A discussion on 7 heroes

When we play peeps and heroes we generally do it with team speak. we occasionally play 3 peeps and sometimes 4 peeps. The h/h play tends to spike the enemy one at a time. Flagging can get quite tricky especially if you want to make the henchman go one place and the heroes stay with you. Obviously apart from one or two gain sayers it would seem that Anet should consider that their community is very disappointed in not being able too play with 7 heroes.

The only reason why seven heroes has never been implemented is because people for PuG's are slim enough. If everyone could bring a full team of heroes, then the only choice for many would be to only use Henchman. And many henchmen, as previously stated, absolutely sucks. (Devona's Charge really pisses me off). Some people have neither Nightfall nor GWEN, and don't have access to heroes.

That being said, I am all for having a seven heroes. However, this would absolutely SUCK if someone did not have access to any Heroes at all.

PvE skills oped indeed but heros make up for it

Those Tyrian henchmen are good at Charge! chaining, makes capping all of the skills in the shiverpeaks a lot faster.

Another one of these threads? Wow.

kk....

"7 heroes would be great because pugs are scrub and i use hero/hench, so why not give me my 7 heroes so i can play with skillbars"

ANOTHER one? Better look at first post's date, champ.
O, and thx for bumping it.

Indeed thats the only argument people here are using.

But well done for not reading the rest of the thread just incase someone had thought of another reason.

If I had access to more heroes, I'd be picking up one or two Real players in every outpost. Simply because my PuG win would be a guaranty. However, with only three heroes, it's just too painful--benevolence loses to frustration. . .

It's still alive...

Well, I have to admit I've changed my point of view a bit on this subject.
While in the past I said no (for various reasons) to 7 heroes, I think there are some arguments for allowing a full team of heroes.

Most notably, full Ursan (UB) teams changed the gameplay a lot in favor of teaming up with more humans. The players did not improve, it's all about pressing 1,2,1,1,2,1,1,1,2 now but that does not really matter.
People have a valid reason to team up with humans, thanks to UB.

Where do full hero teams fit in?
My main objection was that full hero teams would be preferred too much (timewise) compared to adding more humans.
This is also solved by UB. No more arguing about builds.
Just make sure you have the elite and a reasonable Norn rank.

Now it would be no more than reasonable to allow people that don't like to play UB to play with 7 heroes.
Since they still have a hard time to team up and that got even harder since a lot of the GW community seems to be playing UB anyway, making it harder to find people for a regular team.

Is this reaction a bit over the top?
Perhaps.
However, I do feel the introduction of the Ursan skills made a huge difference in favor of the full human teams and since the teaming problem was my main objection against full hero teams I now don't oppose against full hero teams as I did before.
I still have some reasons why it should not be introduced, but those are small compared to the teaming one.

Correct up unto this point, but its irrelevant. Has nothing to do with what I posted. Better henchman AI was warranted in some cases back then. There were still decent PUGs aplenty, as well as just about as many bad ones, players who used all henchmen, all-guild groups etc. There was, however, better balance in terms of team creation.

I never said PUG jerks were not a or the reason PUGs as of late have failed on a greater margin. I simply pointed to heroes as a cause, since a dam doesnt break instantly, but there becomes a breaking point. Heroes were introduced and the need, the desire to group with other players nearly vanished to the point where you're lucky to find it should you desire it. I'll go so far as to say heroes were the breaking point, but I respect the opinion that they were merely a contributing factor.

No you dont. Why would you? What does this really have to do with heroes anyway? Would I mind the removal of all AI? No, not really, but that isnt the topic, nor is it what I said.

So what did you do before heroes came along? Just start playing the game recently? Its a rhetorical, given both your account join date and the fact that I recognize you from forum times ages ago. Obviously you PUGged, played in guild-only groups and/or used all-henchmen or part henchmen groups as we all did back then.

The argument that the removal of heroes ends the game for everyone seems to conveniently forget that we played the game quite well in the two chapters prior to their arrival. It also seems to conveniently forget that most of us prefer the days back then to the days now, though many people wont consider even possibly to thinking about that fact that as fun or easy as heroes might make things now, they contributed to some of this demise.

I seem to recall Prophecies and Factions playing just fine. I seem to recall pursuing six of my Protector's titles all in PUGs by choice, because I enjoyed PUGs, and found them largely successful. I wouldnt dream of doing that now.

I respect your opinion. I merely gave mine. I can just as easily call your assessment "completely wrong". It is not so black and white as to be that simple. Were I completely wrong, this wouldnt even be a topic, let alone how many pages of it now?

