Why have 25 heros to use 3 at a time?

Well there will be people to play with. Those people who prefer to pug will still go and pug. Only those who want to use 7 heroes will use 7 heroes.

Your ability isnt effected.
Infact by giving yourself a disadvantage in terms of skills and weapons etc you put more requirement on your ability.

Im going to go back to gold for another example here.

If you take a top golfer and give them some cheap clubs that makes it more challenging for them to win.
Their skill and ability remains exactly the same. The difference is they now have a disadvantage in terms of equipment, putting more of a challenge on their skill to perform well.

Wasnt really aimed just at pve skills, same applies for any skill that is a bit more powerful than others. If you find it to easy using that, you can always not use it.


Player skill comes into it as well. If you give a solid build to a poor player they will still perform poorly. As it is it takes more skill and tactical team building to come up with a build that works when at a disadvantage.
When you have 1 less player you need to cover for them without leaving a hole somewhere else.
When you have less armour you need to make up for that in your build at the cost of something else.
When you do less damage you either need to add more damage or be able to hold out in a fight for the extra time it takes to defeat the enemy.

But how many? That's what matters, which is the whole point. It'll be dreadfully hard to pug if there are very very little people. You can't deny that.

It still lies in the fact that it's an artificial challenge. If you play a game against some totally new person and you make it dreadfully hard on yourself, you won't learn anything. If you win, well you won against a newbie. If you lose, you probably made it too hard for yourself.

If it was as simple as "making it harder for yourself," ANet wouldn't have wasted their time with Hard Mode.

Yes player skill comes into it, but the amount is nearly minuscule. And it's less "being skillful" and more just "knowing what to do."

"Player skill" does come into it, but it won't save you if your build sucks.

Lets say we have football and computer games.

Some people prefer football.
Some people prefer computer games.

Now the football team is struggling to get a team together.
Should we limit computer games to try and "encourage" people to play football?

If there arent enough people to pug, perhaps that tells you something about the number of people who want to pug.


The point is, if you limit yourself to the point you will fail if you dont play your best (or even improve) thats a challenge. It doesnt matter if you limited yourself or the game did.

Its like giving someone a headstart in a race, shots in golf, extra lives in an fps etc etc.

You create the challenge for yourself by giving your opponent an advantage (or yourself a disadvantage) so that you have to play your best to win.

If it didnt work you wouldnt see mechanics like handicaps in sports, extra lives in games etc.

For the most part its no fun beating something thats easy (although some people enjoy it) and being able to make it as hard as you like is a great feature.


But also a good build wont save a bad player.

You need both.

You've already asked me this question regarding ice cream. This thread is now officially going in circles.

It tells me one of two things:

It tells me that a person new to this game is going to have a hard time. When the game population is spread so thin as it is, when a lot of people would rather play by themselves and when you don't know how to play the game, it tells me that that person might not have a very good time.

It also tells me that the forced party system in Guild Wars sucks. Thankfully ANet saw this and won't be having a party be a requirement in GW2.

It still is to me (and apparently many others) to feel like solving your own puzzle. It's hard to suprise yourself or catch yourself off gaurd.

Can't say much besides agree to disagree in this aspect.

When it's as easy as having to press random buttons, buttons in sequence, etc. then it becomes rather hard to be sucking with a good build.

Well perhaps thats because you wont come out and answer it.

Right now you are saying its ok for solo players to be limited to ensure that pug groups dont have to wait as long to get groups.
But its not ok to make pug groups wait a bit longer so solo players arent limited.

Why is grouping more important? If there arent enough people to pug without waiting a long time for a team. Perhaps a lot of people dont want to pug. Perhaps they should be allowed to play in the manner they wish?

Well I played it straight with henchmen. Even better now there are heroes.


If you take a caster with a poor build that doesnt know how to manage their energy and give them a good build. They still wont know how to manage their energy and will still perform poorly.

If you take a monk with a poor build who just generally doesnt know how to monk and give them a good build. They will still generally not know how to monk.

If you take a warrior with a poor build who likes to charge into groups and is happy to attack warriors in stances and give him a good build. He will still charge into groups and attack warriors in stances.

And thats just the more basic of gameplay elements. Theres even more ways players can still screw up with a good build.

Then I'll say what I said earlier: Pick a better analogy. A hometown football team can put up fliers, call people from different cities and states, numerous ways to fill their team, etc. You don't really have that in Guild Wars.

