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

JDRyder

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Apr 2007

Great temple of Balthazar

Mo/Me

05 Sep 2008 at 14:56 - 1325

Quote:

Originally Posted by Numa Pompilius

Uh... Surely you jest?
8x Lightbringers Gaze? 8x Cry of Frustration? 8x Vanguard Assassin? Pain Inverter? Dragon Slash warrior with Headbutt? Great Dwarven Weapon?

whyyyy?

you dont need 8 of them theres a reason people dont use 8 of them now, and cry of frustration is not a pve skill i think you mean Cry of pain.

Gargle Blaster

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Dec 2005

05 Sep 2008 at 15:12 - 1326

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alexandria

I can't think of any drawbacks if this would be implemented. Sure, it would mean getting through the campaigns would be a breeze, but hey, that's already possible. 1 word, Ursan.

Does anyone why Anet decided to lower the limit on heroes in HA back in the day btw? It went from 4 to 2 and I really can't think of a reason for it, heroes are worse players than normal players (sometimes ^^).
I'd love to see a 7-hero HA team.

it went from 4 to 2 because people were complaining about killing non humans in PvP.

JDRyder

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Apr 2007

Great temple of Balthazar

Mo/Me

05 Sep 2008 at 15:25 - 1327

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gargle Blaster

it went from 4 to 2 because people were complaining about killing non humans in PvP.

imo take it from 2 to 0 in pvp areas

Bryant Again

Hall Hero

Join Date: Feb 2006

05 Sep 2008 at 15:35 - 1328

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDRyder

still like non pve-skills better most the time, just cause you they are not tied to profs of that you can make a build with them does not make them overpowered, the non-pve only skill builds are just as or more powerful.

It doesn't sound like you have a firm grasp of what's balanced. If a skill can be put onto any profession and still be useful, yes it's incredibly overpowered. This should not go without saying.

Now, for a better example of why they're overpowered, take every PvE skills and put it into the PvP environment. What do you get? An utter shitfest. SY warriors, TNTF Paras, every class can knockdown, every class can spike, and let's not forget the hilarity that could ensue from vanguard sniper support.

PvE skills are labeled PvE for a reason.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDRyder

whyyyy?

Because they're powerful. A team of 8x Lightbringer's Gaze will have an easier time than a team with 1x Lightbringer's Gaze. Honestly, we shouldn't have to bring it down to number crunching to prove this.

Inner Salbat

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Oct 2005

Leader - ANZAC

E/

05 Sep 2008 at 15:46 - 1329

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDRyder

imo take it from 2 to 0 in pvp areas

That I'd actually agree with you on, hero's unless in hero battles should not exist in PvP period -ever-, in PvE however we should be able to have 7.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Because they're powerful. A team of 8x Lightbringer's Gaze will have an easier time than a team with 1x Lightbringer's Gaze. Honestly, we shouldn't have to bring it down to number crunching to prove this.

The only PvE skill that should be able to be moved to a Hero is Light Of Deldrimor I -HATE- giving up a skill slot on my monk for anything, with the provision that Hero's will not activate it, it has to be manually pressed by the player.

JDRyder

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Apr 2007

Great temple of Balthazar

Mo/Me

05 Sep 2008 at 15:54 - 1330

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

It doesn't sound like you have a firm grasp of what's balanced. If a skill can be put onto any profession and still be useful, yes it's incredibly overpowered. This should not go without saying.

lol balance in pve.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Now, for a better example of why they're overpowered, take every PvE skills and put it into the PvP environment. What do you get? An utter shitfest. SY warriors, TNTF Paras, every class can knockdown, every class can spike, and let's not forget the hilarity that could ensue from vanguard sniper support.

i lol'ed irl, why SY warriors? warriors are used for big domage.

every class can spike the way things are now.

every class can KD the way things are now.

dont think the vanguard sniper is that good seeing how you can only works 10% of the time and it seems less then that, Ive used it 20-30 times w/o it going off not worth the needed slot or the 10 energy. pvpers have PS NPCs dont, and in pvp you want a consistent spike you can rely on, not something that only works 10% of the time.

