A discussion on 7 heroes

I am against the 7 hero idea.. if you want a mostly hero group find someone else to join you..

I personnaly beat GW:EN almost entirely with PuG's and it was great fun and contrary to what most of you believe, there are good players out there! I am pretty sure anet added heroes so that when you are missing a player or two you can fill in the empty slot.. they weren't added so you can play single player.

yes there are a lot of good people out there that pug, unfortunately the are grossly out numbered by the mending wammo, and that is not counting the mending dervish and assassin, the ranger that uses live vicariously, the monk that thinks that heal party and healing breeze are the leetest skills ever etc....

Often difficult to do. Besides, some of us suffer from SAD and don't want to bother with PuGs if we don't have to (and the tremendous waste of time I usually find them to be).

I find it hard to believe you could possibly be "sure" of why Arenanet added heroes. Where are your references?

Finally, it really doesn't matter to me why they may have added them. I only care about how I may use them.

No matter the pro's and cons here, I'd always be for a full heroe party. Simply because it would make me more independend on other players and it won't hurt anyone in PvE. What you say? Grinding? Economy? As long as there are no über items in GW I'll never accept that argument!

Aight?

As I see it, PUGs are, as a whole, screwed. For one, the less than 1 million (guesstimate) player base is spread across 3.5 continents, and that's pretty damn big. Among that, people just don't like having to take chances with PUGs in the first place, so that's why they take heroes/henchies. For many, time is of the essence, so a lot of people would like to get a mission done as soon as they can, as flawlessly as they can, as efficently as they can, and you can quickly organize heroes up for that.

Besides that, there's just not a whole lot of connectivity in Guild Wars. You're cut off from anyone the moment you leave an outpost, the party search only works in outposts and only in you're presiding district, and - like I said - the world of Guild Wars is freakin' huge.

In conclusion, PUGs are as dead as they can be right now. Having seven heroes wouldn't hurt them because a corpse doesn't feel any pain.

I'd ask why you're more concerned with this and not with Rt solo farming or 55ing. Not only that, but how is vanquishing an area considered bad???

Community already is separated, people who would run 7 heroes are already running 3 heroes + 4 hench.

I guess there's a reason behind it, yes?

Then this would mean they WANT to use AI, not PUGs. Giving an option = bad?

Doesn't that defeat the reason? People who don't want to play with others have to find another player? Wasn't this one of the reasons people want 7 heroes?

So, I beat GWEN using h/h. Your point?

Too bad they're apparently hiding from me


And about PUGs, look at my left, my profession. That' right, assassin. Now, I wanted to do one quest with a PUG in GWEN- In the Defence of the Eye or something.
After 5 minutes, I finally found a group and had to take bullshit from some E
"we don't need 2 Assass, kick 1 and take another monk or ele" and so on.
The point? Screw you, your people, your PUGs. You want to blame someone for making GW anti-social? Fine, but don't blame Tahlkora for it, she only joins your party if you want so. Blame people- people who run wammos, mending/healing breeze monks, stupid players in general, that's what killed PUGs. Even before heroes were introduced I'd rather take 7 henchies than try to find a PUG.
If people fail to understand I can dish good amount of damage and not die- screw them, I'll take h/h and I'll be laughing my ass off when I finish a dungeon and I'll still see your PUGing crap "lf 3 more sf eles and 2 monks, no other classes allowed"

2 player + 6 hero > pug ^^

I love my hero at least it's a lot better than most player

Let me add something to what I said earlier on page 2.

7 heroes should ONLY be allowed in HARD MODE, because let's face it, hardmode is really freaking hard. You need real good strategies to vanquish areas or complete guardian titles. Yes, it is possible to do these in human groups, but it would be nicer to have 7 heroes so that even a greater part of crowd can attempt them. Good pugs are hard to find in normal mode and quality pugs are nearly impossible to find in hard-mode unless you belong to a good helpful guild/alliance.

That said, I'm totally against 7 heroes for normal mode!

What do you all think?

As much as I would like a full hero party, it just won't happen because then there's almost no need for henchmen (though the EotN henchmen are very good, they're packing bigger and better skillbars. I'll happily take them over most players in-game)

That said if they do implement it, I wouldn't care that much because it would make areas a lot easier.

