A discussion on 7 heroes

People continue to ignore the crux of the issue: the fact that people, if given the option, are likely to prefer full hero parties to PuGs - or worse, that many already prefer hero/hench parties to PuGs.

Arguing about heroes is obscuring the issue. If you have a situation where a significant portion of the playerbase would rather take 7 terrible AI members over 7 other real players, you are dealing with a serious problem of an entirely different nature than simple heroes vs. hench.

Players should want to party with others. Once you've reached the point where players are forced to party with others because they don't have the tools available to play the way they'd rather play, you've already lost them.

Well, after an hour of wasting my time in Umbral Grotto trying to get into a PUG to go kill a boss... any boss, I'm pretty much fed up. It's actually to the point of sucking. Apparently having a warrior there is not always good, because you have to be the right friggin type of warrior... and there can only be one, because god forbid you have to replace one SF cookie cutter ele. In hindsight, this game pretty much fails at the whole social thing. It's either play with people, but you have to have a certain weapon/stats/skillbar and play by the book all the time, or you do what you can with Lina, Mehnlo (aka "Hey, let's go see what those red dots are), etc.

I have heroed and hench everything I have ever done (I'm using an assassin) and have never had these problems with henchmen...maybe you should not suck and learn to flag your heroes then pull? QQ for the poor pver...

EDIT; Know what, it's not even worth my account on guru. Whatever dude.

And then you take your subjective view and counter with it? not cool.

Maybe some people do not want to spend fricking X hours of carefull pulls and max concentration ... There is line between hard-but-doable-and-fun and hard,-doable-but-not-fun-at-all. If you want example, All elite areas expect DoA are case one.

Oh, did they remove hero/henchability of Slavers? No, the fix was completelly different, so it doe not really apply. Being able to skip 3/4 of dungeon was obvious bug, they fixed it (as they fixed other similar stuff). If they did stuff like ban heroes from elite missions, then, you would have point.

I have yet to see Dev come out and claim that "elite stuff must be played with reall people".

Besides, i can easily argue that disalowing henches from elite areas was just afterthought. After all, prohecies elite access had L15 heroes. It was easier not to allow them at all then get tons of "henches suck in fow" threads. NF/F access had to mirror it since you would get people complain on how unfair it is that prohecies people cant take in hench...

You might have noticed that generally, average pug person is not taken that much seriously/with much sympathy. They kinda earned it.

I share concern for people who group with people because of people ... friends, guildies, forumers ... but they are not affected at all. Friend who would rather 7-hero than play with you is not friend and similar applies to Guildies

---

But my main argument why i would like 7H is that it simply creates whole new game for me ... deeper and more fun (since developing group builds and stuff is fun for me.), you cant really have 7 people slave you for that kind of stuff.

That's something I do understand and value.
For people that want to play solo this is a welcome addition, no argument on that.
Since A-net adverticed the game as 'soloable' (well, the original GW, without HM) it's also a fair request.
That does not mean it's something that must be done and it does also not mean others are not affected by this change in the game.
I am trying point out where the arguments used by people are flawed in my opinion, which you can or cannot agree on.

Asking for something as a 'would be nice to have' is something different than demanding something as a 'need'.
If you are saying there is a need, it means something is broken.
If that's true and I stated before that I believe that's the case on some points, it's the question if the best solution for this problem is adding more heroes. And that solution solves the problem for every player, including those that have no access to heroes when the problems are in Prophecies or Factions.

Arguments like "I have 25 heroes and pimp them all, but can use only 3 of them" are arguments in the 'nice to have' category and not 'need'.

On the subject of the elite areas.
I don't think it was an afterthought.
Deep and Urgoz's were made before the introduction of heroes.
Best example is Deep: it does have features that are impossible to play with a team with hench in it that you cannot control.
For example, the Aspect of Lethargy room requires 5 players to stay on platforms while the rest gets through a gate.
Without the possibility to flag hench (which was not possible back then) this is impossible to do in a team with henchmen.

