A discussion on 7 heroes - Guild Wars Guru archive powered by Guild Wars Legacy

Windf0rce

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Jan 2007

31 Aug 2008 at 03:12 - 1085

Quote:

Originally Posted by ntherblast

They are probably going to put the 7 heros in after they release gw2. I liked it better when the game first came out and everyone was partying but now its just a ghost town and nobody wants to party unless it is with your guild or friends. If they do add the 7 heros this game will become singleplayer for sure not that it isn't already lol.

I think I'm playing a different game than most Guru people. WTF is everyone saying towns are 'ghostly', outposts are empty and all this crap? It's a lie, game is lively and I see full outposts everywhere. I just don't get it these pessimist people saying the game is dead when it is NOT. Maybe dead for you and your leet friends but not for 95% of people who don't even read forums.

Of course I'm on American districts, things might be empty on stuff like Asia, etc.

Lady Raenef

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Feb 2007

Oregon, USA.

Zero Mercy [zm]

W/

31 Aug 2008 at 05:16 - 1086

/signed

If you cannot flag heroes anymore and their skill bar is limited to four skills and a resurrection signet.

Skyy High

Furnace Stoker

Join Date: May 2006

R/

31 Aug 2008 at 05:29 - 1087

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Little Viking

Ive said it from the beginning of the hero age...(Beginning of Nightfall) why give us 15 heros (now 25, soon to be 26) and only allow us to use 3 at a time? Makes no sense.

Do you have the same builds on all of your heroes of the same class? My monks, eles, necros, warriors, paragons, and rangers all have distinct builds that I use in different situations, and I still tweak their builds frequently. Having multiple heroes lets you do that without completely rebuilding your heroes every time you want a curse necro instead of a MM. And of course, you can't have 2 or 3 of each class of hero without having the 26 heroes that we have.

By the way, 7/26 really isn't that much better than 3/26. Can we drop this argument now; there are much more compelling reasons for full hero parties than this.

Bryant Again

Hall Hero

Join Date: Feb 2006

31 Aug 2008 at 19:45 - 1088

Quote:

Originally Posted by maraxusofk

they might as well. this game is already a single player game in pve. i mean how much worse can u ruin this game? heroes already blew pve wide apart.

Honestly, for as cool as the party gameplay can be, the fact that you need a party for every area in the game has been the only faulty premise. This is probably why they're moving away from this in GW2.

So don't blame the heroes, blame everything else.

Trylo

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Jan 2006

[Here] | CKOD

E/R

01 Sep 2008 at 01:11 - 1089

i really dont see the reason not to, i read the first couple of pages and no one presented anything worthwhile against using 7 heroes, its not like anyone plays with people outside their alliance.

OH PS: heroes*

zwei2stein

Grotto Attendant

Join Date: Jun 2006

Europe

The German Order [GER]

N/

01 Sep 2008 at 05:45 - 1090

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Honestly, for as cool as the party gameplay can be, the fact that you need a party for every area in the game has been the only faulty premise. This is probably why they're moving away from this in GW2.

So don't blame the heroes, blame everything else.

Yep.

Compare structure of "typical MMO" with "GW"

In typical MMO you spend majority of time grinding alone, but in persistent world with other players around. You are not forced to group with people for every single thing so you don't get tired of them and when you actually need to group, it is not chore with pre-flight check and you spent so much time grinding alone that some company is welcome. Plus, environment like this makes it harder to become cynic fellow-player-hater simply because interactions tend to be positive one (i.e. If that game allows casting longtern buffs on other players, you betcha that people will cast them randomly on you for no reason).

GW sadly forces to to group for every single thing, so you get tired of random people pretty fast. Yay for H/H. Shame, because "everything is private instance" model is pretty sound otherwise.

Bryant Again

Hall Hero

Join Date: Feb 2006

01 Sep 2008 at 06:19 - 1091

Quote:

Originally Posted by zwei2stein

Yep.