Me (war) + Livia & Olias & MoW (SS) + Hayda & Morghan (party support) + Ogden & Tahkl (typical hybrid monking depending on the situation) = a dream.

No Need for Tenchi? lol....i cant care less about bloody HM i hardly play cause i see no reason to do that.I want 7 heros cause i unlocked them, i equiped them and i got all the campaignes.Why is it matter so much to darn anet or to silly players who are against it if i got 7 heros in my party?Whats it to you really?Screw the communety, i dont want anything to do with it and i want to play the way i want to play!.

Ditto.

Here, read it again....

And for all you wonderful people so worried about PUGs, as someone who plays an Assassin regularly, I just want to thank you for ignoring my requests to join your endangered PUGs, as you wait 20 minutes for an ele to join up.

And ANet? The poll on GWO says it all.

woot
so much for retarded logic "but this will kill pugs"

Even though I can't sympathize with the plight of the assassin to much, I deleted mine a couple weeks after Factions first came out because I couldn't get a group in Altrum, I can sympathize because my Paragon has trouble getting into groups. What's even worse with my Paragon is that if someone asks me to ping my build and they see that I don't run with the "accepted" anthem of flame/they're on fire combo, I start catching shit. Give me 7 heroes any day.

I hear ya bro. Besides the Assassin, I have a Paragon too. He has a slightly better chance of getting into the endangered PUGs because I'll advertise what he is, i.e. Condition Removal, Flame/Fire, etc.

having 7 heroes would be a pipedream, but ANet is all about balance, and I agree with henchie stuff, their skill set sucks dick. If I ever want to do vanquisher in HM, I can simply buy the exclusive peppermint candy canes and/or just this new consumable that removes DP and gives morale boost (which is better). Or, I could just have a guilde help me out on the HM vanquisher title.

Let's introduce a new question.
If A-net had two choices due to resources on their side:
1. Implement better posibilities to team up with one or more decent players in a reasonable time.
2. Implement 7 hero teams

Which one would most people prefer?

That's a question that is as least as valid as the 'would 7 heroes be more fun' question on GWO.

Better possibilities...?

My against was the only reason I could think of that Anet would say no. Personally I dont get it. I would love to have all Heros. I have spent how much on this game now? buying all 4 games....And in certain areas is it impossible to get a group of people. You could actually build an entire party with "synergy". Skills layer over one another and making your party a wrecking machine.

I know we prob wont ever see it. But I also thought we would never get more storage. But maybe if we discuss it, not bitch about it anet will consider it.

~the rat~

FFXI was a game with forced grouping (there were exceptions though). It also had a number of noob walls: because you had to group together, and death meant losing hours of experience, people who sucked at the game would progress at a massively reduced rate, because they'd get their party dead, and lose a few hours of their incredibly slow party exp.

Because of this, the quality of players you partied with (at least early on before the december 2005 update) gradually and very obviously improved as you levelled up.

You still occasionally got idiots, but overall people randomly seeking parties were of a skill level that wouldn't get you dead.


Unfortunately as time progressed, the entire population of the game aged, formed large guilds, and people who sucked would be dragged up despite their lack of skill, and slowly the idiot barrier rose up the levels.

Even back before the game was destroyed by an incredibly aged population, people hated pugging. Spending ages getting a group together that are willing to play for an extended duration of time and have compatible skills is a pain.


Guild Wars doesn't even have a noob wall. People who suck can be found in all areas of the game. This isn't helped by the fact that Guild Wars is so reliant on having the right build, is that the only way most of the content has been made 'harder' is by giving the mobs silly speed buffs that fall to exactly the same cookie cutter builds.

Guild Wars just doesn't work as an intense PvE PUG based game. If you wanted to have a bunch of skilled players in each mission outpost, you'd need to add hurdles for people to fail at over and over until they stopped sucking.

Suddenly, the entire game would no longer be the casual-friendly anti-grind game that it proclaims itself as.


Presumably this is what Anet is thinking about when they talk about increasing the level cap in GW2. Give people an external number which roughly translates to experience with the profession/character/whatever.


For the moment? You're not going to increase the quality of PUGs without manually forcing people to learn how to play the game. You're not going to do that without having them fail over and over until they do so. And even if you did add noob barriers in, most of the people who suck would quit before they learnt to play properly.