To get on the PuG subject for this argument.
Honestly, I don't care about PuGs in general. I have guild/friends that I can play with most of the time. Pick-up is nice to fill a guild/friends team.
I'm also not in favor of forcing people to team up with other humans.
It may sound like that, but force does not work.
However, for others in this game PuGs are a way to make friends and find a guild (not those adverticing in outposts).

Friends and guildies however are already affected by hench and heroes.
If I want to do something and they are not available right away (or in very short period of time) I just load H&H and proceed on my own.
Meaning I also won't be available for the time I need to do whatever I want.
This has nothing to do with my will to team up and a lot with my available time.
When I want to play an unscheduled guild event with 8 humans, it will take up to an hour of waiting before I have assembled a team (if it even starts at all).
If I do the same thing with H&H it will take me 5 mins to set a team and start right away.

I won't blame heroes alone.
4 campaigns with normal and hard mode contribute.
Titles contribute.
I know from experience that people are most willing to play those missions/vanquish they need for title.
The game already shifted from social to personal goals.

In my opinion the teaming up option should always be the preferred option.
This does not mean that things should be impossible for solo-players, but it should mean that the effort of teaming up should be compensated somehow.

The compensation for teaming with the current setup is that 2 humans can take 6 heroes.
It's not the additional human that benefits teaming the most, it's the heroes.
After that, replacing heroes with humans benefits the team the most, but not as much as the additional human with heroes.
Consider this.
When adding one human, he has about double the value of a hero.
It's not possible to execute complex strategies with 6 AI heroes.
When more humans are added, the value of each human rises, since they are able to execute more complex strategies.
Assuming hench don't have value at all compared to humans and heroes, replacing them does not 'cost' anything.
Taking the assumptions stated above, the additional value of a human player to a H&H team would be 2.5 humans.
He replaces 4 hench with no value and adds himself (1) and 3 heroes (0.5 each).
Replacing one hero with the next human would add a value of about 0.5 (since heroes have the relative value of about 0.5 humans, taking one out costs 0.5). When adding more humans, the relative value of heroes decreases, making adding more humans more profitable.
So with a 7 human/1 hero team the relative value of the hero will be a lot lower than 0.5, more like 0.2 or 0.1. Adding an other human adds almost a full human.

So, in the current situation the first human that joins has a value of 2.5.
When that same human joins a team with 7 heroes, his value will not be 2.5, it will be 0.5 instead.
It would be somewhat less dramatic when the last 4 heroes work like hench (so no controls, only skills/equipment), but still the value of the additional human will not even be close to 1.

When the additional value of a human player is less than 1, without other compensation for teaming, it will affect not only PuGs but also guild, friend and forum teams.
Not because people rather play with 7 heroes, but because the effort of teaming is not worth it anymore except when teaming for social reasons only.
The moment people want to achieve goals (the large majority of the players, I think) 7 heroes > teaming.

This is one of my main reasons to be very carefull about the introduction of 7 hero teams.

The compensation for the "effort of teaming up" is that human players are supposed to be much better. The fact that they aren't is the fault of the human players, because frankly, the hero AI is terrible.

The assertion that most people want to achieve goals rather than social play is actually an argument in favor of seven heroes. After all, if these people don't care about social play, it doesn't matter if they're playing solo or not.

The takeaway here is that the social aspect of the game crumbled because of the people themselves - it has little to do with heroes.

Since adding 7 heroes will not fix that problem, and in fact adding more hero slots ignores the problem altogether, why is it being considered as an option, if the social aspect is really the crux of the matter?

Maybe instead of trying to ignore the problem and say "Oh what the hell, its hopeless, everyone's a moron but me, ill just go play with heroes.", we could be coming up with solutions for viable upgrades to the system that encourages partying with people.

For example.
If 2 people with heroes were doing GW:EN point farming, they get bonuses at random intervals, and the bonuses are awarded per person, not to the party.
Like, i would get a boss hunt, and my guildie would get rampage. It forces the party to have contradicting interests. One person has a rampage and wants to kill more baddies really fast, but i have to run across the map and get the bosses.

If you did GW:EN point farming solo, the bonuses only matter to you, and you dont have the problem of dealing with another person's contradicting interests.