Tyla

Emo Goth Italics

Join Date: Sep 2006

05 Sep 2008 at 16:53 - 1331

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDRyder

lol balance in pve.

PvE needs balance too, you know.

Quote:

i lol'ed irl, why SY warriors? warriors are used for big domage.

I believe he means D-Slashers more specifically, because it's an instacharged adrenal.

Pkest

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: May 2006

Hooded Reavers of Eternal Life(Ankh)

R/

05 Sep 2008 at 17:11 - 1332

7 heroes is pretty much the only thing that would bring me back to this game on a regular basis.

Inner Salbat

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Oct 2005

Leader - ANZAC

E/

05 Sep 2008 at 17:14 - 1333

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyla

PvE needs balance too, you know.

Tell that to some of the utter enemy crap in hard mode it's all fine and well to balance the players, but having balanced enemy is just a joke some of it can take you out just by looking at it you and that is just rubbish balancing unsurprising considering the balancer, I really wish I could be a little more transparent about how I actually felt about the balancer of GW but that would not help the course or be polite in any sense of the word.

JDRyder

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Apr 2007

Great temple of Balthazar

Mo/Me

05 Sep 2008 at 17:22 - 1334

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyla

PvE needs balance too, you know.

players will always be smarter than NPCs, thats why in HM NPCs have fast casting, 30 atts so their skills do 10000 damage 500 energy and 1000 armor

imo make the IA better and take that crap off cause it has rended some profs/skills useless

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyla

I believe he means D-Slashers more specifically, because it's an instacharged adrenal.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

SY warriors,

i think he means SY warriors

also dont forget FGJ does not work for DS in pvp

Bryant Again

Hall Hero

Join Date: Feb 2006

05 Sep 2008 at 17:22 - 1335

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDRyder

lol balance in pve.

Because I was totally talking about PvE:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Now, for a better example of why they're overpowered, take every PvE skills and put it into the PvP environment. What do you get? An utter shitfest. SY warriors, TNTF Paras, every class can knockdown, every class can spike, and let's not forget the hilarity that could ensue from vanguard sniper support.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDRyder

i lol'ed irl, why SY warriors? warriors are used for big domage.

Tyla was right. DSlash is the correct term, but since I focus more on SY in such an instance I used the wrong one.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDRyder

every class can spike the way things are now.

All with the exact same skill that deals the exact same damage across the board and that doesn't rely on an attribute?

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDRyder

every class can KD the way things are now.

"Can" is keyword, when is it worth it? Is it wise for a Monk to bring Shock, or a Rit to bring Gale? Skills like "You Move Like A Dwarf" don't take note of such energy consuming concerns. 10e for a KD *and* a cripple *and* a pretty much insta-cripple if without any assistance.

And again, take note of the fact that it relies on no attributes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDRyder

pvpers have PS NPCs dont, and in pvp you want a consistent spike you can rely on, not something that only works 10% of the time.

I was speaking more in general terms. It's not terribly balanced to have a skill that can instakill 10% of the time, not to mention that monk isn't always going to be there, and it would take one *hell* of a prepotter to catch it.

Either way, you're proving my point. You're going to cause quite a riot if you suggest it's safe to implement PvE skills into PvP.

All that aside, this is going waaaay too far in the off-topic catagory.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inner Salbat

Tell that to some of the utter enemy crap in hard mode it's all fine and well to balance the players, but having balanced enemy is just a joke some of it can take you out just by looking at it you and that is just rubbish balancing unsurprising considering the balancer, I really wish I could be a little more transparent about how I actually felt about the balancer of GW but that would not help the course or be polite in any sense of the word.

Mobs need to compensate for their horrible AI. PvE isn't a player vs. computer form of PvP.

Damian979

Krytan Explorer

Join Date: May 2008

05 Sep 2008 at 17:24 - 1336

7 heroes would be nice but it will never happen because noone would ever join a team of real people again. You might have the occasional guild group doing a DoA run but that's it.

GW would just be a single player RPG where you could hang out in towns and show off your armor. Wait....it's pretty much that now. Bring on the 7 hero teams then

.

