Hero limit

As it is now, we got 15 (soon to be 16) Heroes, yet we can only take up to 3 with us at once, which means that most of them probably won't get much use, sadly. The limit also means that we still have to take the non-customizable henchmen to get a full party. I think the limit should be removed (in PvE only).

Any thoughs?

/notsigned

Then the game would be waay too easy and they'd have to make the enemy AI a lot smarter to compensate.

I'd like the limit to be removed also. But whatever...

I really hate this idea. Why? Because Anet didn't want Heroes to be used for complete soloing. You're supposed to team up with 2-3 other guys and fill in the black spots with heroes.

/extremelynotsigned

Uhm no. It should be only possible for 1 hero per human player. Unlimited? No way.

What?

No, but it's really a fine line. Heroes (and Henchies to a lesser extent) allow players to be, shall we say...antisocial to a larger degree.

And, yes, I use the freakin' hell out of Heroes and Henchies and have only grouped 4 times since I started the game.

Which makes me kinda sad...but hey...what can I do but whine about it on the forums?

People have been playing solo with henches long time before heroes and will continue doing so if thats what they want, so getting rid of the limit would only make it more fun for those who prefer that type of play. Those who like to team up with others could continue doing so. In the end, the choice is up to the players themselves. I think the more options we have, the better.

Heroes, while supperior to the common PUG, will still do worse than a organised party of half-decent players who know what they are doing. (Admittely, making such a party can take longer than the quest/mission itself, but that is for another topic entirely) Having more of them wouldn't change that, in my oppinion.

Why? You want us to take 2 extra henchman instead? Lowering the number of heroes allowed per person wont make more people choose to pug. It'll just mean more henchman added instead.

Two things need to be done about heroes.

Heroes need to be removed from PVP except for "hero" battles, especially HA.

In PVE people should be able to bring as many heroes as they like. Oh Noes The Henchies... Who cares about henchies not being used I don't.

Joe

I think its a bad idea:
/notsigned

/notsigned
Even my lord Grenth is displeased at this proposal

---Follower of Grenth

/notsigned here as well.

I've had my fun with heroes, and I pretty much bum-rushed all the missions (with the bonuses to boot) with 'em, but I feel bad for doing so... especially when I remember that I initially got into Guild Wars because of the nifty (and fun!) coop missions. And yes, I do (did?) enjoy PUGing (the occasional rotten apple doesn't bother me, and just inspires me to some merry laughter), but the temptation of instant accessibility and almost-certain victory is just too much to resist at times.

In short, I've always thought that teaming up with real people is usually a lot more fun, and going around with customizable bots, while great for testing out builds, is a bit too sterile and businessmanlike for my tastes. Plus, I hardly think Anet intended Guild Wars to be a singleplayer game; I already have a theory that the hero system, while well-intended, is diluting the quality of PUGs by polarizing it into veterans (who have all the skills unlocked already for their heroes and plenty of equipment and money to burn on hero upgrades) and the less experienced (who are less equipped and don't necessarily have a good grasp on which skill combos work with each class yet).

So a decided no on my part.

Id like to use up all my spaces with heroes.

Technically their no more powerfull or skilled then normal henchces. The only difference is that you can control their movement and equipment.

But if wouldnt have any incouragement to take humans instead of the remaining hench spaces.

I farmed southern shiverpeaks with my full hero limit last night and did pretty good.

/notsigned

I think heroes should be limited to 1 in missions except where specific heroes are required for the mission.

Ie: In Jokanur, you can have 2 because you need at LEAST Melonni.

/not signed

1 hero is more than enough id say too.

/notsigned


but nightfall is antisocial allready anyways. I can't seem to ever form a party anywhere in Nightfall except for endgame missions, because everyone wants to just take their heroes and henchies. But it is just another step on the fundamental balance issue. If you could carry around unlimited heroes, what would stop you from taking 11 heroes with you on the elite missions? then it would just get crazy after that!!!

Yes they are stronger. Since you don't have to use crappy hench builds but can instead use FotMs.