This is one of those flaws in the game design that rewards solo play more. 7 heroes or H/H, the person soloing will have an easier time.

A simple fix would be that bonuses should be uniform for the whole team (with exception to those who are ineligible for bonuses).

=-=

GW has a very very poor social system. You enter towns and everyone is a stranger. Our friendlist is incredibly limited. Its difficult to keep track of people. Other MMOs have mail systems, message boards, and all sorts of ways to meet and keep track of people.

A better, more intuitive friendlist
Reduce the number of districts (someone proposed removing all districts except international districts in non-major outposts)
Improve the party search system more
Reward veterans for partying with less experienced players (the so called mentoring project someopne posted a while back)
Improved things for parties (like bosses that only spawn on full human parties)

The only time i get these sorts of vibes is during holiday events when theres LOTS of people in one town or in Pre. I want GW to be vibrant and fun and exciting again. It shouldnt BE a burden. It shouldnt be forced. But creating ways so good people can find the other good people, and ways to help the people who arent as good would be better for the gaming environment and not just for those who play the game solo.

If you have suggestions for improving social play, make a thread in the suggestions forum.

The reason seven heroes is being discussed is because it gives solo players better tools. If we're going to assume that people are goal-oriented, then it logically follows that the game should be built around achieving said goals.

Your improvements ignore most of the complaints about PuGs. A better party search feature, fewer districts, etc. wouldn't make any difference to me or many of the others in GW that have abandoned PuGing. Our negative experiences are a direct result of the people we played with, and has absolutely nothing to do with any in-game system for or against partying.

In point of fact, if a majority of players really wanted to party, they would find ways to do so regardless, and heroes/henchmen wouldn't even be a factor. The problem is that exactly the opposite is true - many players don't care to party, and adding seven heroes only helps them. Incentive systems are counterproductive - you want people to party because they like partying, not because they get better drops, more exp, etc.

If you want a good community, tweaking the game isn't enough. If the people don't get along, nothing the game does is going to matter.

But some of those goals were never meant to be achieved solo.

agree or disagree?

I don't know what Anet intended. However, it doesn't matter if they weren't meant to be achieved solo - is there any logical reason for why they couldn't be solo'd now?

Furthermore, seven heroes wouldn't be limited to elite areas - they would be available everywhere. Better tools for everyone, all the time.

Well there is still the factor of design. I think thats a pretty big factor.

People are mad about people forcing other people to play a certain way. How about forcing your playstyle on a design not meant for it?

If an area is designed to be beaten with difficult tactics (like team splitting), and such that they dont even have henchmen, wouldn't it be logical that such an area was not meant for solo players?

One area thats VERY difficult to do solo is Aurora Glade, since it requires running crystals to attune the pedestals, before the flagging system, i dont know if it was even possible to do it without another person.

But I really only refer to the Deep since thats the only area imo thats a true example of a required team ability in Guild Wars.

If Guild Wars was set up to allow soloing in the deep, you would require 11 heroes. Not 7. Now ive shown you what an interface looks like with 7...add 4 more to that. Lets look past the clutter, the 11 flags and controls.

Lets look at the mission itself. Even good humans players fail in this mission. Its not a very friendly mission and requires strict positioning and movement. Something very very difficult to do with heroes.

I dont consider 7 heroes better tools. Better tools for killing maybe. For exploring maybe. I've said before that adding 7 heroes changes the gameplay from an MMO to an RTS. I am serious about this.

Such a change affects ALL players because of a simple thing, the lowest common denominator. It changes the game dynamic.

Guild Wars missions and quests are already VERY VERY simplistic.

Go here, kill this guy.
Go here, grab this, kill this guy.
Go here kill this guy, but dont kill that guy.
Go here, keep this guy from dying, kill everyone else.
Bring this to that guy, then protect him and kill everyone else.

All very simple. It has to be simple so that solo players can do it without anyone's help.

I don't know about you, but to me, this is a hindrance to what the game could have been and limits the game design.

Guild Wars has possibilities for great missions that require teamwork and tactics and can produce a real challenge for its players.

