Curse

DreamWind · Dec 17, 2009, 10:36 PM // 22:36

Ok I'll probably get flamed for this, but I'm posting it anyways because me and my friend were talking about it the other day.

We were both extreme bored so we logged on to play some PvP on our old GW friend. Not surprisingly, both of our friend lists and guilds/alliances were dead. So GvG is out of the question. Then we go to HA and there isn't enough people to form a party. So that is out of the question. We then look to play some Codex but that is dead as well. Finally we get in a couple rounds of RA and rage out due to boredom and not being able to sync it.

Basically, PvP to us is dead to us, which means Guild Wars is dead to us. I was always a strong advocate for removing heroes from PvP (and PvE for that matter) outright. But I haven't been assed to play Guild Wars again until recently, and this situation really had me questioning things. Have we crossed the threshold? Would allowing more heroes in a dying game actually do more good than bad now?

Sankt Hallvard · Dec 17, 2009, 11:34 PM // 23:34

Seems to me your approach was correct. This is how you did it: gvg -> ha -> codex -> ra. Then you stopped. Instead you should go on to the next logical step: PvE.

In pve you can load exactly the heroes you want and how much fun you'll have is entirely up to you. If all you want to do is pvp then why are you looking to heroes for help? Look for players(as in pvp).

The Savage I · Dec 17, 2009, 11:37 PM // 23:37

make new friends to play with, heroes suck

Gennadios · Dec 17, 2009, 11:43 PM // 23:43

FA/JQ

/12 chars.

fricker · Dec 18, 2009, 12:13 AM // 00:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sankt Hallvard

Seems to me your approach was correct. This is how you did it: gvg -> ha -> codex -> ra. Then you stopped. Instead you should go on to the next logical step: PvE.

In pve you can load exactly the heroes you want and how much fun you'll have is entirely up to you. If all you want to do is pvp then why are you looking to heroes for help? Look for players(as in pvp).

This post is full of win.

DreamWind · Dec 18, 2009, 12:15 AM // 00:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sankt Hallvard

Seems to me your approach was correct. This is how you did it: gvg -> ha -> codex -> ra. Then you stopped. Instead you should go on to the next logical step: PvE.

PvE is boring.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Savage I

make new friends to play with, heroes suck

We don't have the time for that. We made tons of friends over the years and all of them quit. We aren't going to remake friends with our schedules etc in hopes of playing some PvP.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gennadios

FA/JQ

/12 chars.

FA/JQ/AB is boring.

Reverend Dr · Dec 18, 2009, 12:20 AM // 00:20

Most of my games lately have been formed not from alliance/guild/friend lists, but from steam/aim/msn.

Eragon Zarroc · Dec 18, 2009, 12:52 AM // 00:52

time to make some new pvp friends?...

...or quit

DreamWind · Dec 18, 2009, 01:12 AM // 01:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eragon Zarroc

time to make some new pvp friends?...

...or quit

The latter is much easier. I'm just saying...the PvP population is so ridiculously small nowadays and our schedules are not up to finding new players. Just saying to me and my friend "it is PvP go find players" is not an answer. When do we get to the point where we have to look for other answers for the game to be playable?

kedde · Dec 18, 2009, 01:38 AM // 01:38

You basically need to know people who know people these days for anything to happen.

Krill · Dec 18, 2009, 03:05 AM // 03:05

Some of the HA henchmen are perfectly decent. If you could take 4 henchmen I'd run the searing, icy and monk henchmen over most dead hour HA puggers.

Reverend Dr · Dec 18, 2009, 03:55 AM // 03:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by kedde

You basically need to know people who know people these days for anything to happen.

Well who is going to start a game where your options are:

Buy full game and grind PvE for weeks before playing a 4 year old game

Spend 20$, giving up all PvE content, and spend weeks grinding balth faction before playing a 4 year old game

Spend $80, giving up all PvE content, to be able to immediately play a 4 year old game

Of course the population is dwindling.

kedde · Dec 18, 2009, 01:05 PM // 13:05

Its not as if I am surprised by that fact.

But I was actually thinking about the fact that this dwindling population lead to the stupid situation that if you actually play the game and want to get a guild, you need to know people who know people who once knew people to even be considered for a possible tryout.

It certainly isn't unreasonable, but I know many people who quit because they could cite no references still playing and simply quit because they were unable to find a guild, or form one.

DreamWind · Dec 18, 2009, 01:28 PM // 13:28

Here is the problem...we quit for reasons other than the game dying. But now that the game is dying, it is almost impossible to CONTINUE playing. There is no reason to come back. If we could just jump on with some heroes (say 2 humans and 6 heroes) and do some battles it would be fun. Granted, I'm not considering the health of the game anymore, but it goes back to my question. When does the good outweigh the bad?

Nimble Night · Dec 18, 2009, 01:52 PM // 13:52

Just use the henchmen? That's what they're for. Or is the problem that none of the henchmen have tease loaded onto their bar?

Ec]-[oMaN · Dec 18, 2009, 09:08 PM // 21:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Ok I'll probably get flamed for this, but I'm posting it anyways because me and my friend were talking about it the other day.