Yes, because soloing limits pugging. The more people solo, the less people pug. The more people pug, uh, the more people pug? No effect on soloing whatsoever.

Also, as I've stated, time can be a rather large factor when it comes to pugs. The longer they have to wait for anything, the worse.

Because you the soloer can still experience the missions. Some pugs can't even do that. The only way that you yourself have said you are limited in is "your enjoyment." You can still get through all the missions, experience the whole game, etc. and still be successful with it.

And they can. They can pick up four henchmen and their three heroes and go. There has to be a limit, of course. If I wanted to play as a pink dinosaur should I be given that right?

But the argument here is such: is the limit effective? Well given the fact that soloer's can get through games in Hard Mode, yeah I'd say it's fine.

Okay.

they will eventually make a full hero team....like 2-3 weeks before GW2 is out. that way, they wont be losing anything.

but I am with you for the fact that they should put full hero teams. Because even if they feel people don't play together, if I don't like PUGs, I won't join PUGs no matter what. I can only have 3 heros in my team? perfect! ill take henchies along.

which makes me think of a saying of one of my old guild leader (Hey Jim!) : 5% of PUGs are great, 10% of PUGs are ok and 85% of PUGs make you wonder if the world will last another 25 years.

cheers to my guild leader!

You have to take them in the context they are being used.
My point is why is it ok to limit one thing to encourage another because it doesnt have enough people who want to do it.
Surely those other people have chosen to go and play solo. Why is it their fault not enough people pug.

I have no problem with people pugging.
Soloing also doesnt limit pugging. People who dont want to pug reduce pugs.
People who play in guilds reduce pugging. People who play with friends reduce pugging.

Other forms shouldnt be limited to try and make pugging more attractive. People should be able to play their own way, if someone wants to play solo let them.

You are limited in that you can only take 3 heroes (or 4 changeable builds). Which then impacts on enjoyment by its reduction of playstyles and builds etc.

Lets not go down that road
Pretty much everything can taken out of context and proportion. It doesnt make for good discussion.
The point is its limited within the game confines not by the game confines themselves. Its an extra limit on something within the game.
Rather than limiting people on things outside the game, like being able to play pink dinosaurs or fly etc.

You have been in this thread long enough to know its not about difficulty.

Lets face it I can spin it around and say even if it takes 30 mins to get a pug you could still finish the game. Therefore adding heroes would be fine, as long as there are at least 8 people who want to pug its possible for them to complete the game.

Obviousely thats absurd, you cant look at it based on just ability to complete the game.

[QUOTE]it is not about difficulty OR PUG as you can fill the remaining slots with henchies.

that leaves as stated by others BTW much faster/efficient clearing of areas in the game

farming and loot to be exact.

since leaving you henchies it is not an attempt to force pug.

it very definitely is a farming limit

Ok well first.

How can you farm with heroes? They take loot and I cant imagine they can run farming builds.

But secondly you apparantly didnt read back to where we mentioned what it was about.

Having 4 fixed builds limits the over teambuild, which limits playstyles and builds for the 4 controllable.
For example when the hench monks dont have condition and hex removal you are limited in that if you want it elsewhere you have to make room for it.
When your warrior hench is running charge and not even 8 skills, you need to make up for that damage or have less damage than a proper build.
When monks have no energy management and less than 8 skills your stuck with it unless you swap out something else for hero monks.

Its a huge limit on gameplay because of this.

[QUOTE] thank you for asking that

some time ago it was stated that they would happily trade all 4 henchies for one more hero.

they would be able to clear many more high end (not elite) areas with that additional hero.

clear an area with a party of 5 (you and 4 heroes) with 3 empty non loot stealing slots for additional loot for you (exempted list)

that is how

I do not think Loviatar understands how loot scaling works.

FYI its like this.

If you are in an area that the max # of people in the party is 4. then you will receive 1/4 the drops.

If you are in an area that the max party size is 12 you receive 1/12 of the drops.


Party size has NOTHING to do with drops, with some exceptions. see below.

-gold (money) is divided among party members equally as possible.

-restricted drop list.
some green items are restricted and drop less than normal, normal is 10% and restricted is 5%.

-unrestricted items
holiday event items
ectos
obsidian shards

Will all drop at set rates.

Party members that are grayed out in the party bar are ineligible for a drop.
So, you may have a greater drop rate if they are grayed out by getting their drops.