REAL challenges, not based on mob numbers or mob strength. Because thats what heroes and henches can handle at the most.

We will never get puzzles that require any real team strategy, because of the solo factor. The Hidden City of Ahdashim has some interesting puzzles, but it can be solved by one player. Our dungeons will always be simplistic hack and slash.

Maybe thats why pugs are so dumb? Theres no way to weed out the weak because our challenges just require us to bulldoze our way through it?

-=--=-=
Burst: In reference to earlier, forcing someone (or perhaps bribing with benefits) to do something they dont want to do can be justifyable but only in situations that entail the greater good of the group.

as per your example, wanting people to have sex with others even if they dont want to. I can point you to http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6990802.stm

Japan also is facing a demographic crisis where their age pyramid will invert.

*shrug*

I know i cant change your mind since the PUG experience has been negative for you.

Well Lyra not adding 7 heroes wont make the missions any more complex or require any new tactics, because they still have to be accessible to those who use h/h.

And adding 7 wouldnt make them any worse.


We also accept there are a few places that cant be done with heroes alone, however it is only a few and a hell of a lot less than what the solo player cant currently do.


And really MMORPGs arent games that require a lot of intelligence or tactics. They are pretty much bog standard hack and slash. Yes there are a few inavative games out there but when you look at which online games are doing best it tends to be those that stick to the simple gameplay that people can just jump in and get going with.

And GW is one of these games, no matter how many heroes it does or doesnt have it will remain that way. It was built upon people being able to solo. That was the original design, people could choose.

It started with henchmen now we have 3 heroes. Anet certainly isnt moving backwards on the issue. And adding an extra 4 heroes would be a good step forwards again.

They are not going to give you 7 heroes no matter how much you discuss it. They don't care. It is pointless to even continue to try to sway them to do so. Save your energy for grinding titles, you need it. Besides, if you are going to get ANET to listen to issues again, Heroes are the LEAST of your worries.

Then why are they so ... anti-party oriented.

Reputation farming bonuses were mentioned and they are most illustrative: even if people are doing same thing, game system still forces them apart for better efectiveness.

If there was "Eyewitness" efect ("For 180 seconds, whenever you gain repuration points, you get 1 extra point for each player in party") for title grind stuff, you would see a LOT of parties with 8 humans. To the extreme that they would refuse to fill in rest of team with heroes if not enough people are out there.

There is a lot of stuff possible:

i.e. "Mentor bonus": If you already finished mission on highest reward level (or got protector title), you get Y gold for each party member who reaches new reward level on mission (bonus per reward level, scaling per dificulty of mission). You would have experts start parties, coordinate them and pull them throught missions, because if he suceeds on master reward he can get as much as Y gold * 3 * 7. if y is as low as 100g, you get 2100 gold. Also, profit does not go down that much if you have several mentors. ...

You can have a lot of neat bonuses for playing with people and helping out, but this game gives none.

Not that this stuff would make me party more, but it would be neat, and for sure a lot more helpfull than party search or so for people liking humans.

Yes we are.. I just got off the phone with Jeff O'brian, and he said its a done deal, we should have them by Christmas.

I don't fully agree with this statement.
I believe a lot of people still do want to team up (with good players).
There are two problems here:
- There is no way to know who the good players are except when you have played with them before
- It's faster to load up H&H than to wait for a human player to show.
Everyone has limited time, so loading H&H for things that can be done without too much trouble is far more beneficial than waiting for a player.


Here we go again.
Areas the solo player can't currently do (except farming):
Deep, Urgoz's, DoA, FoW, UW.

Areas the solo player can do, but may require a lot of effort (too much for some, but they can be done):
Every area/mission with hench available.

That's a good question.
I really don't know.


I'm so going to hate myself for saying this....

Just look for bambi, wolfie, tigger (btw, I don't even have bambi) emotes or other PvP titles and you know that player is not the worsed you can get.
The only current way to tell someone is most probably not a dumb player is looking at PvP titles.