In order to have 7 Heros you would have to change the design of the user interface for the inventory and the skills panels, and probably many other things we don't know about that happen behind the scenes. That sounds like a lot of work and I seriously doubt that A.net would pull staff of GW2 development to do that.

For the pimptieth time:

7 heroes activated only for HARD-MODE
3 heroes activated for NORMAL-MODE (as it is right now)

END OF STORY.

I can go into an area with 2 peeps and 6 heroes. The other peep can leave and I run with 6 heroes. The other three heroes then behave like henchman. They could quite easily allow me to choose 3 main heroes that I can micro manage and the other 4 behave like henchmen. This with no interface changes at all. I think that would be quite acceptable.

Will someone close this allready -.-

Why? Because people like yourself keep posting messages like the quoted?

If you dont like the idea feel free to say you disagree and explain why, but there is no need to ask for a thread to be closed because you dont agree with the topic.

It could be the fact that this thread keeps getting ressed, but like Ursan is an issue that keeps arising and thus conversing about it should be encouraged. The only difference is that Ursan is a much more heated discussion and is why threads revolving around it keep getting closed.

I made a screenshot with 7 heroes bars. Its posted somewhere on this site. Its quite busy and really takes away alot of screen.

If you had 7 heroes bars up on a 800x600 monitor it would be almost impossible to manage them while being able to see what youre even fighting against.

You don't have to manage them all all the time. Just micromanage those who need it at a certain moment.


Being able to set up 7 skill bars the way you want would allready be nice.
Getting 7 flags would be a next step.
Being able to micromanage them the one after that.
Being able to use PvE only skills on heroes would be the next one.

Being able to use your own other characters as heroes and switch the primary focus to them (the character you were playing would then become a hero) would be the final step.

Sheer luxury, even then the Factions Only or Prophecies Only players could have "heroes".

Yeah, and people without Factions should get Alliance Battles and people without prophecies should get access to Pre-Searing or Sorrow's Furnace.

But at least people against it have the biggest argument void.

,,7 heroes would be too easy!''

It can't be easier than with 5 ursans and 3 monks. Or any other combination with Ursan.

As for screen clutter now that we have quick keys for all our heros we can eliminate all of the Hero skill bars from our screens.

Not to mention the simple fact that giving them the correct skillbars means they will act better than hench and micro-managing really won't be an issue unless your runing a massively integrated party build that requires each char to use a certain skill at a certain time on a certain target---if that is the case can you think of a better learning tool for GvG than giving us 7 heros????

Nice, I thought along the same lines as you - and in fact, your last point is exactly what I told my guildies once. The ability to bring your exisiting characters (not the one you are playing in) as "heroes" would be extremely amazing. Heck, I would even stick with 3 "heroes" if I could bring my 3 other characters with elite black armor/sun glasses/....lol

Ofcourse, I don't see that getting implemented, but 7-heroes idea is highly reasonable for hard-mode, so that people without GW:EN and who don't have consumables or the dam URSAN have a better chance at maxing the Guardian/Vanquisher titles. The game is unbalanced as of now, and people without GW:EN are left an outcast, making it difficult for them to join Ursan-based-mindless-killing hard-mode-made-easy PvE groups.

BTW, I do own GW:EN and all other GW packs.

I figured out a "possible" problem with 7 heroes. I'm not sure if this is possible ,but maybe a single person will go and try to do GVG's with 7 heroes and lose on purpose to lower a rival guilds rank down/up(whichever is worse)

7 heroes would not be allowed in PvP.

There is already a limit on the number of AI you can take into PvP, that wouldnt be changed.

7 heroes would only effect PvE.

Having 7 hero teams go against each other in a skirmish would be awesome, though : )

I'd had that same thought too - this would be awesome, but I hold out really no hope at all that we'll ever see it. It's one of those "if I could design the next GW" ideas I often think about.

Sadly, many builds that work well for a player don't work very well with hero AI without a high amount of micromanagement. With 7 heroes I think I'd tend to lean toward builds that the AI can handle by themselves. This would take some of the fun away from switching the focus over to those characters.

To mitigate that, here's another idea that will likely never see the light of day: If we had the ability to switch focus and play as our other party characters, naturally the AI would take over for the player we just left. It would be cool if the AI could "watch and learn" over time how we use a certain build. For example, what order we usually use skills, which stances/enchants we try to always keep up, etc. Then when the AI takes over, it would do its best to mimic that behavior.

I would like to point out that "interface clutter" is nonissue:

People want competent skill bars and equipment from heroes. Flag and Minibar is luxury, 4 extra heroes could exist without GUI aditions, and you don't usually even have reason and desire micro more than 3 heroes.