But as far as this...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Now, for a better example of why they're overpowered, take every PvE skills and put it into the PvP environment. What do you get? An utter shitfest. SY warriors, TNTF Paras, every class can knockdown, every class can spike, and let's not forget the hilarity that could ensue from vanguard sniper support.

PvP is a breeding ground for making skills mediocre. It's always about "itz so imba", "itz so op". Instead of constantly omitting or nerfing skills in the name of "balance", I say make it harder. Open up all the skills, ignore the whining, learn to counter skills, and be a better player and let's see who can really survive in PvP instead of having the watered down whine pool of skills we now have.

I might actually stand to play PvP more like I used to if it weren't for all the QQ's of "you're only winning because you're running an overpowered build". I'm sorry, but I don't start crying just because someone takes me down with a good bar, and I call someone running an underpowered build a noob.

Bryant Again

Hall Hero

Join Date: Feb 2006

05 Sep 2008 at 17:27 - 1337

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damian979

PvP is a breeding ground for making skills mediocre. It's always about "itz so imba", "itz so op". Instead of constantly omitting or nerfing skills in the name of "balance", I say make it harder. Open up all the skills, ignore the whining, learn to counter skills, and be a better player and let's see who can really survive in PvP instead of having the watered down whine pool of skills we now have.

So an Ursan approach to PvP? No thanks.

Damian979

Krytan Explorer

Join Date: May 2008

05 Sep 2008 at 17:49 - 1338

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

So an Ursan approach to PvP? No thanks.

lol Why not? I would love to go up against an ursan in PvP. The skills activate so slow they are begging to be interupted. Plus having even a halfway decent monk + [pain inverter] and an anti kd skill would have me falling off my chair with laughter.

JDRyder

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Apr 2007

Great temple of Balthazar

Mo/Me

05 Sep 2008 at 17:52 - 1339

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Tyla was right. DSlash is the correct term, but since I focus more on SY in such an instance I used the wrong one.

what?

crip slash, magehuters and shock axe > DS in pvp

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

All with the exact same skill that deals the exact same damage across the board and that doesn't rely on an attribute?

why do you not want to use attributes? and you dont need the damage to be the to spike its just has to hit at the same time.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

"Can" is keyword, when is it worth it? Is it wise for a Monk to bring Shock, or a Rit to bring Gale? Skills like "You Move Like A Dwarf" don't take note of such energy consuming concerns. 10e for a KD *and* a cripple *and* a pretty much insta-cripple if without any assistance.

Why do you want a KD on a monk any why?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

And again, take note of the fact that it relies on no attributes.

again why do you not want to use your attributes?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

I was speaking more in general terms. It's not terribly balanced to have a skill that can instakill 10% of the time, not to mention that monk isn't always going to be there, and it would take one *hell* of a prepotter to catch it.

see warrior moving to target, then prot, any monk thats in a R700 guild can do that. also meet my friend mr shut down mesmer.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Either way, you're proving my point. You're going to cause quite a riot if you suggest it's safe to implement PvE skills into PvP.

Never said tha but, if they do its not going to change much cause most of them suck. If they put a 90sec recharge on smiters boon, they will most likely do the same to any wanna be pve skill that became to meta.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

All that aside, this is going waaaay too far in the off-topic catagory.

agreed

Burst Cancel

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Dec 2006

Domain of Broken Game Mechanics

05 Sep 2008 at 17:59 - 1340

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

So an Ursan approach to PvP? No thanks.

No, I'd say that's the "Guilty Gear" approach to PvP. The main problem with this approach in GW is that unlike GG, there aren't any built-in safeguards in the mechanics.

Ideally, you don't really want the devs correcting overpowered stuff - you'd rather the players were forced to find some way around it. Games like GG enjoy playerbases with very high levels of skill exactly because the players have to be able to deal with stupidly broken shit on a regular basis.

I don't see how this has anything to do with heroes though.

Bryant Again

Hall Hero

Join Date: Feb 2006

05 Sep 2008 at 18:08 - 1341

Quote:

Originally Posted by Burst Cancel

I don't see how this has anything to do with heroes though.