How on earth does having more heroes affect this in any way?
It does not.

Also heroes and hench have a bonus % to receive the rare drops, when they drop.

So, an all human group has a better chance of a rare drop per human than a mixed human and hero/hench group, altho drop rates are static.

Hench and heroes did not hurt the PUG, the PUG hurt the PUG. I say more Heroes please. If anyone in my alliance asks for help I help them, if they are in a pug I force them to leave the PUG because I will no longer waste my time on rude, leeching, mouthy, idiots. The # of heroes doesn't affect me but the more I can have in my party the more fun I have. To those that say guild wars is ment to be played with others, I do play with other people, my alliance.Also, look at the BMP PUG that! OH ya its SOLO!!!!!!

What he means is that people can farm higher end areas rather quickly with 5 heroes. That means one person 4 heroes in an area that's meant for 8 people. So the monsters would be dropping a loot table of 8 while you just had 5 people in there.

That aside, back to some quote wars:

It's not their fault. It's the way that the game is set up that sucks. After ANet realized the world was getting bigger and that

Tricky waters. Guilds and friends' list may not be entirely shunned by ANet

And a lack of people to play with reduces the chance of even being able to *play* with any build.

The point is its limited within the game confines not by the game confines themselves. Its an extra limit on something within the game.
Rather than limiting people on things outside the game, like being able to play pink dinosaurs or fly etc.

Actually, most people I've known wanting 4 additional heroes have said either "I can't do shit with the henchmen." That's really how this all started, with that thread started by Bhaav complaining how it's "impossible" to complete a large number of missions/areas on Hard Mode.

That's what it really comes down to.

So you can't have a party of your own full choosing. You can't have a fully functional team build that you want. You have to settle for four henchmen whose skills you have no control over.

Well, PUGs are stuck with a lot of these problems, as well. You have no idea how well your team will work together. You can only ask them to bring what's best for the group if their very tolerant to that and if they have the proper skills unlocked. Last but not least, you have no control over them whatsoever.

Besides all that, there's still the chance that there'll be little to no besides you can be in that outpost. So if the person really wants to play through that mission he'll be forced to solo, something they don't want to do.

So yes, it comes down to simply being able to even being able to start the mission. In the time that it takes someone to organize a party of people in a semipopulated outpost, a person with heroes and henchies could probably've cleared said mission twice (three times if the PUG failed.) Time is a *huge* factor. That's why I use heroes and henchies: Because I don't have enough time to lose.

Your enjoyment of the game is limited, but not the success. Pugs risk both.

And they could do it even FASTER with 8. I still don't understand what effect on drops this has except for gold (money), or that they can get to end area chests. You don't get more drops for going into an area that the max # of people is 8 when the group is 5 of 8.

I will even include a make shift chart:

the area party size is 8.

your team size is 1 of 8, you get 1/8 the drops.
your team size is 2 of 8, you get 1/8 the drops.
your team size is 3 of 8, you get 1/8 the drops.
your team size is 4 of 8, you get 1/8 the drops.
your team size is 5 of 8, you get 1/8 the drops.
your team size is 6 of 8, you get 1/8 the drops.
your team size is 7 of 8, you get 1/8 the drops.
your team size is 8 of 8, you get 1/8 the drops.

with exceptions, see my post above.

The only reason I included this is to diswade people from using drops to justify not adding in extra heroes. As this is a discussion about adding heroes not drops.

[QUOTE] wrong on almost every point.

the devs have stated it is a sliding scale giving the solo player roughlt twice what they would get in a full group

But let's hear it from the design team itself, with this latest Dev Update:

[QUOTE] DEVS SAY THIS

where did you hear this garbage anyway?

from the devs themselves

http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/s...19&postcount=1

when i quote i actually quote the source sorry for forgetting the linkie

something related to Heroes
could they at least sort the Heroes by profession type in the search panel, its a mess atm and very annoying

nuf said 12 chars

12 ?

I say they don't offer enough heroes there should be 3 of each class so you can have 3 of the same class in your party should you choose. That would mean 30 heroes and not 25.

This thread is EPIC

Well they said no to more storage space the first year too, but it happened. No to white dye because the dye setup was not suitable for it, yet they changed it. I'm sure other examples can be found. If the engine can run it, it's possible and Anet can change their mind, especially if a large part of the community wants it.

