A discussion on 7 heroes

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 -.-

Incorrect. Why? Because there were many people, including myself, who just used henchmen instead of puging before heroes came out, all thats changed since then is that those same people just use 3 heroes and 4 henchmen instead of 7 henchmen. I do not think that many people changed from pure Pugs only to h/h once heroes came out, at least that switched ONLY because of heroes.

I personally say we should have 5 heroes in a party. 7 heroes just seems to overpowering to me, and I know many of you will say that a full party of alliance/guild members would be more overpowering, but I say 7 heroes is more because they don't have to leave at times . Also, 7 heroes would allow you to do UW and the other elite areas *excluding Urgoz and the Deep* with just heroes, which will ruin those areas even more then Ursan does now im my opinion. However, with 5 heroes, you can do most of prophecies *which I think is the best campaign with lvling and party size change* without any henchies and for those areas with a party size of 8, which is too many in my opinion, you will just need 2 henchies, which removes a few more chances of party wipes and whatnot since not many henchies take rez, and those who do usually take the rez sig if not a monk.

Heros did not destroy PuGs. PuGs destroyed PuGs. Before heros were introduced, was everyone who had no desire to random group, joining PuGs to do quests and missions? Absolutely not...they were using all hench teams. If heros had never been introduced, they would still be using all hench teams. I personally gave up on random grouping soon after Factions was released...because the henchies were far more capable than most random groups, and far less arrogent, immature, and stupid. Whether there are three heros, or seven, or none...peoples' choices will remain the same. If they want to random group, they will. If they dont...they won't.

Using 7 heros would change absolutely NOTHING regarding PuGs. Those that want to PuG....will continue to do so. Those that still do not want to....still won't.

Ok, let me tell you something... I am referring to people who PUG primarily.

Heroes are not a problem. When I want to socialize, I go to a town. If heroes did not exist, I would use henchmen. If henchmen did not exist, I would solo as much of the game as I could. And when that failed, I'd uninstall Guild Wars.

The addition of 7 heroes will not hurt the PUG players. Those of us who are not playing in PUGs are not going to play in a PUG either way. We will hardly be causing any sort of imbalance, because the game is instanced and because heroes cannot use PvE skills like Ursan Imbalance.

Refusing to give us 7 heroes is stupid. There is absolutely no reason not to.
- It will not imbalance the game. Ursan has already done that, and besides, saying that a 7 hero team would be stronger than a pickup group is basically ArenaNet's admission that the average pickup group player sucks at Guild Wars.
- It is not going to cause GUI problems. Really, it's not hard to add an extra row of flag buttons. And as for skill bars, for me that won't crowd up my widescreen's GUI and for low-res players, they can toggle off when needed.
- It will not kill pickup groups. PUG players already think that heroes are stupid (you'll often find them preferring to get a human monk over a hero monk, even when 99% of the time the human monk is an absolute idiot); this is caused by the fact that they always load terrible bars on their heroes, and when they go with someone who has good heroes, they say that it was the human part of the team that brought about the victory. Therefor the pickup group players will still play in pickup groups. The ones that begin to understand the game and use good builds on heroes might leave PUGs, but they'd do that anyways.

All we're asking for is a way to make our game more fun. Is that too much to ask? That a game be made more fun when the ability to make it more fun is right there in front of ArenaNet and will not harm anyone by being implemented?

This was very very funny to me, and I would probably be the same.

In short, those who want to pug will, those who want to h/h will. Adding more/removing all heroes will not change a thing with this. The only thing that will change is removing all heroes AND all henchmen, but that will not happen in GW1, because many people who do not want to bother with pugs will probably just leave the game if they cannot solo stuff.

I want to make sure everyone understands this.

7 heroes is not an attempt to change the ratio of H/Hers to PUGers.

7 heroes is an attempt to make the game more fun.

Let me say that again. An attempt to make the game more fun.

More fun.

Fun.

The entire point of a game.

Do you have some sort of twitch problem with all that bolding, do you think I'll not read and miss the things you say so you wish to bold them, or are you just trying to be rude and yell?

Your argument is flawed in lots of places, but I'll simply quote this one as I am short on time:

Its not just your game, the game for those who wish seven heroes, but a game for everyone, some of whom share a dissenting opinion.

Anet's already stated their opinion on the topic too, I might add.

Because they've become full of their own self importance, yours and everybody else's opinion who'd like 7 heroes just does't matter, the ego, arrogance and ignorance of Anet of late is quite typical of somebody who got decent sales of a game franchise and get lulled into the idea they can't do no wrong.

Like others have said, games are for fun, when they stop being that peeps move on, it would help if they stopped nerfing the game to the point where all skills become neutrel and listen to forums like this regarding their player base like this 7 heroes idea.

Don't hold your breath though, history has always showed they've died on their owm sword.

/Signed for 7 heroes.

So what if A-net says no. Things change all the time.