I suppose you could add some sort of system where players rate each other (because that wouldn't be abused lol), so that you can determine how good a player is before you invite them. Won't that just exclude inexperienced people in the same way that adding noob barriers would, except that this time they wouldn't even be able to gain ranking points because they didn't have any ranking points?


Aside from all of this, you have to ask whether allowing 7H would hinder PUGs more than it would help those people who suck to realise that they suck by forcing them to set Hero builds and do some research.

I dunno. I mean if you can't be bothered to research and learn what you're supposed to be doing, will you just blame the AI and moan about them killing Heros?

I suppose 7H would help me when i do stuff alone, but mainly i play with my guild. Maybe instead of looking at 7H as a thing which would kill pugs, it could be used to encourage people who suck to learn about party build formation and suchlike?

Just a thought.

I get that all the time. Or I get into a pug, they wipe, doing stupid crap. If the sin out lives the dervish, something is wrong with the pugs. You get tons of grief for a build. "why dont you use this?" because i dont f-ing want to. I beat all of GwEn with H/H as a sin, with the exception of one mission. HoS where u blow up the wurm....So even if we had 7 heros there are some missions that you just need people on.
~the rat~

A system that would be able to spot out the poor and decent players? That's pretty damned revolutionary (har har).

But seriously, that's way too broad and unspecific.

...Should be read.

shirosae - great freakin post man. That post should be stickied, forwarded to Andrew/Gaile (and yes, Andrew deserves to go first, since he seems to give the most straight-forward answers), and placed on ANets front door.

3 are enough. The community is struggling, outposts full of zombies with the 4 disease

10 out of 10

Seconded - great post shirosae. GW is supposedly casual friendly, grind free blah blah thats why the quality of average players in GW are so bad. The more dedicated players has no choice to go with H/H. But thats not the only reason.

Reasons to use heroes:

People live in different timezones - yeah its better if you live in America or Europe as you can find more players when you playing. I play in Australian timezone hence fewer people are playing during that time.

The PvE content is too big - 3 campaigns plus an expansion and then double that with NM and HM. Also farming and titles. Too much things to do.

Immature people - those people who like drawing penis and boobs should go learn arts than playing GW.

Ragequitters - Losing party member(s) right before or in middle of mission = increase of failure.

AFK/ leechers - Same as above but instead leechers possibly will get reward by doing nothing. Some people have real life interference so having H/H wont cause grief to other players.

Profession discrimination - Who needs assassins, paragons, etc? They are teh noobz right?

Reasons not to use heroes:

Imbalance - retarded argument, how about a team who can have up to 24 overpowered PvE skills and each of them can use consumable items?

Its online game, it suppose to be multi player not single player - another retarded argument, who are you trying to dictate other people gaming experience? FYI I play online games because of pvp such as FPS games, RTS games and GW included. If I only have short time to spare or just wanna have relaxing time, I'd roll up H/H in PvE. Im sure other people have similar playstyle hence H/H is the way to go.

Agreed. There aren't no where saying that you're meant to play with other people in Guild Wars.

Lol, you really expect anyone to want to play with you after handling that salty block with the yellow stain.

Hey, I didn't say I touched it!

Honest...

7 heros would have no adverse effect on the pugs at all. Anyone that is currently using 3 heros and 4 Hench would gain 4 better controlable chars.

Those that pug would still pug.

The majority of time I find myself using hero/hench is when either I have only a short time and rather not leave a mission/dungeon party hanging or when I am doing something like farming a green or points and know that others won't likely wish to make the same run repeatedly or once the item drops for me I can quit rather than keep runing till it drops for the entire party.

Give me access to 7 Heros, heck give me access to 12 and ill run them in the Deep and urgoz

My time is often short when I log on and I'd rather be able to jump into and complete something than sit and wait for a party to form then discuss what builds we need then find out somebody doesnt even have the quest or has no clue what to do.

For those that think 7 heros would make the game to easy, well its a game and if I want easy for a change why deny me? I can still go do hard mode or DoA if I want a challange, not to mention PvP.

Oh, I like shirosae's post a lot and (s)he states a lot of point are true.
Same for nugzta's arguments. I know them and am not going to argue over them.

However, I was not even thinking about the PuG situation in the first place.
While I don't support the general 'PuGs suck' statement, I can rely on my guild and alliance about 99% of the time.

Now I have these things called guild, alliance and friends list.
With those, I know who are the decent players and who are not.
Revolutionary? Nah.....