Compare structure of "typical MMO" with "GW"

In typical MMO you spend majority of time grinding alone, but in persistent world with other players around. You are not forced to group with people for every single thing so you don't get tired of them and when you actually need to group, it is not chore with pre-flight check and you spent so much time grinding alone that some company is welcome. Plus, environment like this makes it harder to become cynic fellow-player-hater simply because interactions tend to be positive one (i.e. If that game allows casting longtern buffs on other players, you betcha that people will cast them randomly on you for no reason).

GW sadly forces to to group for every single thing, so you get tired of random people pretty fast. Yay for H/H. Shame, because "everything is private instance" model is pretty sound otherwise.

This is where I see GW2 being awesome.

The party system in GW has a lot of potential to be fun, enjoyable, complex, and challenging. Unfortunately, you'll notice the keyword in there: Potential. Being in a successful party relies on so much: To work well and enjoyable, everyone has to work well together, everyone has to be friendly, everyone has to know what's up...list goes on.

And here's the problem. Not in the party design, not in the open-endedness, nor the complexity - but the fact that it's presented nearly all the time to people who don't know what they're doing. This is not to say that the general playerbase sucks, but that in general it's a hard thing to grasp, with endless possibilities and not a whole lot of them being good. I mean shit, 8 people is a *lot* when you think about it - and given that you ALWAYS have to have a party really puts a lot more pressure on ya.

The only reason I'm kinda concerned about the soloing in GW2 is the loss of complexity. But damn, if they can still keep it a bit fun then I'd considered it one HELL of a good trade-off.

So yeah. As much as I love having a party of bad-ass heroes and heroines, I'm always gonna be a bit ticked about how hard it is too grasp. Good for me, not for newbies (although they nail it pretty nicely in Proph). That's why I'm really looking forward to being able to solo in GW2: No needs to "LFG" in every damned outpost, no need to have a balanced party, no more "LF MONKS", just "let's play".

...Well that's the idea, anyway. There's still plenty of opportunity to RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GO even that up.

fireflyry

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Jan 2007

New Zealand

A/D

01 Sep 2008 at 09:03 - 1092

It's hard to place honest comment on a topic that is so relevant when a game is dying.

Sjeng

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Aug 2005

in my GH

Limburgse Jagers [LJ]

W/

01 Sep 2008 at 10:59 - 1093

Yes. Why?

If you think 7 heroes would make the game too easy, and stop people from making parties with real players: that's already the case. People can play the game very well with H/H now. If you don't like playing with people, you H/H. 7 heroes isn't going to change that.
So it will only give an advantage to people playing solo anyway. It will also make it easier to help people without heroes, or with low-level heroes.
I'd like the opportunity to take 7 heroes with me. But it's not gonna happen anyway. But as I usually play the more difficult missions/quests with my guildies anyway, I almost never need henchies anyway.

Gin Cometh

Frost Gate Guardian

Join Date: Jun 2007

UK

Me/Mo

01 Sep 2008 at 11:34 - 1094

Quote:

Originally Posted by fireflyry

It's hard to place honest comment on a topic that is so relevant when a game is dying.

Yet they are making it harder/challanging* as noted in the last update .

Voted yes.

fireflyry

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Jan 2007

New Zealand

A/D

01 Sep 2008 at 11:41 - 1095

You missed my point.

Is it good or just good because the game is dying a slow death hence pugging is a non-option?

Either way this was discussed to death in another thread a few months back.

Dreams are free.

fenix

Major-General Awesome

Join Date: Aug 2005

Aussie Trolling Crew HQ - Event Organiser and IRC Tiger

Ex Talionis [Law], Trinity of the Ascended [ToA] ????????????????&#

W/

01 Sep 2008 at 12:28 - 1096

Not a single player game, ANet already said no, etc etc.

Highlander Of Alba

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Jan 2007

Real Rogue Clan

Rt/Mo

01 Sep 2008 at 12:55 - 1097

Well I would like the opportunity to use 7 heros

think of it this way also

you have up to 25 heros if you have all campaigns ect

max 3 at any time...21 dormant

Now Mox is been added in a few days, thats another one added

as discussed if you go pug or with guildies= 8 human

So whats the big difference..