Anyone running 3+3 heroes can tell you that.

Besides, word is, anet experimented with 7 heroes, so gui work was already done.

Agreed. The four "hench"-style Heroes would simply function like the current henchmen, on autopilot, only with the skill sets and weapons, etc., you had given them before leaving the outpost. No accessible skill bars or flags needed.

As the GW1 population continues to thin, I would really love to see an idea like this implemented. It would infuse a new level of fun into the game, imo.

I would really, I mean, you have to spend extra money on those heroes, so it may help keep the economy in balance seeing as you'll probably want your heroes as UBERPWNZERSWTF as possible.

Personally, I ALWAYS H/H everything. I take myself, 3 heroes, and 4 henchies. And I still normally pass through the mission, and if i had 7 heroes, well lets just say 2 support rits, 3 MMS , 2 monks, and a SY! Para will be pretty WTFPWNED?

I would love to see this. It'd be fun to come up with different teams, etc.

As was mentioned already, the "it'd make PvE too easy" argument means nothing anymore because of one word...Ursan. PvE can NOT get any easier or more unbalanced than that.

Even if the last four heros functioned the same way henchies do, it'd still be interesting.

I 100% agree. If heroes continue to not be able to use PvE-only skills, than having 7 heroes is not at all imbalanced as compared to a team of Ursan human players.

Anet... Gaile... if you're reading this thread, please consider 7 heroes to be one of the "most requested" features from your gaming community. I know you've already said PvE is not designed or balanced for 7 heroes, but I believe we in this thread have proven why that is not the case.

not the community at all

QUOTE JEFF STRAIN NOT GAILE

many year consistant proven marketing fact not just his opinion.

these sites let alune these threads are not the main playerbase and they already gave a flat no with zero qualifiers on it.

I already thought too that when Gaile said in LA a few days back that 7 heroes would be imbalanced, how come they allow Ursan?

Anet dont have a clue about balance in PVE, 7 heroes would just make it extremely fun.

I'm sure you're right, but when a person contacts the support team, they always reply back "please use the community forums such as guildwarsguru etc." This really is the only outlet we have to try to communicate with the Anet folks.

Also they may have already said no - that's fine - we're just trying to change their minds. Who knows, they may just relent. As bhavv mentioned above, 7 heroes would be just for PvE, where skills like Ursan have already made it somewhat imbalanced. This is not about balance - it's about fun, and giving the gamers what they want.

Actually, my questioning people ingame has turned out that most (excluding PuG players, whose opinions don't really matter in this debate anyways) H/H players would like pure 7 heroes.

Most of the people I talk to ingame would like 7 heroes, around 75%+ of the last two full alliances I have been in (A farmers alliance and a HM alliance).

7 Heroes with PvE only skills ftw !

And no I won't be running Ursan on them.
(well maybe sometimes, but not usually.)

/signed for truth.

Quoted for great injustice.

Players who play the game in a variety of ways, which includes membership in a guild, having an active friends list, farming, H/H and PUGing, do have a say in this debate, because no one PUGs exclusively.

Heroes are the cause of the collapse of the more sociable aspects of the game, like it or not. I enjoy using heroes from time to time, and H/H with my guild leader through all of Legendary Guardian and Master of the North. There's no reason, having done that, to need seven heroes, provided one other player is playing the game before they kill the switch.

anet is the greatest idiot for not giving us from the begin on 7 hero parties ...

really, it can't be more easier, than ursanway with 6 ursans and 2 monks -.-

heroes CAN't use pve only skills, so they have a limitation over real players, which makes them much worser, not to mention, that the AI of heroes is DUMBER than the one of henchmen...even henchmen can run finally out of aoes, stupid heroes need to get all flagged first, before they move their asses out of the aoe -.-.

The only advantage that you have with 7 hero parties is having full control over your party and that you can create a complete group build for your personal likings with heroes using all useful skills for the thing, that you want to do with your heroes and not stupid henchmen, which run builds, which are way to weak or unfiitin for the areas ...

Their reason that they can't give us 7 heroes is just a retarded excuse for their inability and laziness to correct their stuff to make it a better gameplay for all casual gamers with not much time.
Their heard here only on the small amount of whining idiots, which fear, that this change would "destroy" GW and that then nobody would pug anymore ... but THAt is wrong ...

people, which want to pug, will do so and will ever search for other people to play with together, for this reason you go also into GUILDS... to play together with your guild mates then ...

But anet should stop punishing those people for not having enough time, to search endless in towns for parties -.-