However, it is absolutely impossible now to schedule anything in advance besides putting it in guild notice.
Asking alliance officers to put it in their notice is also not really working when you want to schedule several things at once.
Guild website could be an option, however, less than half of the members have registered.
And alliance / friends don't check the website.
We could use the alliance leader's website (which we encourage), however, the same there, a lot of people don't check it that often.
Whisping my entire friendslist is not really an option.

Now suppose I could put in some kind of ingame schedule that is visible to guild/alliance/friends that I want to play Eternal Grove HM tomorrow at 7.00PM GMT, start from Euro Eng 1. Or vanquish Cursed Lands, same time, ToA Euro 2.
Perhaps with a "I'm in" option if people want to join. People can then see how many people in total have the same interest and are willing to join.
When people are honest (which I expect from guild/alliance/friends) they show up. Then it's just a matter of forming one or several teams and start playing.

In my opinion a feature like this would be a lot more valuable than playing with 7 heroes.
And it would support support the "the social interaction that is such a wonderful and desirable element of the game" without having to rely on PuGs.
People should be able to judge the original organizer if he/she would have a decent friends list and alliance.
If you are not sure, don't sign up and do something else.

[QUOTE]i waited a bit for someone else to answer that but i think it deserves an answer.

1. the HA was announced as an experiment due to player request and would be monitored and as much feedback from the community including polls discussion etc was not just asked for but repeatedly asked for as they would change it according to what most wanted

HEROES

the decision and testing of how many to allow was done BEFORE the first hero came into the game with Nightfall

they had to determine the maximum number of heroes before release and after testing the head designers decided that they would cap the heroes at 3 giving a player control over half the party allowing the remaining 4 slots to be filled as they wished.

2. that was a high level decision because it would affect the entire gameplay not just a fraction like HA

3. since you can fill in with henchies which have gotten much better (herta anybody?) the excuse that they are doing it to force us to pug is proven garbage

bottom line

HA was an experiment subject to change as feedback came in

HERO LIMIT was set in stone a year ago and GWEN is only adding to the choice you have in heroes not raising the cap

HA polls were asked for to help make a decision

HERO polls were never asked for as the top dogs had already agreed on the 3 hero cap for reasons all of them thought valid even if you disagree

HA discussion was ask/begged/solicited to help make a choice

HERO discussion was never asked for as the final decision had already been made making further discussion meaningless as they wont change

so you can make all the polls you want but when Anet/NCsoft says NO instead of it is under consideration i have never seen them change their minds on a basic gameplay item

You make it sound like 7 heroes and an ingame schedule are two different solutions for the same problem but they aren't. One offers more possibilities for the solo player, the other offers more possibilities for the people that want to form a team of real players. Implementing both of these features would improve the game for everyone, solo players and team players.

Absolutely missing the point. Ambivalent means "not caring whether they would use AI or human players."

For this target audience, it isn't about WANTING to use AI, it's about using something that is (1) easier to form and (2) has the same or more power than a PuG human team.

It's this same group that would likely use two elites on their skillbar, seven PvE only skills, etc...if you provide them a very powerful and quick option, most players would likely use it.

The more benefits (and possibly incentives) A-Net provides to playing solo, the more these ambivalent players will likely use the AI. And this will likely have an adverse impact to the multiplayer aspect of the game. As has been said before, although 7 heroes would be a "boon" to those who currently use AI almost exclusively, it comes at a cost that needs to be considered.

Please read my post on page 6 and provide me your rationale as to why (1) seven heroes would not have any adverse effect on PuGs considering the ambivalent players I refer to and (2) why "people that would PuG will always be able to PuG". Explain why you do not believe why more areas will become like Unwaking Waters and Eternal Grove where getting an all-human party together is currently almost relatively impossible.

Looks like this discussion is turning into into 7/8 Hero's vs. PuG groups.

Hero's dont ruin PuG groups...Titles do. Everyone in my guild now adays is all going in 500 different directions. Can you help me with this...Naww, im working on that.

Does your PuG group want to help me work on the Title im currently working on? I dont see many people making PuG groups to help Vanquish the area im working on.
I also dont see too many PuG groups willing to keep playing with a 60% DP, wich i have finished many areas in the game with. Just takes longer, but no one quits.

H/H teams are already easier to form and have the same or more power than a PuG human team.