Only possible explanation is that at some point later as gw2 is far off yet they dont wish to kill off if thats the expresion what is left

I can see some reason it tho as I often use different builds on heros to make the game more( Fun and enjoyable is that not what it is supposed to be?) and think out of the box for builds that may not be great but different...rather than ..having a build on main that rarley gets altered

Anyways we can still Dream cause thats all it will be

agrios

Krytan Explorer

Join Date: May 2006

South America

Naked Stalkers of America[Nude]

W/

01 Sep 2008 at 14:04 - 1098

/signed

Freedom of choice is the true freedom. So..let people choose.

Necro Quink

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Aug 2007

Belgium

Trinity Of The Ascended [ToA]

N/

01 Sep 2008 at 15:43 - 1099

if you want to use 7 heroes go play a single player game or something. What's the use of playing with 7 heroes in a MMORPG game?

Destro Maniak

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Aug 2006

A/

01 Sep 2008 at 16:02 - 1100

Quote:

Originally Posted by Necro Quink

if you want to use 7 heroes go play a single player game or something. What's the use of playing with 7 heroes in a MMORPG game?

then please remove henchs?
why henchs in a multiplayer hame?

you can see discussions are inlimited

BUT heroes were the perfect solution for ghost missions, unwanted areas for vanquish

why not make 7 heroes there cant be a valid reason

CMON people who dont pug WILL STILL not pug
It wont change ANYTHIn

I havent pugged for 2 year probably and Im prety happy with my decision

BECAUSE

my heroes are FAR more well built then the sucky pugs that have non elite skilled monks with tatoo non level 20 armor and such

Or no insignied suck heads

Teutonic Paladin

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Feb 2006

TW

W/

01 Sep 2008 at 16:13 - 1101

Having seven heroes would make PvE more fun, isn't that the only thing that matters?

I'm in a purely PvP guild, I can't make/find guild groups for any areas of the game. PuGs barely exist in game outside of select areas (Slavers'/UW/FoW), how am I supposed to beat areas like Vloxen HM with three heroes and some henchmen? The hardest areas of the game are balanced for strong player groups but there is no possibility of finding groups to play with.

fireflyry

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Jan 2007

New Zealand

A/D

01 Sep 2008 at 16:19 - 1102

Quote:

Originally Posted by agrios

/signed

Freedom of choice is the true freedom. So..let people choose.

That's overly idealistic and really applying outside ideology to a game genre which seems to happen way to much here.Actually at the end of the day it's a product, one that needs to make money.

If people wish to play the whole game through...alone....they already can.

I've read, as a lot here have, so many threads on this and to me it's really quite simple.

Dreams are free.

If you can't see how broken PvE would become with 7 heroes well...yeah....you don't actually know much in concerns to what your talking about.

Then again GW and greed go hand in hand at times.

Vehemence

Academy Page

Join Date: Apr 2008

Perth

[LOD]

W/

01 Sep 2008 at 16:20 - 1103

Although it does make PvE easier than now, it will still be good for creating synergistic build and like most of you said, more fun.

/signed

Vaal 84

Frost Gate Guardian

Join Date: Oct 2007

UK

R/

01 Sep 2008 at 16:22 - 1104

ok so if 7 heroes makes things more fun, but at the same time makes things easier. How about they implement this feature with a game mode that is actually hard to do...

Teutonic Paladin

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Feb 2006

TW

W/

01 Sep 2008 at 16:25 - 1105

Quote:

Originally Posted by fireflyry

If you can't see how broken PvE would become with 7 heroes well...yeah....you don't actually know much in concerns to what your talking about.

How exactly can PvE be broken? Bad players would still run bad builds, probably worse than the henchmen (at least in EotN), their heroes wouldn't be geared, they'd barely be better off than those who play purely with henchmen (Who at least have maxed weapons). Those who actually want to delve into the harder areas of the game, would be given that opportunity, but they'd still be weaker than an organized group. Ursan was broken because it allowed players with no skill to complete any part of the game, but heroes are only as strong as the player guiding them (with the exception of Sabway). How does this "break" PvE?

Taurucis

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Jul 2006

The edge of reason

I don't play any more.

W/E

01 Sep 2008 at 16:26 - 1106

I play with 7 heroes when I play Heroes of Might and Magic 4.

