A discussion on 7 heroes

^ totally agree with that

To which I say, see my earlier post.

I've got a better idea:
Increase party size to 20, and allow all hero parties.

Also allow full hero teams in ALL PvP.

Also, again, allow at lease 5 heroes in that dungeon that involves Kilroy.


There we go, game ruined.

You're heavily exaggerating the concept of Hero parties.
All it would be is PvE areas. And right NOW, two people in a party can add 3 heroes, making an extremely near-all hero group right there. This could make it so One person could add 5, the other person could cover the rest. Or something.

Are there currently any areas (excluding Elite Missions/Zones) that cannot be completed with the current H/H setup? I personally can't think of any.

That's not the proper issue to be paying attention to here.Yes, all areas can be completed with heroes and hench, that's a fact - but not the pressing matter.

As stated earlier, the question posed by those for 7 heroes asked "why not?" The "why not" originally had to do with balance, but that's pretty much thrown out the window with the existence of PvE skills and Ursan Blessing.

I am dying for the day where i can run a full synergistic team. pretty much impossible to do with pugs.

pug type A: lfg rank 9/10 ursans + cons and 2 HB
pug type B: lfg 3 SH, 2 monks, 1 obs tank, 1 SS

What if i want to run a team full of mesmers and assassins, where does one go for that?

Though 7 heroes would be an interesting idea (since there are team builds I'd like to experiment with), I do think it would totally destroy any remaining reason for social interaction via grouping. Yes, I do understand there are those out there that do not care about that aspect of the game. But I think we have to look at what would be good for the game as a whole. After all, it's pretty much an MMO-style of game with a community of players. Not to mention that it'd be a huge clutter on the interface to have 7 hero windows open at once. =)


Just my $0.02...

What community?
The only community GW has is forum based.
And having 7 heroes available wouldn't influence that in the slightest.

The "destroying the community" is a tired old argument against seven heroes. Pugs are hard to come by as it is, for those that are willing to, and there are many in GW that refuse to pug, me included...because for the most part pugs suck. Guild groups is a different story, and most people that guild group would continue to do so even if 7 heroes were implemented.

Having 7h or not having them isn't going to help pugs, period. Nobody likes to pug, and there's a reason for it. But handicapping people that choose not to is BS imo.

qft. i run sabway + 4 hench most of the time, simply because i don't want to fail because some nawb runs ahead and aggros 8 groups at the same time, or if another noob is leeching off the team and not doing anything.

you can't flag pug members

I'm all for the 7 hero team, mebbe just limit it to HM or put some kind of restrictions on where it can be done (mebbe not so much in elite areas)

Hey, I just thought they could sell it as a bonus pack!

As far as I know, there are 4 million GW players, if Arena.net made all the heroes available for, let's say, 17$, they would cash big time. They should think about it, there's no more money to be made out of GW. And when GW2 comes out, GW will be almost empty.

Heh, I'll pay 50$ for it!

I would find 40 euro (about 50$) okay. It's not cheap but compared to the fun it will give me, it would be more than worth it.

No Life Alert! No Life Alert!

Anyways there are henchies you can take extra so you don't need any more heroes because there are enough henchies to fill the slots. Be different if there weren't any henchies but there are so no need for Anet to waste resources on more NPC AI's.

And this is what happens when you get a fanatic who exaggerates his agenda. lol Too funny "nobody" likes to pug hahaha that's a good one, but, untrue of course.

Unless your atempting to get Vanquishing and Guardian titles, then finding a pug can be a full days work...all in vaine too when one noob over agros causing a party wipe.

this thread should be renamed...


Immediate Implementation of 7 Heroes


screw the discussion.

When the first game came out, I had many times where PUGing just didn't cut it. I didn't play the game again until Heroes were released, and 99% of my characters are from Nightfalls solely because of the Heroes.

I do H/H in 99% of the areas, sometimes having to go with a human player to accomplish very complex tasks. I would love to have the ability to run 7 heroes.