Then following that logic and considering what I stated above, this group is already using H/H exclusively. In that case, how will adding more benefits for solo players make a difference?

Then they could simply add benefits/incentives for those ambivalent players to play in PuGs, like the ingame schedule mentioned above, instead of limiting the options for solo players.

This.

In Prophecies, people were in Mission towns because they were there to do the mission that started there. Most people within that town had the same goal...to form a group and do the mission. The smaller outpost towns were usually great starting points for specific quests, so people in those places also had a similar goal and would be in the outpost to form up a group.

Factions comes along and all the sudden you have Missions and Side Quests beginning in the same towns. Now we have a mass a people gathered in one place and each has mulitiple reasons for being there.

So now you have, say me for sake of example, going to a town called Townsville. I need to do the mission there. There are many players standing about but no one seems to be doing the mission. What are they all doing here?
1. Well, come to find out the are numerous side quest that start off from here. (lots of outpost in the huge Canthan city are jumping points for missions and side quests)

2. Some people are there to go out and farm monster bounties for their titles.

3. Some are there to do Hard Mode.

4. Some are there to sell their wares.

5. Some are jsut passing through.

6. etc. etc. etc.

So now I am standing there saying to myself "screw it, it will take to long to even find 1 person doing the same thing as me. I am just gonna grab some heroes and henches and go by myself."

Guild Wars has just grown waaaaaay to big and offers waaaaaay too much to do in order for Pick Up Groups to still be used when any great frequency. Each person has their own goals and their own set time they can play and their own things they want to do. It is really hard to find people doing the exact same thing as me.

I am not here to argue for or against more heroes. I just saying to those who are saying "you should be PuGing more" that this is no longer a viable, reasonable, easy thing to do. There are just simply too many different things going on with each person.

I would say to Anet, for GW2, please seperate you towns/goals better. One town should just be for Missions. Make that outpost the best place to leave from to do side quests. This may help boost commraderie and the number of PuG's. People in the same town would mostly have the same goal/reason for being there.

There is a large portion of the population that is NOT currently using H/H to complete PvE. It is this portion of the population that A-Net is concerned about 7 heroes adversely affecting, not those that currently use H/H almost exclusively.

Jumping to the conclusion that substantially all of the population either (1) exclusively plays multiplayer or (2) exclusively plays with H/H is one of the biggest fallacies I see in these threads. There is a large portion of the population that is "in between" those two camps, and that is the point I'm trying to get everyone to focus on, as that is where A-Net is likely focusing their attention.

I'm all for introducing mechanisms and/or incentives to play in multiplayer groups, but I don't think that is a mutually exclusive situation with the introduction seven heroes.

Jetdoc

What about those of us that want it for the reasons stated before? The whole time issues, afk often etc etc (You can always check back to read them all)

You also go ahead and link the people who are casual with the people who want to game on easy mode. Im fairly sure you will find that to be untrue. While there will be a small ammount of players who would always like things to be easier, that isnt what this is about.

This is about making the game more accessible to the casual player. Now Anet has done a great job of it compared to most games. Players have an option they can use if due to any reasons stated they dont/cant pug.

However this option is limited. Compared to someone who plays in a pug they are at a disadvantage. They have to take 4 set builds. Which until GW:EN are useless and even in GW:EN arent great. A few exceptions of course but its more the fact they dont work everywhere. With heroes you can change them to face the comming area. A henchmen is stuck running the same build even in an area where it may be much less effective.

Why should the casual player be at a disadvantage? The whole pull of GW to me was the skill > time it promoted.

I have never been in an elite area of the game and ive never been able to do HM.
I just dont have the time and if I joined a pug I would get part way through then have to leave. Even if I did have enough time set aside to do one of the above I will 90% of the time have to go afk multiple times for various reasons. I know I wouldnt like someone doing that to me so there is no way im going to pug with someone knowing thats what might happen.

I know that there are people in between the two camps, I'm one of them. I do join PuGs regularly despite knowing that a H/H team would perform better. What Anet doesn't consider, in my opinion, is that those people in between the two camps don't join PuGs because they are better than H/H, they have different reasons for doing so. It's not like we're in a situation where H/H teams are not as good as PuGs and full hero parties are way better. PuGs are already inferior to H/H teams to begin with. Therefore I can't help but disagree when people, and Anet, say that adding full hero parties will adversely affect that part of the community that still joins PuGs.

about the HM/NM comment, what difference would allowing 7 heroes in NM make? Yes it is 99% henchable, but even so allowing 7 heroes just makes it more fun.