I wish I could play with 7 heroes when I play Guild Wars, though. Sometimes when I'm on Guild Wars with my brother, we want to do a mission or something where henchies are either not allowed to go in (FoW) or they're too stupid to do well at the mission. He doesn't have Nightfall/EotN so he can't bring any heroes.

It would be nice, however I don't think we'll be getting it from Anet...

Bryant Again

Hall Hero

Join Date: Feb 2006

01 Sep 2008 at 17:35 - 1107

Quote:

Originally Posted by fireflyry

If you can't see how broken PvE would become with 7 heroes well...yeah....you don't actually know much in concerns to what your talking about.

I too used to agree with this, until I realized how much more overpowered full human groups were with the possibility of 24 or more PvE skills. Not to mention how outright shitty the hero AI can be.

Abedeus

Grotto Attendant

Join Date: Jan 2007

Niflheim

R/

01 Sep 2008 at 18:42 - 1108

PvE with 7 heroes + player < 8 players.

7 heroes with bad builds and no equipment < 8 players with bad builds and bad equipment.

Skilled player with 7 heroes < 8 skilled players.

Simple. Even if you gave us 10 heroes, they would STILL be weaker than 8 good players. Mainly because Player can bring pve-only skills and has BRAIN. At least most of... some of them do. Heroes can't use anything harder than knockdown + falling spider/crushing blow combo. They can't even chain MS/DB.

upier

Grotto Attendant

Join Date: Mar 2006

Done.

[JUNK]

01 Sep 2008 at 19:01 - 1109

Quote:

Originally Posted by fenix

Not a single player game, ANet already said no, etc etc.

The issue is that one can already do what ... 90%(?) of the game with hench.
What all-hero parties would do is to cater to the wishes and desires of the best players. By achieving that the best players stay interested in the game.

Which I also the reason why I seriously doubt we'll ever see all hero parties.
A.Net is just to busy catering bad players in PvE.

MithranArkanere

Underworld Spelunker

Join Date: Nov 2006

wikipedia.org/wiki/Vigo

Heraldos de la Llama Oscura [HLO]

E/

01 Sep 2008 at 19:48 - 1110

Heh, and why not remove all Henchmen and turn them all into Heroes then?
Factions Challenges would finally have a real use: The way to get Factions Hero armor pieces, XDDD.

Chico

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Jan 2007

01 Sep 2008 at 21:36 - 1111

I know the reason we don't have 7 heroes.... "Our interface will be too cluttered to be able to control them!"

Lol, before you flame me remember that it was the _first_ excuse we heard from Anet. That was Gaile's scripted response until they came out and told us that they don't want people to not PUG. Lame but they want us to PUG and not use more heroes even if more heroes would be more fun and would allow us to create skill bars that other players don't want to or like to run.

BTW, I'm all in about being able to use 7 heroes.

Sniper22

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Apr 2005

01 Sep 2008 at 23:15 - 1112

No, then it will all be about using 7 hero UW, FoW, DoA builds etc... I am so sick of guild wars pve turning into a EDIT: YES SINGLE PLAYER.... (sorry XD) game. It would be nearly impossible to find groups if 7 heroes were implemented.

Btw what about urgoz/that luxon area... zomg 11 heroes FTW!!!!!!!! RAWR

Striken7

Frost Gate Guardian

Join Date: Apr 2007

The District Nudists

R/

01 Sep 2008 at 23:20 - 1113

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sniper22

I am so sick of guild wars pve turning into a pve game.

lolwhut??12char

JeniM

Desert Nomad

Join Date: May 2007

W/E

01 Sep 2008 at 23:20 - 1114

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sniper22

Btw what about urgoz/that luxon area... zomg 11 heroes FTW!!!!!!!! RAWR

I'd forgotten Urgoz and The Deep, maybe saying "Unrestricted Heroes" would be better.

If Anet allowed 7 heroes I wouldn't have to try to talk my mate into getting GWs next year at university

Quote:

Originally Posted by Striken7

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sniper22
I am so sick of guild wars pve turning into a pve game.

lolwhut??12char

you took the words right out of my mouth

Burst Cancel

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Dec 2006

Domain of Broken Game Mechanics

01 Sep 2008 at 23:30 - 1115

Hero teams would be easier to manage for spike builds. Bind all of the "use skill X" keys to a single macro button and even the most inept people can clean spike anything. People do this now with three-hero Discord or AP-nuker teams though, so in a sense the horse has already bolted.