I'm afraid there is no way this is going to change, except when A-net implements a title track that can't be gotten without the player actually active participating in hard challenges.
Preferably with a fixed set of skills for each challenge, so people have to rely on playing skill.
The first challenges can be solo, so people can get used to the skills.
The later challenges should be teamed, where people can even team up with guildies/alliance/friends/PuG. Heroes not allowed. The only way to beat the challenges is for every player to participate, there is no way someone can AFK and wait for the rest to finish.

Titles 1-5 could be the solo-ones.
These show you have mastered several builds for your profession in increasing difficult environments.
For good PvE players, those can be skipped.
Titles 6-10 are the team titles with increasing difficulty.
Here the player has to show he not only masters the builds, but can also play them in a team.
The title does not count for title track and can be enabled without affecting other titles, so people can see your 'rank'.

This would probably generate the same discrimination as fame, but it seems it's the only way to weed out the worst players.

jos while you could go in to some areas with h/h.
Who is really going to be taking a warrior with less than 8 skills and charge on their bar into HM?

Yes we can currently access these areas, but why should the solo player not be able to take a decent team into these areas?

We cant even take 64 skills into some areas! (By some areas thats actually most of the game, over half the game at anyrate)

Anet has already done what they could to help out pug, allowing people to easily jump from American to Europe servers so they can find people online when there district/region is not active.

Now were asking for them to help out us solo(ie hench/Hero) players.

Forcing people to PUG does not improve there skill lever and certainly will not improve thier enjoyment of the game. If they like pugs they will use them regardless of how many heros are availible and if not then giving them the full use of those heros will keep them playing the game and increase the chances of them joining a pug.

By decreasing our enjoyment of the game your forcing many people to quit, decreasing your player base and reducing the number of people who might potentially join a pug or even a Guild.

Yes i did bring up the reputation farming as to one of those things that needs to be fixed so that it awards the whole party the same thing.

I identified the problem (The bonuses are random for each party member) and suggested a solution that directly applies to the problem, instead of saying "Screw playing with people, it works better if i go solo."

Broken game mechanics and unfair gameplay quirks get ignored with that kind of mindset.

Jos:

I remember when Hardmode was announced. People were siked. Theres been this thread on Sardelac about player suggestions on how to make the game more challenging. I thought we were going to get some nice tough challenges.

some suggestions posted were:
-dual class monsters
-balanced monster parties
-randomized monster skillsets (among a pool of good skillsets)
-monsters who kite

what did we get instead?
-dual elite monsters
-built in IAS/Speed buff
-increased monster health/energy

I mean really its the cheap way out. It didnt require players to be better, since previous tactics worked, it just took a little longer.

HM was supposed to be our barometer for PvE Player skill. But sadly, its not.

Crom:

How can you say enjoyment is decreasing when there hasnt been any changes against solo players?

I dont see how you can say your enjoyment is decreasing because of the lack of 7 heros, since theres ALWAYS been a lack of 7 heroes. I hate to say it, but the status quo seems to be in favor of solo-ers as it stands, with exceptions to areas without hench.

Now, if Anet was taking away hero slots, i would definitely agree with you there.

I think this all really stems from the addition of the GW:EN heroes (giving potential for interesting team builds) that people wanna use more of their heroes, which is an understandable reaction. But there hasnt been a change against solo-player types as it stands (correct me if im wrong please).

Anet isnt taking away any fun, but rather taking away potential for MORE fun.

The fact that heroes can't use PvE only skills does seem to be a change against solo players.

Because the game evolved while solo play didn't. For example playing with H/H teams in Hard Mode isn't exactly as fun as in Normal Mode, since you're confronted by the limitations of henches a lot more often there.

Heroes could never use lightbringer gaze.
Heroes could never use sunspear rebirth signet.

Whats the change? This was added when heroes were added.

The fact that heroes WERE added is a change FOR solo players.

Evolved, ya right.

I just posted at exactly what changed in HM. Thats not an evolution, thats just an increase in level cap.

The tactics dont change, the bad guys just hit harder. They didnt get smarter or require new tactics. Just spam your skills more.

So if Anet were to introduce 100 PvE only skills which only heroes can use, the team players wouldn't complain since it doesn't change anything for them?