We were both extreme bored so we logged on to play some PvP on our old GW friend. Not surprisingly, both of our friend lists and guilds/alliances were dead. So GvG is out of the question. Then we go to HA and there isn't enough people to form a party. So that is out of the question. We then look to play some Codex but that is dead as well. Finally we get in a couple rounds of RA and rage out due to boredom and not being able to sync it.

Basically, PvP to us is dead to us, which means Guild Wars is dead to us. I was always a strong advocate for removing heroes from PvP (and PvE for that matter) outright. But I haven't been assed to play Guild Wars again until recently, and this situation really had me questioning things. Have we crossed the threshold? Would allowing more heroes in a dying game actually do more good than bad now?

I see where you're coming from, I stopped playing this past summer, and have logged in once a month some times. Last month I finally removed GW from the Hard drive. I was inclined to having Heroes removed from the game over 3 years ago when it would have made better sense.

It's the classic debate we've seen over the last few years. Too little too late regarding Anet and decision making. I would have probably played more than 5mins once a month if...

When are they just going to remove QPs and allow one player with 7 heroes to participate in MATs or AT's?

When GW was populated heroes made your playerbase mad and gameplay shit.

Now that the effects of the above have taken over you remove heroes from a dead game, further promoting the death of it.

When the playerbase is large NPCs aren't needed as much, when the playerbase dwindles, NPCs are needed, just thought I'd clear that up for the backwards mentality over at Anet.

Greedy Gus · Dec 18, 2009, 11:10 PM // 23:10

What format were you planning on playing with 2 people and 6 heroes? I think this was the wrong game to fire up for two people determined to play with each other (RA is one of the better formats left tbh) with dead friendslists (which I assume most people share).

Personally I think that people fighting tooth & nail against the main pug pvp format changing to 6v6 was terribly short-sighted, as we were left with two 8-player team formats that don't hold up very easily as the playerbase shrinks. To be fair though, if 4v4 formats are dead, then its too late anyway.

For a constructive response, a better alternative to re-introducing heroes and possibly allowing up to 6 of them in gvg/ha (or whatever you were thinking) I think was posted here: http://www.teamquitter.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=15106

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tinfoil Hat

Random Arena

The change to limit syncing was definitely a good thing for the majority, but I think there could be an interesting middle ground. Change RA to allow teams of 2 to enter, in addition to being able to enter by yourself (try and make teams 2-1-1 where possible). This does a few things, it can make RA pretty fun for good players for example, by removing some of the random aspect and making it easier to run a larger variety of builds. The main aim however would be to encourage new players to network in game, and hopefully allow them to start building up a solid friends list.

Reverend Dr · Dec 19, 2009, 12:50 AM // 00:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by kedde

Its not as if I am surprised by that fact.

That's not what I'm trying to get at. No matter how much people are complaining about "rank discrimination" or "can't get pugs/guild/parties" the core root lies not in the playerbase, but at Anet's door. People will leave the game, this is inevitable in any game, but by effectively blocking new players (why buy an old game and have to grind when I can buy a new game for the same or less?) the game population will fall and never recover.

Its not a heroes allowed/notallowed in PvP. Its not "elitist attitudes." Its not poor balance. Its not poor servers. This really is the most core problem the PvP community is facing, until it is properly addressed none of the other issues matter at all.

DreamWind · Dec 19, 2009, 02:23 AM // 02:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ec]-[oMaN

Now that the effects of the above have taken over you remove heroes from a dead game, further promoting the death of it.

I couldn't have said it better myself...this is exactly what I'm getting at. Yes I know heroes aren't the ideal situation, but we simply aren't going to have the ideal situation in this game anymore. We are long past that. So for that reason I think I've crossed over to the dark side...I think we need full or nearly full hero teams in PvP.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greedy Gus

What format were you planning on playing with 2 people and 6 heroes? I think this was the wrong game to fire up for two people determined to play with each other (RA is one of the better formats left tbh) with dead friendslists (which I assume most people share).

I think HA or GvG (or both) should allow more heroes. Maybe not the ability to have 1 human and 7 heroes...but maybe 2 humans and 6? That way there is still some semblance of a "team".

Again I have to reiterate that I don't think it is the best situation. I am simply asking if it would be a better situation than what we have now. It would certainly bring more players. Until then I simply can't play GW anymore. PvE is ass, PvP population is lacking, and I simply don't have the time to do it any other way now.

tealspikes · Dec 19, 2009, 03:57 PM // 15:57

I'd just like to point out that HA and GvG are two different situations in regards to heroes.
-HA can be completely pugged and has its own districts, you don't have to have 4 people+guests in your guild like GvG
-HA is generally a closed environment meaning forced 8v8fests vs teaseway, but in GvG where tactics matter, heroes are disadvantaged and much harder to abuse

I guess I have to admit the same situation since I wanted heroes gone over year ago. For the past few month's before removal my guild used heroes in GvG to fill in whenever people were unavailable - which became somewhat frequent. Now, nobody really logs on anymore to GvG as our backup option is gone (who wants to sit around for an hour trying to find guests), and the new henchies are such a joke you have almost no chance of winning even at the low level. As kedde mentioned, unless you are 'known' or you know people who know people, it can take a LONG time to find people and guests to play with.

I don't HA anymore but I hear it's become more active since heroes were taken out.