Heroes make the game for me. I hope they are implemented in GW2, maybe even more than GW1.

Has it occurred to you that you may be networking improperly? The vast majority of players that might be interested in clearing zone/farming faction/doing HM mission/etc. likely are NOT located in the town in question.

(good) Groups get put together from friends lists and guild rosters. You need to be associated with a group of people that wants to do the same stuff you do. If you need to improve your playskill/manner in order to get into a guild where people want to do what you want to do and are capable of executing it, or to make friends worth playing with...then you need to do that.

*News Flash*

7/8 Hero parties are Overpowered by 6 Ursans and 2 HB monks.

But 7 heroes don't fit AN's vision of the game.
And only god knows what is this vision.

Based on recent evidence, its all about pack of noble Melursus numbingly shredding enemies while pair of listless clerics oversees them.

Has it occurred to you that maybe I don't have time to network together 8 live people to do a 20 minute mission?

Some of us don't play for 4-6hours at a time, we just log on and get straight to the fighting then log off afterwards. Hard to imagine for some but its really true.

When I have time to kill I do use my guildies/friends, that often means setting up a time several days in advance or waiting 20-30minutes for them to finish what they are in the middle of when I log on.

Because of my work I rarely have a guarenteed time of day or even day of the week when I can log on to play. Often I just have 30-90minutes to kill so I log on and pick something to do. If there are people availible then great, if not I have to H/H and hope its not a waste of time.

Join a large PvE guild with 9 other large guilds in alliance. That should be plenty of players.

Why should I be forced to leave the Guild I started 3years ago just because were a small group of friends?

Most of our experiances with Alliances have been less then fun.

It doesn't according to Gaile's anti-7-heroes statement. But it does according to the back of the original GW box which states something like, "Play with your friends or ours" and makes it clear that you are supposed be able to solo the game if you choose to. The GW box promotes soloing if you choose to, and doesn't have any statements about soloing being semi-gimped, like it is via only 3 Heroes. Granted Heroes weren't out at the time the box was made and the box calls henchmen "skillful". But the point is, if the box says you are intended to be able to choose to solo, they they shouldn't introduce arbitrary limits to Heroes that attempt to semi-gimp the ability to solo.

Anet trying to force people to PUG by gimping Heroes to 3 doesn't work anyhow. Those who hate to PUG are not going to ever PUG because of the 3 Hero limit. All the limit does is tick them off by making them have to use 4 incompetently-equipped henchmen along with 3 Heroes. Which while that is extremely annoying, they are still 10 000x better and less annoying than PUGs. The 3 Hero limit accomplishes nothing in terms of "promoting social play" as per the official "reason" according to "Anet's vision". Those who hate PUGs are never going to PUG, not because of the 3 Hero limit, not because of anything. Period. So might as well make everyone happy by putting in the ability to use 7 Heroes instead of causing needless frustration & aggravation with the silly limit that accomplishes nothing, other than those bad feelings in the player.

At this point, I honestly believe that 7-Heroes will come out eventually, just that given that it is really a radical change which might change how GW is played and percieved, the idea is being placed on the backbench, until:

1. GW2 comes out, becomes a major hit. In this case, to keep GW1 sales up, with that HoM thing, 7 heroes might be introduced to get encourage players to back one title, and accomplish some things before going to GW 2.

or

2. GW2 comes out, and fails miserably for one reason OR anothing, maybe competetive market or just plain bad gameplay. In which case, releasing 7 heroes in GW 1, while they iron out the kinks the GW 2, would give them a large window of opportunity to help minimise the impacts.

The above 2 scenarios are NOT the only reasons why, but probably is the most realistic ones on why Anet has not decided to release it. Keeping 7 Heroes back as a fail safe net is a corporate strategy, and from Anet's point of view, much better set for a "rainy" day, so to speak.

I played 4000 hours of GW over 18 months. My friends list was quite mercurial; people disappeared form the game on a regular basis. The few good compatriots I found often moved to other games.