As for groups being impossible to find, heroes aren't the ultimate cause - after all, many players were already henching everything before heroes were even available. The real reasons behind unpopular PuGs have to do with the PuGs themselves; heroes are the solution, not the problem.

Lishy

Forge Runner

Join Date: Jan 2008

01 Sep 2008 at 23:34 - 1116

I think ANET is moderating to see how much heroes affect gameplay. Similar to the case with ursan.

Sniper22

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Apr 2005

02 Sep 2008 at 00:07 - 1117

Quote:

Originally Posted by Striken7

lolwhut??12char

lol sorry... correct word is single player, tired today

slowerpoke

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Jul 2007

Cuba

02 Sep 2008 at 00:29 - 1118

while players may want it, i dont think they'll do it. and they have said no numerous times.

in practical terms the ui updates required are probably beyond the capability of the skeleton gw1 dev team. look at the supposed recent 'massive' update, its really is rather small for something they were working on a long time.

the game designers may be against it due to not wanting to encourage folks into solo play. whether it would or not any more than currently is questionable; the people that would benefit from the update are folks who use henchmen and heroes anyway.

i think hero ai generates alot of problems, 2 years(?) after nightfall and theyre still tweaking and debugging the logic, and its still not working 100%. with so many combinations its very difficult to create behaviour that even partially mimics human skill selection and execution.

do i want to see it? sure, it certainly wouldnt change how i currently play the game, and besides with a 2560x1600 res im sure it could all fit into my screen

enxa

Krytan Explorer

Join Date: Sep 2006

Novi Sad, Serbia

Rt/

02 Sep 2008 at 01:00 - 1119

Quote:

Originally Posted by legion_rat

Henchmen often just dont cut it for certain quest

~the rat~

Crucial word bolded.
Henchies are enough for most of the content except for the 'certain' quests, at which point you can find a group.

And things being as they are for so long, 3 heroes work, there is no 'need' to have 7 heroes, its just a matter of convenience, but this convenience would break the game for others.

vaxmor

Krytan Explorer

Join Date: Dec 2005

Ascalon

R/

02 Sep 2008 at 01:26 - 1120

7 heroes are overpowered - why? Because the average intelligence of the GW population is less than that of a henchman.

Bryant Again

Hall Hero

Join Date: Feb 2006

02 Sep 2008 at 01:56 - 1121

Quote:

Originally Posted by enxa

And things being as they are for so long, 3 heroes work, there is no 'need' to have 7 heroes, its just a matter of convenience, but this convenience would break the game for others.

Would it, or would the huge appeal of PvE skills override the "urge to solo"?

kazjun

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Aug 2006

HoVa

W/N

02 Sep 2008 at 02:13 - 1122

If I had to choose 7 heroe's or pve skills, I'd take the heroes. Pve skills are fun and some are just imba, but being able to set a full team build would beat them in effectiveness.

Esprit

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Jun 2005

Dvd Forums [DVDF]

E/

02 Sep 2008 at 02:38 - 1123

Those of us who were there from the beginning did not have the luxury of hero's. We either had a guild group or we pug'd or used a henchmen team.

Even now I still use henchmen because sometimes their AI is more reliable than hero's are with our own builds.

While I really don't have any particular reason against 7 Hero's, I would restrict the option for 7 Hero's to Hard Mode.

Bryant Again

Hall Hero

Join Date: Feb 2006

02 Sep 2008 at 02:39 - 1124

Quote:

Originally Posted by kazjun

If I had to choose 7 heroe's or pve skills, I'd take the heroes. Pve skills are fun and some are just imba, but being able to set a full team build would beat them in effectiveness.

A team with heroes and good builds is more effective than a team of humans with good builds *and* PvE skills? Come again?

However, that question wasn't really directed towards you. It was more a question to ask the general populous, and it'd be very likely they'd go with humans and PvE skills. Heroes aren't really effective unless you really know your shit with the game. Otherwise you're just as better off with henchies.