Curse

Essence Snow · Mar 05, 2011, 06:25 PM // 18:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Another Felldspar

God, what idiocy.

The "whining" -- the complaint -- isn't that the game is too hard. It isn't about 8 necroes or rits or any other specific build. It's about offering something through the cash shop that players CAN'T GET from playing the game. It's about inequity based on a purchase. It's about lack of integrity from a game studio, it's about selling something that is not cosmetic even though that studio has promised their player base that the cash shop items will only have cosmetic value -- after saying that cash shop items would not effect game play.

This particular cash shop item affects game play. It isn't merely cosmetic. No matter how easy the game is or isn't there are profession combinations that aren't available to the player base unless they purchase from the shop.

Understand now?

I agreed with u 100% on this....Too many ppl take "advantage" as "easier", which is not what is wrong with this picture. I will agree that the summon stone in pre is unfair and should be removed. They (gerneric term..no one in particular) also imply that microtransaction=content transaction, which is not the case either. It is merely about gaining access to options via micro transactions (which is not the same as a content transaction) for something that others cannot have access to w/o paying for it.

Plz plz plz stop saying its about 7 discords..idk where that came from, but it's not about that.

DiogoSilva · Mar 05, 2011, 06:55 PM // 18:55

The possibility to have an entire party of the same profession is so pointless, that I can't understand how it can be used as an argument to an otherwise excellent addition to the game.

Really, just because there are more party compositions with mercs? The game by itself already offers an absurd amount of different compositions, and all the ones that really matter don't need mercs with the exception of a full discord or full paragon party. Let people pay for that if they want, it's almost insignificant to other players in every point of view.

There's nothing wrong with offerning new things through the shop as long as those are mostly cosmetic or don't give any power advantage. You can also buy the dungeon's pack to get more weapon skins, you can buy extra storage/ character slots for more storage, etc. So what? Any player without them about equal when it comes to power, and the mercs don't change anything.

Dzjudz · Mar 06, 2011, 05:05 PM // 17:05

It's not really about 7 necros. For example, I'd rather take a third mesmer instead of the third necro we already have. Necro heroes are really pretty pitiful, you don't need more than two, a resto and a minion master/bomber. Curses is weak (on a hero) and so is non-minion Death Magic. Domination is much more powerful.

That is one example of how Mercs can make a better 7-hero team. There must be other options as well that improve on current combinations.

DiogoSilva · Mar 06, 2011, 06:27 PM // 18:27

That might be true in theory, but I wonder if more than two mesmers are needed without overlapping each other? A domination one (generally with panic) and an illusion one seems enough, IMO.

Dzjudz · Mar 06, 2011, 06:37 PM // 18:37

I'm not arguing it is needed, I'm arguing that It would be better to have another mesmer instead of another necro.

What does another Necro add? Single target armor-ignoring damage with Discord?

What does another Mesmer add? AoE armor-ignoring damage and enemy shutdown.

Which would you like more?

An example of 3 mesmers:

Extreme enemy shutdown with armor-ignoring damage against both casters and physicals

WarcryOfTruth · Mar 06, 2011, 09:05 PM // 21:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dzjudz

I'm not arguing it is needed, I'm arguing that It would be better to have another mesmer instead of another necro.

What does another Necro add? Single target armor-ignoring damage with Discord?

What does another Mesmer add? AoE armor-ignoring damage and enemy shutdown.

Which would you like more?

An example of 3 mesmers:

Extreme enemy shutdown with armor-ignoring damage against both casters and physicals

This wins the thread. If I want to make a fourth elementalist, I have to PAY for it. If I want a third mesmer, I have to PAY for it. It isn't about what we're getting, it's that what we're getting is only accessible through payment. Sure, things like Divine Aura and /dancenew are the same, but those don't contribute to game play in the slightest. Things like the mini Varesh Ossa and Kuunavang are tradeable, so even if I do not pay for them with real money, I can still obtain them if I need to. Mercenaries contribute to game play changes, why do people not see that?

Daesu · Mar 06, 2011, 09:36 PM // 21:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarcryOfTruth

This wins the thread. If I want to make a fourth elementalist, I have to PAY for it. If I want a third mesmer, I have to PAY for it. It isn't about what we're getting, it's that what we're getting is only accessible through payment. Sure, things like Divine Aura and /dancenew are the same, but those don't contribute to game play in the slightest. Things like the mini Varesh Ossa and Kuunavang are tradeable, so even if I do not pay for them with real money, I can still obtain them if I need to. Mercenaries contribute to game play changes, why do people not see that?

The fact that mercenaries are not tradeable means that they don't grant those who have them as much advantage in the game as Varesh or Kuunavang did.

I don't see why mercenaries should be tradeable. If they are, wouldn't that translate to buying in-game gold through out-game dollars? Kuunavang and Ossa affected the game more than the mercenaries.

Dzjudz · Mar 06, 2011, 09:40 PM // 21:40

He's not saying Mercenaries should be tradeable...