Henches spamming Healing Breeze won't help you in Hard Mode.

Are PvE skills unfair to solo players?

It seems to me, heroes were added for solo players.
PvE skills were added for team players for use in hardmode.

I dont really see PvE skills being added for heroes, just as there wont be any more hero slots added, because it does lean too much towards solo play.

Thats purely speculation of course.

I find H/H teams adequate, albeit slow.

Some missions are impossible, but that brings us back to what the original design was intended.

There is a difference between a decent team and a team of 7 heroes.
Part of the discussion is that people want to use their pimped heroes and not buffed hench.

However, a decent team would be possible to achieve with a buff to hench, which I don't oppose.

Hench with less than 8 skills on the bar?
Well, in a lot of situations I run heroes with a number skills disabled.
That's because the AI can't handle the 8 skills without using the wrong ones or draining energy.
Less than 8 skills does not have to be a problem, however, the remaining skills should be a fair combination. That's where certain hench fail.

As primary mesmer, I know this all too well.

The HM title track does say something about the player, but there is no way to tell if he got it by playing or with support of a good guild (the same could be true for fame, I guess).
However, HM titles are titles that count for me, only less than PvP titles.
Having said that, no HM titles here.
Guess I've been helping guildies too much (HM guild)

Looking at it objectively then it leans towards team play. It's the solo player who is limited in his choice of what build he can run since he's stuck with henches. However, you can't solve the problems with team play by putting limitations on solo play. This entire 7 heroes debate shows what happens when you try to do so.

I guess they could change every hench skill bar in all the campaigns and give them runes and better weapons. They could also let us use 4 more heroes that act like henches, a mechanic that already exists in the game. The latter seems like the most logical option.

And at the same time, he doesnt have to deal with pug bs, he can afk for as long as he wants, he can disconnect and not worry about people stealing his drops, he doesnt have to worry about other player's latency. And all mission designs (in normal mode) are made with the solo player as the maximum, using Hero/Hench.

You cant solve the problems on team play by removing the limit on solo play either.

Draikin, but noone here actually asks for PvE skills on H/H.

Its not worth it.

Of course not, like I said they are different problems that need different solutions. I'm just saying that the limitations on solo play only hurt solo play and do nothing for team play, so what reason is there to keep them?

Neither am I, I was just using this as an example of how solo players can't customize their team in the way a team of 8 real players can.

Exactly...give rewards to groups who already get the rewards that solo players can't get? What does that solve? Nothing...absolutely nothing. That's not an incentive to party with people for socializing, that's an incentive to party for rewards....again it's all about the business which is what PUGs are about now anyway. That wouldn't change a damn thing...people who do not like joining PUGS will continue to not join PUGs.

The problem with PUGS is the PUGS themselves...something nothing in the game can fix...it's the people not the game. No matter what you change in game...people are not going to suddenly decide "OH I better PUG now!".

"Promoting Socialing" is the same as "Forced Grouping"....You can't force people to socialize if they don't want to...thus when you try to "Promote Socializing" all you get is a group of people who want to get the job done, don't care to "Socialize", and do it with as little grief as possible...ie The current state of PUGs. NOTHING will fix that. There are some people who want to PUG...and things should be done to help them find others who want to PUG....but then there are others who don't want to PUG and just want to have fun by playing the game...those people should be able to do that unrestricted....and 7 heroes should be allowed for that exact reason.

They gave us Henchmen...we asked for more...They gave us Heroes...and now guess what...We are asking for more. The game design has been developing towards 7 heroes since the beginning...just freaking give in and give it to us so we can play the game and HAVE FUN. That's what this is all about...Having Fun. Why can't solo players have fun and play the ENTIRE game solo?

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO AND A BIG FAT NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

heros ruined the social life of Guild Wars as it is. its loosing the MMO part of the MMORPG.

People complain that if heros removed they have to play with sucky henchmen, well why not play with real people? then they say all real people suck, PUGs suck and all the good people jsut take heros/henchmen. Well if heros didnt exist then the good players would use PuGs too. why not try to have fun with other people instead of having the opinion "im 1337 all other suck"

Seriously Guild Wars was supposed to be played with other people. All the whiners turned it into a solo play game.