None whatsoever, it's bad habit on my part.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDRyder

this post

Took pretty much everything out of context, nice.

JDRyder

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Apr 2007

Great temple of Balthazar

Mo/Me

05 Sep 2008 at 18:30 - 1342

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Took pretty much everything out of context, nice.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

I am compelled by your reasoning. /sarcasm

The least you could do is support your points, otherwise you just encourage everyone to up their post count, i.e. pointlessly lengthening the thread.

123456789101

Inner Salbat

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Oct 2005

Leader - ANZAC

E/

05 Sep 2008 at 18:40 - 1343

Quote:

Originally Posted by Burst Cancel

I don't see how this has anything to do with heroes though.

Was kind of brought about by looking at the aspect of 7 hero's and what would happen to PvP areas, and I think it was concluded that remaining 2 should be removed as well, PvP should be just that Player vs Player not player vs hero/player that's just dumb, if you want to play with your hero's vs other people that is what hero battles are for.

Eragon Zarroc

Atra estern?? ono thelduin

Join Date: Jan 2008

Madness Incarnate

[Duo]

W/P

05 Sep 2008 at 18:45 - 1344

Quote:

Originally Posted by Burst Cancel

No, I'd say that's the "Guilty Gear" approach to PvP. The main problem with this approach in GW is that unlike GG, there aren't any built-in safeguards in the mechanics.

Ideally, you don't really want the devs correcting overpowered stuff - you'd rather the players were forced to find some way around it. Games like GG enjoy playerbases with very high levels of skill exactly because the players have to be able to deal with stupidly broken shit on a regular basis.

I don't see how this has anything to do with heroes though.

exactly what i was about to say ^^ good job.

Bryant Again

Hall Hero

Join Date: Feb 2006

05 Sep 2008 at 18:46 - 1345

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inner Salbat

Was kind of brought about by looking at the aspect of 7 hero's and what would happen to PvP areas, and I think it was concluded that remaining 2 should be removed as well, PvP should be just that Player vs Player not player vs hero/player that's just dumb, if you want to play with your hero's vs other people that is what hero battles are for.

Between Ryder and I it came up with how I stated that many are turned off by the fact that heroes can't use PvE skills, and that it would be quite a thing to miss out on if the person chose to H/H instead of pug.

And, gonna emphasize on Burst Cancel's comment.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Burst Cancel

No, I'd say that's the "Guilty Gear" approach to PvP. The main problem with this approach in GW is that unlike GG, there aren't any built-in safeguards in the mechanics.

Ideally, you don't really want the devs correcting overpowered stuff - you'd rather the players were forced to find some way around it. Games like GG enjoy playerbases with very high levels of skill exactly because the players have to be able to deal with stupidly broken shit on a regular basis.

I don't see how this has anything to do with heroes though.

There's a difference between "overpowered" and "imbalanced". Generally, something is overpowered when it's totally out of balance. From what I've played in GG, it isn't just one character being given all of these "OP" abilities, but instead everyone is equally crazy. For GG, it's just it's game design. Nothing's wrong with it, it's just a different playstyle.

Things only become a problem when one character is more powerful than everyone else, but that applies to all games. In Guild Wars, it's certain builds.

JDRyder

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Apr 2007

Great temple of Balthazar

Mo/Me

05 Sep 2008 at 18:55 - 1346

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inner Salbat

Was kind of brought about by looking at the aspect of 7 hero's and what would happen to PvP areas, and I think it was concluded that remaining 2 should be removed as well, PvP should be just that Player vs Player not player vs hero/player that's just dumb, if you want to play with your hero's vs other people that is what hero battles are for.

agreed, dont know why they let you use them in pvp in the 1st place

Burst Cancel

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Dec 2006

Domain of Broken Game Mechanics

05 Sep 2008 at 21:14 - 1347

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

There's a difference between "overpowered" and "imbalanced". Generally, something is overpowered when it's totally out of balance. From what I've played in GG, it isn't just one character being given all of these "OP" abilities, but instead everyone is equally crazy. For GG, it's just it's game design. Nothing's wrong with it, it's just a different playstyle.