/signed henchie builds are too rigid, heros add flexability, gimme 7 heros to join me on hard quests that most people refuse to join in with cause there too busy farming *cough - SF, titans etc.*

This is exactly what I've thought about this issue since NF launched. People are going to solo, whether it be with a full team of Heroes or with Henchmen added in. It seems silly to tell those people they can only use a handful of the good NPCs, and the rest must come from the crappier line. Though, to be fair, I think it should be tied in with your Sunspear rank. As you gain ranks you gain the right to control more men, it only makes sense.

/signed.

/notsigned

using two monk heroes and a monk hench i can pretty much solo anywhere. in the places with two monk henchies, its just ridiculous. i'm a RANGER, i shouldnt be able to sit and tank with four henchies healing me. Taking more heroes would just mean i could bring more monks or whatever. i felt that the game was more balanced withour heroes, but they are a welcoem addition. if you were to have unlimited heroes you would need to get rid of henchies in order to keep the game difficult.

Come on, we both know that's not true. In Prophecies and Factions 90% of people did the following: first choice was guildies or friends, then you would go with a PUG, and as a last resort you would hench the mission.

In contrast, in Nightfall 90% of people played through using only henchmen and heroes. Maybe more.

See the difference? We've gone from 90% of people playing with each other, to only 10%.

Those who like to team up with others can't continue doing so. I am one of these people, and I play with heroes and henchmen. Why? Because it is so damn easy to, and because everyone else is. It's not about having more options if the option you add is so ubiquitous that everyone does it.

Using your fragile argument, I could say we should have the option to bring 2 elite skills. The people who want to play with 2 elite skills can have more fun, but those who still want to play with only 1 can do that.

Show everyone that you didn't make up these figures on the spot and then, maybe, you'll have a point. You don't know that 90% of people in Nightfall are solely using Heroes and Henchmen, it just feels that way, so stop trying to pass this off as a fact.

I, and many other people, do not spend time looking for a group when we get to a new town/outpost/mission area. We grab a group of Henchmen and Heroes and head on out. Heroes are not an atrocity, nomatter how much you'd like to portray them as one. Stop using flimsy arguments backed by statistics you've arbitrarilly made up, and try looking at this from a different perspective.

Lest we forget there is a price to using Heroes (to a lesser extent Henchies)

Using them:

-automatically means the player is losing loot and gold drops.
-the player will spend gold and items to improve the Heroes.
-the player will probably forget how to play with real human player.
-will cause a social backlash like in that movie Artificial Intelligence and people will hunt the Heroes/Henchies down to destroy them with heavy machinery.

Of course I made that figure up, based on observation. Everybody knows I can't know that for sure, but it isn't hard to see that before heroes, people formed PUGs for missions. Afterwards, nearly everyone is using heroes and henchmen. That was my point, the numbers don't matter.

I am using no flimsy arguments, the person I was replying to was. I'm sorry you take this heroes thing so close to heart, but I don't see the ability to form a party of 1 human and 8 heroes as a good thing.

Most of the players are antisocial already, they don't want to play with others, they don't know how to behave maturely, and they either suck and can't admit it, or overly critical and can't tolerate weakness. Heros allow people who arn't Fit for cooperative play to solo without others, and leaves the friendly and mature groups open to meet eachother.

I think 3 heros is a good balance between independance and dependance, with your 3 hero slots you can provide the essentials of your party with little need for outside help, but you still have 4 slots to fill and another developed team is better than henchmen. Still, the more freedom the better, without a need for player dependancy, only players who enjoy cooperation and know how to behave will play together, in all honesty, it eliminates much of the tension between whether your single character is effective enough for the party, and much talk about how human parties need kick functions and replacements for afk members, it truely meets the needs of several difficulties, whether you like it or not.

It is sad that people are so selfish that they woln't consider players because their party has a need to fill and they don't meet their ideal need, it is sad that players are too immature and inconsiderate to put proper effort into a mission or respect their fellow players, it is a problem and it can't be removed, alternatives are the ultimate remedy.

I agree that it would be easier if you could program all of your partners (Heros), but it isn't that hard to cooperate with as little as one or 2 other players and their heros to overcome much.