Actually Wild Karrde it was advertised as a game you could play solo. You had the choice.

And no heroes didnt ruin it, before heroes I used henchmen.
Even without 7 heroes people will still avoid pugs. Some because of time or afk reasons, others because they just dont want to.

All this would do is enable them to play how they want at the same level as people who choose to play with other players.

PUGing isn't fun. Remove heroes, remove henchmen, and we just won't play at all. Get it? It's really simple, nothing you do to this game will ever make us play with you. Whine, cry, scream, call your mommy, it won't make any difference. People that want to PUG, PUG. People that don't want to PUG don't PUG. Heroes didn't create this situation, 7 heroes isn't going to make it any different.

Most people want play MMO's alone or with friends/guildies the bulk of the time, a design that doesn't allow for that is a design doomed to economic failure. Why do you think that even true MMORPG's like WoW are so soloable?

What I don't understand is why they even bothered to improve hench skillbars (for gwen). The only reason I can think of for limiting to 3 heroes, is to force players to play with "bad" hench, which ultimately encourages them to socialize. The problem is, the new hench bars are reasonably well thought out, and are probably better than what your average pve'er puts on his hero skill bars. It's just a weird contradiction. I mean if you're going to give us hench which start to mimic hero skillbars, just allow heroes already.

It was dead before heroes were introduced...I played almost all of Prophecies and Factions using nothing but Henchmen. Heroes simply made the game I played a bit closer to what a human group can already do. It's still far far far from what a human group can do, but it is an improvement. 7 heroes still wouldn't be equal to what a human group can do
...but then again heroes don't complain when I decide to take a break
...Heroes don't run around the map agroing groups far away from the one you're fighting
...Heroes don't suddenly go afk leaving the group to suffer
...Heroes don't leach on missions, contributing as little as possible to the success of the mission and even contributing to the failure
...Heroes don't have problems with disconnects
...Heroes don't berate you when you don't use the right skillbar
...Heroes don't complain and moan when you make the slightest mistake
...Heroes don't show one skillset in town then use a completely different one in mission or an explorable area
...Heroes don't draw genitalia on the radar
...Heroes use the skills you give them....they are as good as their AI allows and the skills you equip.
...Heroes DO THEIR JOB AND KEEP QUIET

...letting me play the game and have fun....should I go on?

see above....and....

most...and I emphasize MOST PUG players are there just to get the job done. They do not care about socializing like Guild groups do. If heroes didn't exist...ie just like before they existed....the people who hated PUGs would use Henchmen. And who said we thought we were the top players in the game? No one...it's a simple fact that PUGs are usually not well organized...the skill levels are a mixed bag...and the maturity levels are a mixed bag. That doesn't translate to meaning "im 1337 all other suck"...that means we obviously see the difference in skill levels in the PUG groups relative to our own skill level.

When I said MOST PUGs suck...that is a fact. MOST PUGs I have been a part of, have at least a couple bad traits. That does not mean all PUGs are bad. That doesn't mean the groups can't be well organized and efficient or even fun. What that does mean is when participating in a PUG you are likely to find at least a couple of the bad traits that turn people off to PUGS. This means that unless you are lucky...you will most likely find the typical PUG which is generally not fun to be a part of because of those bad traits.

When I join a PUG I'm hoping to have fun AND get the job done.
...you will never find me taking a break unless it's an absolute emergency or I am risking my job or something. Then again I try to play in PUGs only when I know I can play for the entire time without interruption.
...I don't agro unless told to do so...or unless the group moves as a whole.
...If I'm having problems with disconnects I do not join PUGS...I find something to do with Heroes/Henchmen until the dc's subside.
...I don't ask people to ping their skill bars. I show them the respect I would expect. I expect that they are competent enough to put together their own skill bar...just like I believe I am. If someone asks to see my skill bar I will show it...if they make suggestions I'll consider them...I'm always open to suggestions. Demands, however, have me hitting the Leave Group button faster than anything in this game. Goes back to the respect thing.
...If someone makes a mistake you won't find me complaining about it. If they make repeated mistakes I make suggestions as to what they should do differently. If they still don't learn...I make do. Only in extreme cases will you find me giving someone an earful about their mistakes.
...If I show a skillbar I stick to it or let my group know my change in skills...a group won't be good if people suddenly change the group dynamics without people knowing about it.
...Do I really need to comment about drawing genitalia on the radar? I mean...seriously.
...Unless a group needs a leader I do my job to the best of my ability and keep quiet unless input is needed.