Things only become a problem when one character is more powerful than everyone else, but that applies to all games. In Guild Wars, it's certain builds.

No, not everyone is "equally" crazy, and some matchups are actually pretty bad. But as I said, one reason GG can get away with overpowered stuff is that there are safeguards built into the base game mechanics.

Here's the bigger problem though: how do you know when something is actually imba? In some cases it can take a long time for players to figure out how to deal with a particular tactic. Further, the average (or even above-average) player is almost never a good judge of balance - the appropriate counter to a seemingly imba tactic might require skill that only the best players possess.

Tyla

Emo Goth Italics

Join Date: Sep 2006

05 Sep 2008 at 21:33 - 1348

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDRyder

players will always be smarter than NPCs, thats why in HM NPCs have fast casting, 30 atts so their skills do 10000 damage 500 energy and 1000 armor

imo make the IA better and take that crap off cause it has rended some profs/skills useless

Enemies in PvE need to know how to react towards certain situations, not incredibly high attributes and buffs. They also need full bars and with decent comprahension.

Just giving people PvE skills isn't going to balance it out, it's just power creep versus power creep.

Quote:

i think he means SY warriors

... Which usually refers to Godmode D-Slashers in the first place anyway?

Quote:

also dont forget FGJ does not work for DS in pvp

I understand that. SY wouldn't exactly work in PvP either though, will it?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damian979

PvP is a breeding ground for making skills mediocre. It's always about "itz so imba", "itz so op". Instead of constantly omitting or nerfing skills in the name of "balance", I say make it harder. Open up all the skills, ignore the whining, learn to counter skills, and be a better player and let's see who can really survive in PvP instead of having the watered down whine pool of skills we now have.

You're pretty retarded if you think build wars is a good idea, which is what "learn to counter skills" means. A common balanced build is very tight, but if you have to prepare for more and more different things and take a more defensive, one-sided approach you end up having an inflexible build that can't combat much at all.

"Really survive in PvP" isn't the case at all, because if you have some uber awesome 1337 counter to X build, but it fails against Y build and maybe Z build because your bar isn't designed to combat Y or Z build, which degenerates into build wars.

Quote:

I might actually stand to play PvP more like I used to if it weren't for all the QQ's of "you're only winning because you're running an overpowered build". I'm sorry, but I don't start crying just because someone takes me down with a good bar, and I call someone running an underpowered build a noob.

In other words, (going back to the Cultist's Doom Spikers here) you'd blame someone for losing if they were using a build not equally as powerful?

Build flexibility is a very important thing. You can't design your build to defeat everything if there's too many builds that need specific counters and beat every single one, because once again, it degenerates into build wars and skill won't be nearly as important as bringing counters. That, and power creep versus power creep is bad.

EPO Bot

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Aug 2006

Mo/N

05 Sep 2008 at 21:40 - 1349

Even if i could have seven heroes, i would still try to play with players as much as possible.

Just imagine something now: What if Anet had continued to pump out new chapters as originally planned. We could have had like six continents by now. Having seven heroes would be almost a must for latecomers in the game, because older areas would be abandoned completely.

Bryant Again

Hall Hero

Join Date: Feb 2006

05 Sep 2008 at 21:41 - 1350

Quote:

Originally Posted by Burst Cancel

Here's the bigger problem though: how do you know when something is actually imba? In some cases it can take a long time for players to figure out how to deal with a particular tactic. Further, the average (or even above-average) player is almost never a good judge of balance - the appropriate counter to a seemingly imba tactic might require skill that only the best players possess.

Determining an imbalance relies on numerous factors, including the following: how simple is it to use? What's the tradeoff for the simplicity? How effective is it? What's the skill threshold? The list goes on.

A good example is the Necron race in Dawn of War: Dark Crusade. The main problem with the Necrons is not that they have too much versatility, but unlike they Eldar they don't make a tradeoff: they're also highly resilient. They would have numerous abilities and specializations but not suffered little consequence for it. Because of this, the only way to beat a Necron player was to be *much* better than him and not hope he screws up by just a little bit but a whole lot. But in every 1v1, if it's against the Necron and between players of equal skill, Necrons will always win.