I've followed your posts last pages and I have to agree with other people here that you're wrong on so many points I'm wondering if you're just trolling to let off some steam because pugs died when Nightfall arrived. Pugs are irrelevant in this topic. We passed that stage several pages ago, as well as the claim (based on air) that this game should be played with other people and all that MMO crapp. Henchies were available on the first day of prophecies' release some three years ago and they're still here. Proof enough that this game is meant to have the option to play solo. Now solo players want to use seven heroes to have more fun in that solo experience. Basically you can't stand it people are having more fun this way, if that's the case, I pitty you and all like minded players, no offense.

I still have to see the first valid argument why not to have 7 heroes.

If theres no 25 heros, there will be a thread with the title:

Dear Anet, can we have more heros.

thats why you have 25 heros and only can use 3, where 3 is the maximum allow at the present, and the rest is so that we won't bug anet for more heros.

I had to blow some steam out of my engine after 3 years of GW playing and sent Anet Support Europe this email.:

Guildwars is the best game I ever played since 1985, even nowadays RPG games give no satisfaction Like Guildwars does.

1.However Normal Game play in GW-EN is impossible for average players, impossible strong last level dungeon or impossible strong end bosses.
2. Since more then 1 year impossible to get good drops if one cannot play in hardmode (shame to you)
3. Overall bad drops since more than 1 end 1/2 year for average players.
4. Absurd unreal prices for keys with 99 % chance for a worthless purple , so I never buy keys or lockpicks.
5. I am getting crazy and tired with the constant skill changes, so to say for the game or economic balance. Dont make me laugh!(see absurd unreal prices for keys and lockpicks)

So however this is the best game I ever played, at the same time it is the game with the most less satisfaction and more and more frustrating.

I am only interested in the RPG and exploring part of the Game, and I want to have some fun, and no frustration.

What I want to ask is : Give average and lesser players their pleasure back. And let utmost skilled players play in hardcore, but make no differences in finding good drops.
Give a choice in Easy, Normal and Hardcore Play for instance, without effect on drops or goodies.

In the early game development years designers wanted to be better then their players( customers,buyers), don't make the same mistake please.

Any way I know a lot of players , that doubt if they are going to buy Guildwars 2, same doubt as I have.

So I hope you can give a lot of players their pleasure in GW back.

;-)

Yes guys I need more heroes instead of hench. Need it coz Guilds are low on active players and PUGS are too risky, an by now I am a complete solo player thanks to Anet.

ummmmm.... No sorry, thats just BS.

After NF was released there werent any threads asking for more heroes, most players were happy with the ones they had. However, asking to use 7 heroes at once has been around since NF was released.

And I should know this, I've followed hero discussions since day one. No one ever wanted extra heroes in Gwen, they just want to use 7 at a time.

There was a very simple idea that someone suggested a long way back, that if you have either NF or GWEN, you can use 3 heroes. If you have both NF and GWEN you should be able to use 6 at once, and then a seventh if you own all three campaigns plus GWEN.

That would get a lot of people buying the campaigns and GWEN.

I personally would like someone to just let Devona kill herself and get it over with. I am tired of her running off helter skelter agroing 2 or more groups in hard mode. It's bad enough as it when you have to fight to the mission because there is no staging area. Devona gets you killed once or twice on the way sure makes the missions a lot harder.

FREE THE HEROS. If I can control 3 hero's I can do 7 too. FREE THE HERO'S!

From the other post on this exact same topic....

Before this thread goes cold for another month or two could someone go through it and make two lists that we can sticky for those who are wondering about this one way or another.

1. Reasons for allowing 7 Heros in PvE
2. Reasons for NOT allowing 7 Heros in PvE


Personally I think the list for 1 will be greater than for 2, but I've not got time to sort through 31 pages of posts to comprise an exact list.

Note* One of these threads could be closed if all the info was summed up in just one spot.

Why is this thread not closed?

lol I like how the guy bumped both of them.

This thread should be stickied.

As for now I use my spare computer again with another acount so I can play with 6 heroes at once but loose one spot to drop my other character when starting a mission or whatever. But I have no prob at all to loose that spot in function of three more custom hero builds.

This is an expensive solution though, it will cost you a spare computer, another few copies of the GW campaigns and time to play with that new account through all those campaigns.

All that trouble to have more fun but it's worth it imo.

i like to pug, i just don't find any ...
not signed.

That's because heroes were intruduced when Nightfall arrived. It has nothing to do with 3 or 7 heroes which I explained several times. Pugging died back then. Your argument was valid at that time but is offtopic here.