I'm not against socializing in a group...not at all. I've had a hell of a lot of fun in guild groups before....if I can enjoy a PUG I will absolutely try to have fun in the group. The fact is the vast majority of PUGs do not desire socializing...they are there simply to get the job done. If it's a decision between a human group who isn't having fun and is just there to get the job done (but with some of the bad traits mentioned) and a Hero/Hench group...I would think that choice would be completely obvious.

The game was designed from the start to allow people to solo otherwise they wouldn't have allowed people to fill their groups completely with henchmen. They would have limited the number of henchmen like they are limiting heroes if they didn't want to allow people to solo.

One of the main reasons I play this game is because I CAN play it solo....and who are you to tell me how to play MY game.

And therein is the problem with the attitude of the person you are replying too - you can not force me (or you) to PUG.

If you dropped the hench and hero there will not be a golden age of pugs, there will be far far far fewer little blue dots in town. In fact, given that most hench/hero players PUG every once in a while you will most likely find it *harder* to get a group. There are other games out there, none of us have to play this one. If you remove the method people enjoy playing they aren't going to suddenly play a game they dislike, they will move elsewhere.

PUGs died well before Factions was released and there is little that can be done to reverse this as it is a community problem, not a technical one. As much as a team full of humans running amok with 8 siege Destroyers, a team full of higher level PvE skills, Hard Mode, or any of the other things Anet has done that makes a human team SIGNIFICANTLY more effective than a H/H it has done *nothing*to improve them. In fact PUG usage continues to decline in the face of it.

Too often people think they can twiddle one little bit and have nothing else change, nor is this particular to this game but happens in real life in general. Generally speaking it is called a "false dilemma" in logic - there are more choices than "PUG" and "hench/hero". Hope and feelings are used to decide this, not reality.

Oh boy, I lol to that sentence, I do play with other people thank you very much but only if they have the same tag as me or in the alliance. Guild and Alliance chats are always active as well.

Seriously though if I really want to be social I would go to the pub with my friends, tomorrow night or Saturday's night. But hey if social life for you is about chatting to random people in an online game then good for you. What the heck do I know, right?

It doesn't matter if it 3 or 7 heores, I still won't pugs. Hell, give me 1 hero to use and I will fill up the team with henchmen. Limited 3 heroes in order to encourage people to PUGs, my arse.

I'm all to give freedom for people to choose.
Even if I had the choice of 7 heros + stacking PVE skills on them, I would still play with my guildies.
That's my e-friends who are keeping me playing this game. I got fed up with solo play a long time ago.

Agree, I think we should encourage people to join guilds rather than relying on PuG. Give GUILD more meaning in Guild Wars. By putting the right people into right guilds, it would bring better social aspect for those who care about interacting with other people. For those who dont and rather stay in their seclusive guilds, they can have their 7 heroes. Look at XoO, we need more guilds like them by creating community within the guild/alliance.

Say like how about ingame guild recruiter NPC which gives you list of guild and people who looking for guild? Spamming 1 line of guild recruiting in ALL chat is not good enough.

Bit off topic right there but the real social aspect can only be found in guild, not PuG.

Like me, this is the attitude of why most people don't want to be with PUGs: Not because they suck at the game, but because we've been subject to some horrid, horrid treatment from wretched players. I've lost count of how many times I've been verbally abused and harassed, but I think it's near the thousands, now. Fortunately, with henchmen, I don't have to deal with that. The heroes just make it easier for people on me.

I think that ANet may've gotten the wrong idea about why a lot of people use heroes. I know for me and for *many* others, we're doing because the social aspect of Guild Wars sucks.