So yeah, Necrons got a well-deserved nerf in Soulstorm, the next expansion.

To answer the other part of your question, how "imbalance" should be decided and acted upon, I think it goes a bit one side and mostly the other (also in the same philosophy that I hold to Guild Wars): The most knowledgeable and experienced should always be the ones who guide the utmost vital balance of the game, while at the same time making sure the lesser-skilled players are able to find a wide variety of options of bearable play. While I don't think going polar in either direction is good for the game, it's vital to keep a larger emphasis with the experienced portion of the playerbase. Generally, the "lesser-skilled" are always easier to please.

Inner Salbat

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Oct 2005

Leader - ANZAC

E/

06 Sep 2008 at 01:18 - 1351

Quote:

Originally Posted by EPO Bot

Even if i could have seven heroes, i would still try to play with players as much as possible.

Just imagine something now: What if Anet had continued to pump out new chapters as originally planned. We could have had like six continents by now. Having seven heroes would be almost a must for latecomers in the game, because older areas would be abandoned completely.

That is slowly happening now it would be like a ghost town when GW2 hits the market so it's better to start bringing it out soon so that the good players can filter some of there genius to other players before that happens of course it's not imperative.

On the other hand that maybe the plan to depopulate GW1 so they can close the servers, I for one am not buying GW2 so at that point unless there is some sort of offline version or something will wave goodbye too my 3 years of effort.

This debate sounds like the favor debate we had before they changed it, it isn't going to go away.

Crom The Pale

Furnace Stoker

Join Date: Nov 2006

Ageis Ascending

W/

06 Sep 2008 at 03:59 - 1352

At this point PvE is very much a dieing aspect of GW.

By the end of this year, barring some major PvE content update, I expect PvE to be completely dead.

Only those diehard title farmers will be left in game, plus those few that are still rather new to the game.

Today an old guildie of mine joined me for the MOX quests. We partied with a pug and it was a split between 3year vets and new relatively new players.
The vets were basically just there for the Hero, then they would go back to some other game.

It may already be to late for 7heros to keep people in GW. If they were unable to H/H or PUG something in the last 6 months chances are they left GW and may not return.

Inner Salbat

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Oct 2005

Leader - ANZAC

E/

06 Sep 2008 at 04:43 - 1353

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crom The Pale

It may already be to late for 7heros to keep people in GW. If they were unable to H/H or PUG something in the last 6 months chances are they left GW and may not return.

That's all the more reason to get it out and done sooner before it becomes too much a job for 1 dev and 1 artest to handle, maybe we should have pushed harder sooner but I think people have been pushing for this option for a long time, well it took us 2 years to get them to sell unlock packs for us to UAX our accounts 3 years for them to split favor.

JDRyder

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Apr 2007

Great temple of Balthazar

Mo/Me

06 Sep 2008 at 07:19 - 1354

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyla

Enemies in PvE need to know how to react towards certain situations, not incredibly high attributes and buffs. They also need full bars and with decent comprahension.

thats what i said

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyla

Just giving people PvE skills isn't going to balance it out, it's just power creep versus power creep.

umm???

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyla

... Which usually refers to Godmode D-Slashers in the first place anyway?

why do you want SY warriors for pvp?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyla

I understand that. SY wouldn't exactly work in PvP either though, will it?

nope thats why i lol'ed irl when he said "sy warriors" when we were talking about pvp

Avarre

Bubblegum Patrol

Join Date: Dec 2005

Singapore Armed Forces

06 Sep 2008 at 07:38 - 1355

Quote:

the players have to be able to deal with stupidly broken shit on a regular basis.

How can people even bring this argument into a discussion with a straight face?

Skill countering overpowered stuff usually involves using an equally powerful strategy, or opportunistic strategy, to retake initiative or preying on the weaknesses of the setup.

Completely imbalanced stuff, however, just gives whoever uses it an advantage in all situations and therefore even if skill can defeat it, it takes away the whole point of competition, which is meant to be a fair platform of skill.