Now, you could just say thet I'm no good at making friends...

...and I would point out my 400-person-strong WoW guild, 90% of whom are adults, and many of whom at over the age of 40 (like me). We do raiding, questing, leveling -- all good stuff. My WoW friends list is always full of active players, and I almost never have a problem finding a group.

A fluke of WoW? No -- because I've had the same experience in LotRO.

GW enforces a sense of incredible selfishness, because the only character progress is vanity items. Thus it attracts a large community of people who are more interested in appearances than substance.

I liked GW until they added Hard Mode, and then dumbed it down with Ursan and consumables... if you want to be social, you have to grind titles for cheat-like skills. And solo play is broken by ANet's idiotic refusal to implement full-hero parties. They created a poor social environment, and then try to force us to play there.

No thanks.

Oh, I still play GW from time to time. I jump in on my ranger, and go solo (no heroes or henches) hunting, just for the fun of it. But in terms of socialization -- I'd rather play with heroes who don't insult me for my build or insist that I spend hundred of hours grinding a title.

I fully agree, or a even worse senario would be for a A-net to implement 1 or 2 more titles after gw2 comes out and to bump up the koabd title a tier to help keep gw1 alive.

All players strike for 1 week, 7 days, and not play gw at all. send in emails demanding 7 heroe access. if everyone stopped playing gw for 7 days, i think it would make an impact.

remember folks, we dont need anet, but they need us.

My opinion:

Go with 5 heroes.

Why only 5?
Because most of the original, and best in my opinion, game *prophecies*.

Why not 7?
Because for the areas that are 8 party groups, 2 henchmen is not terrible awful and 5 heroes allows for most of those areas to be done without those 2 henchmen anyways.

Why is 5, or even 7, heroes better then ursan?
I think everyone can agree that 6 ursans that know what to do, with 2 HB monks, and consumables, are much more overpowering then 7 heroes. ANet disagrees, as far as they have mentioned at least, but I don't think they would disagree with it being overpowering then 5 heroes.

Both 7 and 5 hero suggestions are much better then ursan. It allows those who want to solo the game to actually solo Hard Mode, and not be forced to join groups to use a skill they may not like. And for those who dislike Ursan but can never find a non-Ursan HM guild, like myself, they are forced to use Ursan or use heroes and henchmen. Also, if Ursan was never put in, but 5 heroes was, then those who don't want to solo everything still don't have to. Just as now, they would find Pugs or Guilds that does what they do, the Ursan idea would just be removed.

Also, 5 or 7 heroes would allow people who are not as good with 3 heroes to do Elite Missions because of the no henchmen thing.

ANet wants to make things easier without being imbalanced. Well Ursan without putting in 7, or 5, heroes makes the PvE game imbalanced.

Should Hero Battles be changed?
Option put in to have 4v4 or 6v6/8v8 *whichever is put in* but not force either of the 2.

I believe I put in every common issue, but if there is something else that I forgot to mention, please tell me and I will post again with why 5 heroes would be best.

Edit:To many people play GW, that would never work, but if the miracle happened and it did, we will get 7 heroes *or better, 5*

But why would anet care?

a) They already have all the money you were ever gonna spend on GW1, and people who like heroes are not people who would buy GW2 anyway. They might as well enjoy less server load and praise for better pings from people who dont join you. Cold and hard fact: anet does not need you anymore.

b) You will have hard time actually telling about this to noticeable amount of people. And its not like they would stop playing (seriously, would any bear stop playing for week to support this cause? dont think so.)

c) Noone on forums would care enough to make this panic-worthy in anet HQ. Any ragequit thread is met with resounding "dont let the door hit you on your way out.". For some reason greatest sin MMO comunity member can do is to proclaim he is (semi)quiting in fasite forum thread.

yeah dude anet would like it if we didnt play, less people complaining

Good luck finding people willing to listen to this.

Then you shouldn't be able to do the hardest content in the game. Plain and simple. If you want an 8-player game dumbed down to the point where one human and 7 AI players can be just as effective as a team full of 8 real, live human beings, then you want an imbalanced game.

