed?

Instead of aadding bots faking as humans, I would just add additional rewards to attract real-player into replaying a mission again.