Theories like this work in games where you can change your style midway, but in Guild Wars, the build you have is the build you have, and there are limits to what you can do midway (compared to most RTS games, where you can switch builds/unit compositions in response). Tactical adjustments only go so far.

Numa Pompilius

Grotto Attendant

Join Date: May 2005

At an Insit.. Intis... a house.

Live Forever Or Die Trying [GLHF]

W/Me

06 Sep 2008 at 09:16 - 1356

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmr819

I sometimes wonder what would happen if ANet offered a "7 Heroes" feature as a purchase option the way they currently offer extra character slots.

Additional revenue, for virtually no labor investment

/SIGNED!

That's the way to do it, IMO. They could even sell extra heroes individually at $2 - 5 per extra hero slot. Only the people who really wanted extra heroes would buy them, and somehow I'm thinking most people likely to PUG would not be in that group.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDRyder

whyyyy?

you dont need 8 of them theres a reason people dont use 8 of them now, and cry of frustration is not a pve skill i think you mean Cry of pain.

8 lightbringers gaze for a player at 10 LB means 8 interrupts and 8000 points of damage dished out over up to 10 enemies every 15 seconds.
8 cry of pain means 8 interrupts and 8x93 armor-ignoring AoE damage every 12 seconds.
8 Vanguard assassins mean 8 interrupts and 8 extra lvl 20 minions for 15 seconds every 30 seconds.
That's pretty powerful stuff.

Sure there may be situations where it's even more beneficial to bring other PvE skills on some or all the heroes (e.g. you do want headbutt on your dslash warrior, necrosis on your discordway necros, eternal aura on your dervish etc etc) but the point is that there's tons of PvE skills which would be horribly powerful if heroes could use them, not just Save Yourselves! like you said.

EDIT: Of course, human teams can use PvE skills today, so heroes with PvE skills wouldn't be more horribly overpowered than human teams are today, so I'm actually more arguing against the existence of the stupid PvE skills than against heroes using them. However, as long as heroes don't get to use those horribly overpowered PvE skills, human-only teams will be more powerful than any team with 7 heroes, which I guess is the way many people want in order to keep PUGs alive.

And personally I'm not sure I want my heroes to be able to use PvE skills - I enjoy facing at least some level of challenge.

JDRyder

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Apr 2007

Great temple of Balthazar

Mo/Me

06 Sep 2008 at 09:52 - 1357

Quote:

Originally Posted by Numa Pompilius

8 lightbringers gaze for a player at 10 LB means 8 interrupts and 8000 points of damage dished out over up to 10 enemies every 15 seconds.
8 cry of pain means 8 interrupts and 8x93 armor-ignoring AoE damage every 12 seconds.
8 Vanguard assassins mean 8 interrupts and 8 extra lvl 20 minions for 15 seconds every 30 seconds

you going to put 3 non prot/heals on your monks?

also you going to have to micro all that cause heros are not going to use things like CoP, the way you want them to

Moloch Vein

Forge Runner

Join Date: Apr 2007

Reactive Hexing Sucks

[Thay]

N/

06 Sep 2008 at 10:16 - 1358

Frankly, it puzzles me why this hasn't already been added to the game.

Seven heroes could also be used to make up new Guild Wars pvp arenas.

Inner Salbat

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Oct 2005

Leader - ANZAC

E/

06 Sep 2008 at 10:21 - 1359

On the other hand we could just farm gold buy consumables and power stones to make the h/h party so overpowered that it requires no skill to actually play at all great solution ~not~, I'd rather make a build and roll with it to see what I'm made of rather than rely on cheap tricks.

Numa Pompilius

Grotto Attendant

Join Date: May 2005

At an Insit.. Intis... a house.

Live Forever Or Die Trying [GLHF]

W/Me

06 Sep 2008 at 10:56 - 1360

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDRyder

you going to put 3 non prot/heals on your monks?

"Sure there may be situations where it's even more beneficial to bring other PvE skills on some or all the heroes" --- "but the point is that there's tons of PvE skills which would be horribly powerful if heroes could use them, not just Save Yourselves! like you said."

What was unclear about that?