As a personal example, the first time I started a 4+ mission, the 2 human players both quit before the middle of the mission, one just quit because he went the wrong way alone and got killed, and the other racked up so much DP that he couldn't continue. Imagine that, a Dervish who can't survive even with 2 enchantment heavy super monks which can charge his energy like a power line.

The final truth is a perfectly coordinated skill setup is better than players 90 percent of the time, because the game is about cooperation, even more than skill. Players like to develope their own build and don't care to consider what is best for the team. Perhaps an elementist wants to go air magic even though the party is set up to reap strong defensive advantages with "Their On Fire". It doesn't matter how good an air elementist he is, he will not match the offensive and defensive advantage that party has with burning focused fire magic.

I'm all for gameplay difficulty, but they should not come in the form of disgruntal players and lack of support, one would hope if your good enough to beat the game, you would have players with you which can pull their end.

My best suggestion is new areas where several small parties cooperate with eachother in large scale battles. Simular to the Harvest temple or alliance battles, you would be in charge of your 4 man party (hero or otherwise), and you would be in the same instance cooperating with other 4 man parties, like seperate platoons in a battle. In an instance like this, even having 7 heros on your team doesn't relieve you of other players, and in such an instance, you may not even be able to choose your allies, they will just end up in the mission with you. I rather like the idea of open combat vs legions which would star several 4 or 8 man parties, and pit you in a battle to siege or defend or straight out open combat in the field. I would perfer more War settings, this is guild wars. OMG, I just thought, what if there was a new kind of guild battle which involved 4 teams of 4, vs 4 teams of 4......on and on and on.

Before Heroes people either made do with Henchmen, which were terrible, or they simply felt forced to join a PuG. Making anyone feel forced to do anything in a game is a terrible thing, as it means they can't enjoy the game the way they like.

Then don't use them. Stating obviously incorrect numbers detracts from any form of credibility one may have when forming a post.

No one would be forcing you to use them. They would simply be there for those that wish to grab a team and go. There will always be people standing about screaming for a PuG (I've completed the Nightfall and Prophecies storyline since Heroes launched, and I'm close to completing Factions again, and there are a great number of people screaming LFT in towns.), so, again, this doesn't really effect you.

Not everyone that uses Heroes/Henchmen are "[not] fit for cooperative play". The vast majority of players that use them have been through the story lines at least one time and are simply fed up with PuGs. So, if this statement is designed to make PuGs look like a bastion of civility and gaming prowess, it falls terribly short of doing so to anyone with even a shred of common-sense.

They could just disable them for elite misions, same as you can't take henches into the underworld.

Taking four PC monks would have the same effect though, so if it is unbalanced, it isn't the heroes fault.

The comparison is flawed, having two elites would be unbalancing, as the game is designed with only one elite per player in mind. Without the hero cap, you still would be limited to X players for the given area.

I have henched most of prophecies and factions, and I know I am not the only one. If people use hero/henc, its because they want to solo, for whatewer reason. I see no reason not to make it more enjoyable for those people.

/signed


There are many reasons why people hench this game. As for me i do it cause my gaming time is limited and i dont have the time to sit around and wait for a group to get together, when i can just grab henchies and go. I can play the game at my own pace, which in the end gives me more out of my game. So, in otherwords i'm gonna continue to hench regardless.

The only thing adding an unlimited hero option will do, it let me customize my game even that much more. I think it's a great idea, and should be implimented. I dont think it's gonna change how gw is played. Those that like to hench the game will continue, but will have the option to do it with their heros. Those that like to play in parties will also continue to do so. I honestly see no downside to adding this option.

/not signed

Even after being removed from a human pug (the took me as a fire ele, then kicked me after I flashed my skill bar as requested) and a lame excuss we needed a healer after I mentioned I can change my skill bar had EVERY ele skill from Cantha/Tyria and 70% of elona ... srry end rant.

I think it would be over kill.

No.

/notsigned

reads my mind
its not a solo game make friends, ask guildies to help

/signed because I hate PuGs. If I play with other people its with friends/guildies.