Also you should be able to use 7 heroes in challenge missions, UW, FoW and DoA on NM at least.

/Anet are stupid. Really really stupid for not allowing 7 heroes.

Oh yea, in HM tyria please increase the party size from 4 to 6 because those damn grawls and charr's are too hard to beat with only 4 people. Add bigger mobs if needed.

Alright, first off, let it by known that while I am for the seven hero idea, my argument is based off fact, not bias.

Let's begin.



Some of the current arguments against 7 heros are:

-Over Powered Parties
-Game loses Social Aspect
-Things become too easy


Over powered parties? Give me a break. Let me tell you a few things. All these heros have the same skills available as players. They are not in the least bit more powerful than a full group, in fact, they underpower it greatly. Another thing, they cannot think. They cannot chain skills well (Assasins aside) they cannot judge what to not agro, they cannot spread well, and they do not follow specific commands without having to open all their HU's at once and have them perform the skills in the order you check them. (That's nearly impossible to coordinate in a hard area). They cannot conserve energy, and most of all, they cannot judge. They cannot judge between healing someone at 3/4's health vs. someone at 1/8 health. Sometimes you get lucky, but not usually. Unless you carry three hero monks, it's not a very pretty thing to hero your healing team in hard areas.

Heros are not over powered.



As for the social aspect of the game, PuGing is not the only social aspect of this game. There's a chat tab labeled "Guild Chat" and (Wait, there's more) yet ANOTHER one labeled "Alliance Chat". You can utilize these two tabs to talk to anyone in your guild. Your Guild.... oh yes... you've forgotten about guilds? You know, those things that people make to interact with a certain group of people? Hm? Sounds social to me.

If you like talking, join a guild that has an active chat line. There are only like one hundred thousand guilds to choose from that would probably take you. That's why they're THERE. To SOCIALIZE. Duh. If you want to interact with people, then join a talkative guild. That's all there is to it.

What I don't get is how people find PuGing social at all. I don't carry on a coversation with my group while doing a mission (or at least I wouldn't if I PuGed it). Do you? Seriously, who talks to the other people, aside from "Don't go there" or "Use X Skill now" or "You [email protected] noob".

How is this in the least bit social? There's no social difference between a player and a hero runnning beside me somewhere. And if you DO carry on conversations with your PuGs.... well.. er.. good for you. The rest of us don't.

As for the people who miss talking local chat, I don't. They miss the good old days where you could carry on a conversation in that chat. Let me tell you people something. There never WAS a time like that. Humans play this game, people. It's been available to humans from day one, and humans are idiots, therefore, they fill the local chat with idiotic things. Go to any town if you don't believe me. That's nothing new. Seriously. If you want to have a conversation, do it with your guild. No one's on? Find a new one.

Oh wait, I almost forgot to mention the suburb social aspect of this game. It's the tab on your far right labeled "Whisper". It's so amazing! You can contact any online player at any time regardless of guild or time zone! Talk all you want! (Note the sarcasm.)



The last thing people bitch about is the fact that the game will become too easy. Too easy.... oh dear god.

The game is already easy. You put skills on your bar to fit your situation, and you go kill things. That's the basis of everything in guild wars. There is nothing in this game that is NOT easy. There are things that are LONG. There are things that are BORING. There are things that are ANNOYING if a human player makes a stupid mistake, or decides to wipe the group, but nothing in this game is HARD.

Capturing Order of Undeath? Frostmaw's? Urgoz? DoA. These require a MINIMUM amount of thought. You watch out for boulders and tap skills on your bar. It's still the same concept, you just have to do it a tad faster. There is nothing in this game that if you are equipped for it, is not easy.

And if you're not equipped, then that's your own personal problem. Go deal with it.





Guild/Friend/Alliance Group > Seven Heros > Most PuGs.

That's the bottem line for gameplay.

Teamspeak/Vent > Guild/Alliance chat > Whisper/Friend chat > local chat > PuGs.


Taking PuGs away permanantly would not damage this line. And that's not even the case in question.


Bottem line:


No reason that seven heros should not be available for you to use.