He's saying you could pay to get Varesh / Kuuna (by buying CE Factions/Nightfall) but also buy one in-game from another player, and therefore not giving payers an advantage, but you can only get Mercs by paying, and therefore giving payers an advantage.

CrustyEarl · Mar 06, 2011, 09:57 PM // 21:57

Considering that GW is by far the BEST FREE to play MMO ever made, and still running... There is no room to complain. So what if there is an advantage(albeit very slight) you actually have to pay for. How many years have you been able to play this game, with very little out of pocket? Would you rather Pay $15 a month? I'm glad this game is even still being supported. The main thing is, that while you may get some advantage by paying, your not being disadvantaged by not paying.

BrettM · Mar 06, 2011, 10:36 PM // 22:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dzjudz

but you can only get Mercs by paying, and therefore giving payers an advantage.

What advantage? People keep claiming that there is some advantage to mercs, but they never state exactly what advantage or offer any proof. Are you saying, for example, that a team with three mesmers is significantly better than any and every possible team you can build without mercs? How do you know?

If someone is going to claim an advantage for mercs, then they should build the team they claim is better than everything else, do something with that team (one of the harder vanquishes, for example) to set a benchmark, and then see if anyone else can come up with a non-merc team that matches or exceeds that benchmark.

If nobody can match the merc team with a non-merc team, then the claim to a cash-shop advantage has been demonstrated. Otherwise, all such claims are simply theory crafting. People can bloviate all day long about this so-called advantage, but I'm from Missouri. Show me. Or stop repeating unfounded allegations as if they were proven fact.

WarcryOfTruth · Mar 06, 2011, 11:26 PM // 23:26

It's not about having the builds being better or worse, it's about having the same choices in terms of game play. This is where the "problem" lies. The buyers have more variety to experience game play differently than those who do not pay. Whether it is easier/harder/funner or whatever other adjective could apply, they have more variety to experience the game.

Daesu · Mar 06, 2011, 11:44 PM // 23:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dzjudz

He's saying you could pay to get Varesh / Kuuna (by buying CE Factions/Nightfall) but also buy one in-game from another player, and therefore not giving payers an advantage, but you can only get Mercs by paying, and therefore giving payers an advantage.

And I am saying because of this it IS giving the seller (a player) an in-game advantage. Through his out-game dollars, he is gaining in-game gold. How is this not giving real life rich players an advantage in the game?

With the large amounts of in-game gold from selling Varesh/Kuuna he can easily hire players with pve skills to be his mercs and get his stuff done in the game. Also more gold to buy cons. How is this not gaining an advantage? This is even worse than merc heroes.

Personally, I consider the merc heroes advantage to be minimal at best. You can only have up to 7 hero slots per player, so having more necros just means you have fewer rits and mesmers. It is a trade-off.

Even though I have been playing with 6-heroes using 2 accounts long before this update, I still prefer my 2 necros, 2 rits, 1 mesmer, 1 monk heroes over having 6 necro heroes, any day.

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarcryOfTruth

It's not about having the builds being better or worse, it's about having the same choices in terms of game play. This is where the "problem" lies. The buyers have more variety to experience game play differently than those who do not pay. Whether it is easier/harder/funner or whatever other adjective could apply, they have more variety to experience the game.

What do you mean by "more variety to experience game play differently"? You bought costumes, I didn't so we are already experiencing game play differently. One can extend that and say, you bought GW:EN, he didn't, so you have one extra necro hero (+other heroes, powerful profession-independent pve skills, and more access to cons) than he does through using your real life money. By that same argument, one can say that is "more variety to experience game play differently" also, and even much more so.

aspi · Mar 07, 2011, 09:47 AM // 09:47

Been trying fow and VQ areas with almost the same builds. I just have a PI mesmer instead of the inaptitude build. I am still trying to see what would work better since I have almost no experience with mesmers. My team could shutdown entire mobs with the mesmers and spike them to death with the necros.
Not the best or fastest but it works.

*lemming* · Mar 08, 2011, 07:46 PM // 19:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrettM

What advantage? People keep claiming that there is some advantage to mercs, but they never state exactly what advantage or offer any proof. Are you saying, for example, that a team with three mesmers is significantly better than any and every possible team you can build without mercs? How do you know?

If someone is going to claim an advantage for mercs, then they should build the team they claim is better than everything else, do something with that team (one of the harder vanquishes, for example) to set a benchmark, and then see if anyone else can come up with a non-merc team that matches or exceeds that benchmark.

If nobody can match the merc team with a non-merc team, then the claim to a cash-shop advantage has been demonstrated. Otherwise, all such claims are simply theory crafting. People can bloviate all day long about this so-called advantage, but I'm from Missouri. Show me. Or stop repeating unfounded allegations as if they were proven fact.

The onus is on you, along with everyone agreeing with you that the potential of running more than the former maximum number of heroes per profession in a party is completely meaningless, to prove that in every potential scenario, a nonmercenary team is at least exactly as effective or capable as a team featuring mercenaries. Otherwise, you're theorycrafting.