Call it an elitist attitude if you want, but the simple fact of the matter is that 8 good players are better at playing the game than 1 human and 7 AIs; as a consequence, if a game designer wants to challenge 8 good players, there has to be content that those players can complete that the hunan and AIs cannot.

7 heroes will give you more control over your own fate; it won't resolve the underlying issue.

You overcome this problem by having MORE guildies and allies to go with your friends.

Why doesn't your small group of friends go find some more people that are worth playing with? Just because it hasn't worked in the past doesn't mean it won't work in the future. If your small group of friends has a sufficient combination of 'fun to be around' and play skill, plenty of guilds/alliances out there would love to have you. If your group doesn't have that combination, that's your problem right there.

Having real people to play with is a numbers game; the more people you know, the more likely you are to be able to find a group to do something when you log on.

Actually, I'd argue that you just didn't make enough of them. GW is, as you state, a high-turnover game. However, if you have a regular crew that succeeds at the game, it isn't hard to find replacements.

Monthly subscription business model. If people were going to quit those games, they'd have done it a long time ago. Proves nothing about GW, unless you want to make the argument that the expansion-based business model is bad. There are plenty of 500+ member alliances in GW.

Astonishingly stupid blanket statement. The real problem is that it tends to attract a younger player base because of the lack of a monthly fee. Adolescents are generally more interested in appearances over substance. Just how it works.

The antidote to this, by the way, is to build your guild by getting a core group of good players together and building the roster through play (and success) in high-end areas. Once you achieve critical mass, you start attracting your recruits' friends, who are usually worth having.

PvE skills are a terrible mechanic. No argument there.

Get a better build, nub. If you're playing a suboptimal build, you're wasting my time. If you don't have the skills you need to get the job done as efficiently as possible, you're wasting my time.

That's the flip side of your argument, from a team leader's perspective.

If you're getting build criticism, one of two things is true. Either you're trying to play with bad players that don't know an effective build when they see it, or you're trying to play with good players that refuse to waste time and risk failure by permitting players to bring whatever they want. In the former case, find people that don't fail. In the latter case, you need to adapt in order to survive.

No question that the PvE skills are problematic in that they create a barrier to entry for new players. However, the barriers to entry for the endgame content in WoW (in terms of time investment) are pretty large. I don't think that you can make the argument that it's harder to get a character set up in GW than it is in WoW.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_action

What do Anet need us for? They already have our money and dont charge any fees.

And anyway, I am 100% /unsigned to this totally rubbish idea of allowing 7 heroes in GW now because I dont want a reason to have to return to the game.

its grand the way it is,Henchmen do a nice job too.
it would make pve a bit more unbalanced.

/not-signed

They need us to buy GW2

If you don't want to come back...don't. You can still make your own choices I hope.

Still, I don't see a need for this either. All you need is one more player for a 2+6 and you can do anything in PvE. If you don't have one person you can play together with, that's an entirely different problem. And except for a few bonuses you can pretty much do all missions in pve with heroes and henchies.

Why would I want to play with 1 other person if I can play alone? I hardly ever do that, and you actually think it is possible to find 1 other person to do everything that you want to do with in the game? lol.

/waiting for AoC.

Its actually quite fun, and very possible. I went through Legendary Guardian and MotN with but a single other person and the rest heroes. Had no problems and we had a lot of fun. You'd be surprised. Ended up joining their guild too, since the one I had been in since the start of the game had come to an end.

Even before that though, when I started out with Legendary Guardian, it wasnt that hard to do a LFG (HM) and find one other person in pretty much any area to do the mission with. Met a few other really cool people doing that.

Why would you want to? I dont know. Why would you not want to? I wasnt trying to answer either question than just to say yeah, it IS possible and not that hard in fact to find a single other person to do 2+6 with.

It was smart to make it 3 heroes only. I see many people who just H/H everything and sometimes I rather just be in the party than lead it.