A discussion on 7 heroes

its still there, but i its like saying "i like the color blue" to a much of color blind people.

Plus its already be said and gone over about 100 times now, if people want they can go back and read about it.

The joke I see wasn't translated into ascii very well.

Umm everyone /ragequitted ?

That sounds a little self righteous don't you think just because you or I have differing or the same opinion doesn't make yours or mine +1 greater than anyone else's, it's just a different or the same opinion there is no value to it.

I'd have to agree. For the record, my reason for wanting seven heroes is that it would be more interesting and fun than three heroes and four henchmen. I don't think it will break the game from a difficulty perspective. And I think that people who enjoy playing with others will continue to do so, and that people who don't still won't. And everyone can be happy playing the interesting, fun, balanced game that they prefer.

The "which is more powerful" argument was brought in response to claims that seven heroes would be too powerful in PvE.

Human parties are more powerful than seven heroes, but I'd still rather have the heroes as an option, because I play the game to have fun and enjoy myself, not make sure I'm participating in the optimal party.

I agree with you. My whole problem was there were a lot of people claiming their opinions were superior because the poll agrees with them. Like I said, I don't really care one way or the other. I just think the arguments in favor were mostly bad.

This is true but just because it bad and can be refuted doesn't make it wrong though, all it comes down to is different experiences while playing the game.

After just PuGing Shards of Orr I won't touch that with anything less than 7 heros in hard mode, or do it with people that area is just insanity in normal mode which I just did with 6 ppl +1 hero, and we was using consumables like confetti in normal mode there is something VERY wrong with that.

Either we had bad build or the area for normal mode needs one hell of a NERF bat, I dread to think what it's currently like in hard mode may as well just not bother.

I think guilds and the PvE (I don't PvP so can only speak for the PvE side of the game which of course the 7heroes argument is about) player base are both in rapid decline. More people leave the game everyday and I have liked GW for a long time and try to stay interested but I am finding it hard. I have been in a few guild during my time in GWs and I find that now it's not worth the hassle of finding one, most of the "large active" guilds I see advertised are actually dying if you join and see a roster. The "Last Signed In XXX" numbers keep getting bigger and the "Members xx" number keeps getting smaller and I think this is across the game not just in guilds.

Unless you want an UW clear or a VS farm run there are no players in the out posts. I recently played on a level 10 ranger I've had sat in Ascalon for ages and couldn't find anyone to help with missions in the outposts. I resorted to using Hench and Fire Imp. This ranger isn't strictly relevant as it has no heroes anyway, however it was the first time I've noticed the lack of players be a problem short of harder areas. (normally playing on my fully kitted lvl 20 with all heroes).

I agree with Anet on the it's an MMORPG (or whatever that other collection of letters was) and people should play together. However the players are now stretched too thin over too large an area for this to happen. There are very few active guilds in PvE that I have come across and I really don't have the time to put in the 3 hours a day or whatever they ask of members. 7 Heroes is a solution to the problem of too few players over too vast an area, players can use a decent build when they need it and not have to count on henchys that have some questionable skills in there bars.

I'm sure it can't be to difficult from a programming view to change the allowed heroes from 3 to 7. You could always try it for a month and if you don't like the result (likely a raise in players logging in) then you can always change the code back. I really wish Anet were not so afraid to try things out and recieve feedback although from some of the posters on these forums I can see why they are.

I'm not sure afraid is quite the right term here, considering they have a vested future interest in not supporting GW1 after GW2, even though they play lip service to say they would support GW1 after GW2, because of that they have no incentive to try things with GW1 beyond more retarded hero's that we don't actually need, did anyone need another Dervish? I don't think so but thanks for the 110k.

its not hard finding a good guild, just dont join the guilds that spam "Guild X looking for members!! GvG/UW/Fow/TA/AB/Pve/PvP/HA etc" in places like LA/ToGB/Kam/KC etc. Use the Guru forums, its not that hard finding good guilds there.

7 heroes would be fun. Thats all the reason needed. Its just a game. Stop taking it so seriously people. I think everyone in this thread should take a 6 month break from guildwars. Its wonderful to leave the game and return to find something new added. I just got M.O.X, you know, that crappy hero. But it was nice to find something new. Now I won't touch gw for months.