It's already too easy to win with 3 heroes adding 4 more would just make it too silly easy. When I can take just 3 heroes and play in HARD MODE and all I have to do is loot that says right there that 4 more heroes would just be stupid to implement. Thus, this is your valid arguement to prevent everyone from having a stupid silly easy time of it from point A to point B there will be no 7 heroes. You can do just fine with the 3 we gave you and 4 henchies, there is absolutely no reason to give you any more and make the game so easy a 3 year old could play it.

And yes this thread should be closed. We don't need to read or hear about how someone is bypassing the rules and playing on two computers and all that other blah. That is not the NORM of the game or the players. So, if that's the way you want to play it go right ahead, it's not going to change the minds of Anet or the reason Anet does not implement 7 heroes in the first place as I stated above it just makes the game super childish romper room easy, but, if that's the type of game you wish to play then go right ahead and play it...close thread though please.

For one person the game is easy, for another it's hard. It's about choice. If it's too easy for you don't use 7 heroes but allow others the choice to play the game as they want. Also like I explained earlier, I can play with 6 at a time, but other peeps don't have that option or the time. Also two player teams with 6 heroes is a common fact. It's almost as if playing with 7 heroes. That one more spot is irrelevant here. So the argument of the game becoming too easy is invalid.

In short:
1) you can play with six heroes yourself if you have another machine and account
2) 2 man teams with 6 heroes are common
These two counter arguments destroy the argument of the game becoming too easy as the game is already played with 6 heroes one way or the other.

Sorry, but 7 heroes would make it absolutely way too easy even for a dolt as yourself. Obviously you're not having a hard time with even 6 heroes as you brag about it. Common sense just proves me right when a single skill like Ursans Blessing also makes this game super easy. So, nope no reason to implement 7 heroes when 3 is quite enough for the average IQ of 80 for anyone. Also, 3 heroes and 4 henchies is quite easy as well. Thus one has 7 optional heroes and henchies to use, it is irrelevent to even think of having 4 more heroes as opposed to the already sufficienct henchies.

EDIT:The valid reason is they are not needed. YOu have 3 heroes already and 4 henchmen you do not need or does the game require anymore heroes to finish or play any of the chapters. I could see valid reason for asking for 4 more heroes if they were needed, but, they aren't. So, it wouldn't be COST effective to add four more heroes since GW is basically dead now and GW2 is the top priority for them now. Whether someone is DUMB or not while using heroes and henchies is irrelevent to the addition of them. Dumb players will remain dumb no matter how many heroes you give them only smart players will exploit the use of added heroes. So, in a nutshell the game being easier for the smart player is valid reason for not implementing 7 heroes total. As I said the dumb player will find the game hard no matter how much advantage you give them.

What would be "too easy"? You have no idea what are you talking about.

edited for clarity.


you totally missed the point. Stop posting.

lol Sleeper who made you god? hahaha Not a very good IMP even I'm sure hahaha baw haw haw.

Are you really that impish or do I need to draw you a romper room picture?

At any rate I really don't know why the imps keep bringing these dead horse issues back up. Anet isn't going to implement 4 more heroes and these things do nothing but start flame wars all over again. I won't argue a dead horse issue it's not worth my time or my intelligence to argue over soemthing that isn't going to happen.

The same people who promoted you to the head of the Anet GW development team and assigned your role as mod on this forum.


Gun has demonstrated that 6 heroes under the control of one single player makes NO difference other than increasing the fun factor.

all you've done is blabber about IQ and your ...intelligence. Ill refrain from commenting on what your posts actually made you look like, no point in stating the obvious after all.

Are you really that stupid or perhaps you just don't know the answer?

hmmm
mistakes eh?
pretty easy i reckon - and funny now, altho at the time it wasn't so funny :P

1. Missing Elites at Nightfall release....very funny when ya think about it, making the same mistake twice...priceless. Funny now tho ;-)

2. Missing Elites at Factions release....damn that was frustrating...spent hours and hours and.....ah well ...got fixed

3. Not making titles retroactive... as much as I like the Kanaxai fella (one day you will be mine pretty one!) having to find a group and do it all over again was not something I relished! And Sorrows and ...but hey, having now done them it was groovy to revisit them areas again. Sorrows is soooo pretty. I often wonder what the plans REALLY were around that and a few things connected ....