3 Heros per player is balanced as it is for the moment. As much as i would like to have my party entirely made up of Heros, its not likely to happen for the following reasons:

1) Anet has previously mentioned they envision that 1 player +3 heros X2 will be able to make up for a full party so there will still be some form of interaction btwn players. (though these days most are just 1player +3 heros +4 hencies going at the game.)

2) There are too many Whiners about NF turning the game into a single player online game or that they cant find groups cause no one is willing to babysit them through more difficult missions or no one is willing to listen to their BS and look at their drawings on the mini map or to rage quit from etc.

3) As mentioned, Heros AI can be tweaked by players to become extremely powerful builds hence contribute to unbalancing issues and the mob AI will need to be readjusted again.

4) If we were able to have a unlimited full Party of Heros, we will see even more PvP hate threads all over the forums QQing over how HA is broke.

So what i am saying is:

/Signed even though we know its not gonna happen.

well then the game would be too easy it already is easy enough with regular hench. So hey, we survived without them, this is just a little boost

Increase max to 5 Heroes.

I agree with many of your orginal points. I do not think we should have unlimited Hero advancement. I do think we should be allowed to have as many Hero's as we can have in a party - 6 party members, 5 Hero's or 8 paryy members then 7 heros. I may be wrong, but I do not think we could ever have all the henchmen thus we still have to choose. Someone stated that the game would be easier if we could use 7 henchmen, I disagree with that as well. Has anyone tried to control 8 characters at the same time. I have (with three) and it is very hard to control one heroe (especially in the middle of a battle)

Aside from other comments, logic,etc. Lets assume they change this to unlimited heroes

1) Do you really want to micromanage 7 heroes skills in a battle?

2) Wouldn't they have to add more buttons to be able to direct heroes? That would be more clutter around the compass.

3)More people will complain that their heroes take up valuable cash and drops.After all, who has to equip the heroes...you do. And if you want the heroes to have nice stuff, you're paying more.

4)Pvp would be ruined because it would be "commander of uber interrupt bots" vs the same.(I don't pvp, but I've read that there seems to be a bit of trouble concerning heroes in pvp already. I'd like to keep the player in player versus player)

5)Since you now have a team of super interrupt heroes, a squad of beastmasters or whatnot, what possible reason do you have to play? What challenge could the game in its current state possibly afford you? Unless you simply want to mow down everything in your path like grass before a lawnmower, the AI would have to be upped.

6)If the AI is upped to accomodate the Heroway players who are bored, what becomes of people who still wish to pug or simply have human interaction? Will they be forced to go Heroway for the ability to survive in an area designed for the reaction times of computers?

Now I know there are holes in some of these statements, but frankly I am very very tired. Please just look at the possibilities when you ask for changes like this, as the consequences could be quite drastic if taken to the extreme. What you are in fact proposing is to allow RTS play in a multiplayer online rpg. This game was designed to be played by multiple people, which is why there are limits on heroes, whose abilities and tweakability would unbalance play.

Henchman are not limited because you must adapt to their skills, not the other way around. Henchman and a hero/hench team are great for when you don't have time to play with others, or don't feel like it. But to increase the limit would simply exacerbate the problem of having solo playability in a multiplayer game.

What I mean by this is: Henching the game was challenging. You had to work hard to play without humans. Heroing and henching is slightly less challenging due to skill tweaking possibilities, but still requires knowledge of skills/builds and the ability to use the npc's to their fullest. A full hero team under the direction of a human would not be challenging, because of the ability to fully tweak every single build. To play you would simply have to create templates; every time you hit a possible snag you would change the team build to take advantage of the area's 'weakness', a luxury you don't have with henchies and seldom have with pugs.

Instead of attempting to figure out how to play and beat the area that has you stumped, you would simply click a few buttons, change to a fotm hero build and continue mindlessly clicking. No skill involved, no thought involved. Last I heard this game was about skill>time played. Last I heard it was Guild Wars, not Hero Wars or Template wars.

Try not to take anything in this post personal, as I'm attempting to play devil's advocate here, despite my biased opinion on the matter.

But that's just my two cents

/signed

I usually play with all henchies anyway because the pugs are usually so bad, so I dont see any difference besides making the game easier and more fun.

/notsigned