What I don't believe is debatable at all is that buying mercenary slots provides additional possibilities that are otherwise impossible.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

And I am saying because of this it IS giving the seller (a player) an in-game advantage. Through his out-game dollars, he is gaining in-game gold. How is this not giving real life rich players an advantage in the game?

With the large amounts of in-game gold from selling Varesh/Kuuna he can easily hire players with pve skills to be his mercs and get his stuff done in the game. Also more gold to buy cons. How is this not gaining an advantage? This is even worse than merc heroes.

What do you mean by "more variety to experience game play differently"? You bought costumes, I didn't so we are already experiencing game play differently. One can extend that and say, you bought GW:EN, he didn't, so you have one extra necro hero (+other heroes, powerful profession-independent pve skills, and more access to cons) than he does through using your real life money. By that same argument, one can say that is "more variety to experience game play differently" also, and even much more so.

I think you're the only person conflating an expansion with a microtransaction here.

Kirzath · Mar 09, 2011, 03:05 AM // 03:05

How is the disadvantage to not buying mercenary heroes any different from not buying one of the campaigns?

This is the equivalent of complaining that people who bought EOTN have an unfair advantage because they get uber PVE skills while the others, who didn't want to make the investment, don't.

Sure, you're not getting a whole lot for your money compared to all the content a campaign would give you, but come on, EOTN came out in 2007 and you likely haven't given NCSoft a single cent since. Surely you can afford the 20$ for 3 vanity hero slots that will let you play the game at the same level as those who already purchased mercenary heroes.

Dzjudz · Mar 09, 2011, 12:01 PM // 12:01

Well it's kind of a double edged sword isn't it?

If I say I haven't bought anything but the campaigns you'll say that "you played 5 years for free, surely you can spend €35 to support the game?"

If I say I have bought all Costumes etcetera, you'll say that "well you also spent a lot of money on costumes, why not spend a little more on this?"

To the first point: campaign/expansion =/= mercenaries

To the second point: I don't want to be forced to buy something to get the same gameplay abilities as someone else, especially at €35.

Kirzath · Mar 09, 2011, 12:36 PM // 12:36

summary of this thread:

QQ

Grow up, people. Mercenary heroes are toys, and they do not offer a tangible advantage over people who did not purchase them.

Vallen · Mar 09, 2011, 12:53 PM // 12:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kirzath

summary of this thread:

QQ

Grow up, people. Mercenary heroes are toys, and they do not offer a tangible advantage over people who did not purchase them.

Are you actually seriously this stupid that you cant see how they do give an advantage? Sometimes I just cant help but feel that humanity is doomed.

They offer an advantage in the way of someone who bought them having the OPTION to run more single professions than I can having not bought them. Im not saying using 8 rangers or 7 necros or 3 mesmers or whatever is better than using 3 necros, 2 rits, 2 mesmers and an ER prot but its an option that I DON'T HAVE because I didn't buy it.

This imo is the only bad thing to come with this update and it really gives me a bad feeling about micro-transactions in GW2...

Kirzath · Mar 09, 2011, 01:06 PM // 13:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vallen

They offer an advantage in the way of someone who bought them having the OPTION to run more single professions than I can having not bought them. Im not saying using 8 rangers or 7 necros or 3 mesmers or whatever is better than using 3 necros, 2 rits, 2 mesmers and an ER prot but its an option that I DON'T HAVE because I didn't buy it.

Well done contradicting your own point, sir. So it's a lot like how you don't have the option to wear silly festival costumes.

BrettM · Mar 09, 2011, 01:19 PM // 13:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dzjudz

To the second point: I don't want to be forced to buy something to get the same gameplay abilities as someone else, especially at €35.

With 27 heroes already in the game, there are 4,475,671,200 ways to select seven of them to build a team. For each of those team compositions, there are an enormous number of builds for each hero chosen. I don't think anyone without mercs is really being stifled in the options available to them, since it is not humanly possible to explore all the options we already have. Granted, most of the options will be crap. But, the same can be said of the additional options available with merc heroes.

Unless you believe that there are one or more super teams you can build with mercs that will give you an unmatchable ability to get loot, title points, or other rewards faster than every single one of those 4+ billion combinations you already have available. If this is true, then mercs would indeed give a gameplay advantage. If it is not true, then mercs are simply cosmetic.

If there is some unmatchable merc team, why hasn't anyone shown it? If it exists, it seems that nobody has been able to find it so far. That doesn't prove it does not exist, but, the longer we go without seeing such a team appear, the less credible are the claims.

@Lemming: the onus is not on me to prove a negative. The onus is on those making the positive claim. I have not made the claim that no advantage exists, so I have nothing to prove. I am simply challenging those who claim it does exist to demonstrate it before I'll believe it. Why should I spend money on something that has not yet been shown to work?

The only way to test this is for those who think they have found such a merc team to post the details and a benchmark of performance, at which point others can try to match it with a non-merc team. At some point there will be a preponderance of evidence pointing one way or the other. With so many combinations available either way, absolute proof is simply not possible.