*Looks at tabbed storage box*

But for those that want to use seven heros...it would make it more fun. And for those that don't want to use seven heros and wish to keep PuGing...it would change absolutely nothing... >_>

Yea this thread has returned for yet another debate of we want/you can't have.

While I would like to see it happen, don't really believe it can ever happen.

Maybe after the launch of GW2, but certainly not before.

I've noted for a while that a lot of the issues that surround GW PvE revolve around the entire "you must play with a party of X people" mechanic. While the goal is obviously to encourage sociable play, the problem is that it makes each person's enjoyment of the game dependant on someone else - that's a very dangerous concept from a design standpoint.

Nobody would care if "PuGs" sucked if you didn't actually need parties to play the game. Nobody would care if most players were mud-chewing primitives. Or if everyone had overpowered, win-button builds. Or if everyone was an asshole. It simply wouldn't matter at all, because none of that would affect you unless you wanted it to.

An analogy I like to use is driving. We complain about bad drivers because we're forced to drive on the same roads as they do. If they're slow, reckless, etc., that has real impact on you and your ability to get to where you need to go. But if you could somehow drive on your own private roads, nobody would give a damn how other people drove. GW is the same way.

In short, I think the whole "the game is designed for parties of 8" was a bad idea to begin with. But since that's what we're stuck with, the best way to fix it is to get as close to a true single-player option as possible, which is a full hero party and PvE skills. There are, of course, other ways to do it - make all classes self-sufficient, for example, and scale area difficulty with the number of players.

Finally, a lot of the arguments in this thread have been rehashed many times and are simply not credible. For example:
- Heroes killed PuGing. This is not only impossible to prove, but also not even likely. As pointed out several times, the H/H'ers played with henchmen and friends before heroes came out - they were never PuGers to begin with. There are also a number of other more likely factors - the fact that the player population is spread out between three continents, for instance. Or that there's so many different things to do in so many different places (vanquishing, NM missions, HM missions, dungeons, etc. across four different campaigns).
- Seven heroes are overpowered. Not really - real players with PvE skills are infinitely stronger. Ursan or imbagon are prime examples. And that's ignoring the fact that hero AI is terrible and can only use a very limited subset of skills correctly. The entire 'imbalanced' argument is simply without merit.

Why not?

Those who don't pug, like me, wont pug less because of 7 heros, since I don't pug at all.

Those who defends that pug is something very important and has to be protected don't use H/H themselves, so what would change?

I'm not reading all 30 some odd pages of the topic... I get the gist of it, but here's the deal: Ever since I got to where the Henchmen were level 20(the dragon's lair) I've used them almost exclusively aside from when guildies or allies need a hand, since well before factions came around. It seems like the hench got way smarter and the players got waaaay dumber after that point.

I remember henching in prophecies, you needed to be quick to run up, pull the bad guys with a longbow then run back before the heroes charged the mob(this was before flags). I remember smashing my head against THK and Ring of Fire in pug after pug, watching idiots over extend, disco or afk the team to death and not bring res sigs to ave the party. Then I took the henchmen out and rolled through all the rest of the missons. The only issue is, and I figured this out early, is in proph you had to take your own condition removal and hex removal, only dunham had shatter hex and I think lina had mend ailment but if you took RC or holy veil it wasn't an issue. I Henched most of factions too, even the Sungjang District(I left the urn at the start, just took the spear), and the eternal grove(didn't get masters but I beat it).

Now I'm interested in the elite missions, but I'm having trouble finding groups. Right before they added the FoW/UW reward chests, me and another guy with 6 heroes beat the whole FoW, it was a blast, but about 3/4 of the way through he had a power failure. Miraculously he got back in the game, and we finished the run. I'd like the hero cap limit removed in areas where henchmen cannot go. Like the Realms of the gods, the DoA, and the Urgoz/Deep. I know I could beat these areas if I got in there with the fabled magnificent 7(or 12 in urgoz/deep), I could probably thrash them with 3+4 but they won't let me take the henchmen(I'd rather have the level 15s in the ToA then most other pugs in the FoW). My Norn rank is only about 5-6 on most of my characters, I'm not going to grind it to 10 just so I can get in a pug group....

Hell I'm thinkin on taking just 4 heroes into the FoW, I hear it can be done, I just have to equip them well. Get them some runes and such.

I bold it because the people against 7H seem to be repeatedly ignoring what we say. Hopefully when bold they might start to notice the important points.

No, my argument is flawless, unless you can prove otherwise.

Except it is my game, because it's instanced. If I ran a 7 hero party it would affect no one but me and the other 7 hero players.

Those who don't PuG will be relieved to not play with....ugh, Failmen -- AKA Henchmen.

Those who do PuG won't be affected.

I don't see why this shouldn't be implimented.

Decent PUGs have a tendency to be difficult to form, but with seven heroes we will be able to choose what builds we need instantly.

I doubt it will affect PUGers at all, so why all the bitching and moaning?