Quote:

also you going to have to micro all that cause heros are not going to use things like CoP, the way you want them to

They don't need to coordinate spike, they just need to spam on recharge.

Give up, your point was wrong, SY! is not the only skill "people may change" to if heroes could use PvE skills.

JDRyder

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Apr 2007

Great temple of Balthazar

Mo/Me

06 Sep 2008 at 12:29 - 1361

Quote:

Originally Posted by Numa Pompilius

"Sure there may be situations where it's even more beneficial to bring other PvE skills on some or all the heroes" --- "but the point is that there's tons of PvE skills which would be horribly powerful if heroes could use them, not just Save Yourselves! like you said."

What was unclear about that?

cuz they are not horribly powerful..

Quote:

Originally Posted by Numa Pompilius

They don't need to coordinate spike, they just need to spam on recharge.

thats nice but unless they modded the IA for cop "very unlikely" they will use it as a interrupt...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Numa Pompilius

Give up, your point was wrong, SY! is not the only skill "people may change" to if heroes could use PvE skills.

many people are also bad.

Cobalt

Krytan Explorer

Join Date: Aug 2005

Mo/W

06 Sep 2008 at 13:26 - 1362

I think 7 heroes is really a necessity for some classes that have been poorly balanced, or over nerfed so that are only desired in a certain few areas with and only with particular builds.

Like Mesmers, Rits, Sins, Paragons, even Dervish all of whom for the most part can't not either heal as well as a monk, do damage like an ele or tank like a warrior thus are not sought or grouping by most who seek the best possible chance for success.

It is not the player populations fault they prefer other classes over these classes to group with they want to succeed, nor is it the fault of the players who play these classes, it is the pathetic class balancing in GW that is at fault.

So at the very least Anet should provide a away for these weak classes they created and beat to uselessness to migrate through the chapters with as much of a chance for success as anyone else.

Give them 7 heroes so they may have a team that is as strong as any pug you owe them that much!

Tyla

Emo Goth Italics

Join Date: Sep 2006

06 Sep 2008 at 13:59 - 1363

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cobalt

I think 7 heroes is really a necessity for some classes that have been poorly balanced, or over nerfed so that are only desired in a certain few areas with and only with particular builds.

Every profession has a powerful build available for use in PvE.

Quote:

Like Mesmers, Rits, Sins, Paragons, even Dervish all of whom for the most part can't not either heal as well as a monk, do damage like an ele or tank like a warrior thus are not sought or grouping by most who seek the best possible chance for success.

Anyone can run Cry of Pain, and that includes Mesmers. Mesmer hex, Cry of Pain, win.

Ritualists can pull out an extremely powerful Splinter Weapon, and also support the party defensively at the same time.

'Sins have MS/DB, which generates some of the nastiest DPS in the game when it comes to PvE.

Paragons deal moderate damage while having the ability to support the party. Even moreso when it comes to the Imbagon, which is pracically godmode.

Dervs have the most overpowered weapon in the game, next to spear.

And only bad Warriors tank. Warriors are there to deal damage.

Quote:

It is not the player populations fault they prefer other classes over these classes to group with they want to succeed, nor is it the fault of the players who play these classes, it is the pathetic class balancing in GW that is at fault.

No, it's their fault that they can't see these professions exceed stupidity though. Even a single CoP is quite devastating in PvE.

@JD: I missed the part on PvP. However, you could still use Brawling Headbutt and Steelfang to fuel the adrenaline either way.

R.Shayne

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Oct 2007

06 Sep 2008 at 14:06 - 1364

ANET has already said that the HoM would not be locked after GW2 was released which leads me to believe that if a player likes a certain reward for something they can return to GW1 and fill that Monument.

I would guess that NCSoft will at some point bundle all 3.5 GW1 campaigns with GW2, just like they are doing now with GW1 3 campaigns.

I don't expect the servers to close for some time but if someone wants to play GW1 I do expect the number of players to have decreased so something will need to be done about FoW, UA, DoA, Deep, and Urgoz where henchmen are not allowed. The Deep and Urgoz are already at the state if you don't have a pve guild you might as well forget it and DoA is declining again but Tormented Weapons may revive this area.