Actually, I think ANet should do both: offer the 7-Hero Option for sale (the way they did with the BMP, as an add-on feature players do not really need but can pay extra for if they want it) but not have the feature operable in a given campaign on a given character until *AFTER* the campaign has been completed in normal mode. I say this just to keep the first pass through a campaign for a given character more in keeping with the way it was originally designed. It's not a perfect solution by any means -- just an idea. I only suggested the quest because that's what they did with MOX and more quests = more fun till GW2 comes out. But no quest(s) is fine with me, too.

And, yes, more money for ANet/GW2 is a good thing in my opinion as well.

6 months ? after what I've seen today with the game I'm borderline quitting, of course I would advise anyone reading that it's just the frustration factor sitting in, while looking for PuGs where there should be plenty, but what do I find? oh no... a pack of flaming farmers digging about for a stupid volcanic spear, and no where near enough people looking for a group to play any of the content, maybe farmers are the reason why PuGs failed everyone of them is out to make them self rich and to hell with the game and it's content.

Before i start 7 Hero discussion and the talk of paying for the use of it should not go into the same sentence. There would be an outcry of outraged ppl.

This by far is the most legitimate reasoning behind the debate of 7 heroes and why we should be allowed. When i first began around the release of factions there was talk of players being spread thin but at the time GW was still an ever growing community so it balanced out between Factions and the release of NF. Alot of players between two campaigns. By the time NF hit the compensation was the 4 Heroes as a good counter for the spread out community as it was foreseen coming due to the three chapters/campaigns. EotN furthered this as well as the title questing and farming thats been implemented. PPl want to do it but dont always have the time, or they have the time but not the audience to do so, 7 heroes is compensation as well as allows them to enjoy the game the way they want to play.

Ill say to this directly they gave us 3 so 7 shouldnt be that big of a deal to program in if we already have coding for it for a H/H party.

To be fair i dont think they knew how big Heroes would become into the factor of play in their game. On the other hand _ why give us so many heroes to equip and time sink too when we're not allowed the diversity to use them to our full advantage? So what if it makes PvE gaming simple or overpowered, ironically one of the biggest downsides to GW was the fact that theres no true ability to SOLO an area, something they are making sure to include into GW2, so this raises the idea that 7 Heroes should become the acceptance bc they know ppl want to solo as well as pug/ premade bigger more challenging areas. But in this game u cant TRULY SOLO .. so 7 heroes is the compensation or gives that feel.

Ill even take the 7 heroes to the level it will go next ... to the 11 for elite areas. Dont lose me here .... Think about it when they allow 7 we may see an influx of players returning again but again would it be enough to satisfy everyone. Probably not and they will ask for this next. Is it wrong of course not, and sure it should be allowed EVENTUALLY cos the population will still be spread and dying. Think D.o.A and how dead it became or Urgoz or the Deep. There were ppl who probably never got a chance to complete, maybe all they bought was NF or Factions + Eotn isnt this their compensation as well, to be able to play how they want when they want. Bad example but still an example. lol. No but serious this would come down the line so lets knock this out the way now. who knows maybe ull Hero/Hench with a few ppl along the way. As well as gives them more opportunity to enjoy the full aspects of the game w/ out having to worry whether or not u can find a good team to play with anywhere, anytime.

Or how bout pve only skills that seems to be a topic too now a day, should this be allowed too since we'd be able to use 7 heroes, sure why not or maybe they could make each hero have a specialty skill for PVE. Idk but i dont see why not allow the team to be fully capable of running the gauntlet anywhere. just negate certain elite pve only skills from list. Im not saying i agree or disagree, i just figure why not, it all goes into allowing the person to play the game they want to play if they choose to play solo or with friend[s].

Another one joins the fold welcome to the vigil, I'm not sure even 7 heroes will get you past some content in the game but it sure as hell would be a step in the right direction, I'm sick and tried of bumping in areas where all there is farming people and no one to play the content with, if I'd rushed with everyone else on the release of EoTN for example I wouldn't have this problem, but fool me decided it was time to put it down for awhile about a month after EoTN release.

So I'm not allowed to take breaks? others wise I'll miss out on PuG grouping if I felt like it that is just stupid and presents a broken game if you cannot come back to it and complete things because no one else is doing them anymore or not enough, which is the reason why 7/11 heroes are so important.

Now here I would have to disagree and agree some PvE only skills should be able to be used by heroes yes but not all because that would really over power them, LoD should be able to be used by heroes because ANet for example should have had the forethought that you do not make something key to a quest/mission that forces a skill off of a monk bar.

On the other hand full human groups can do this already, and I don't understand why people have not already made builds to abuse this fact it might be people are stick of the nerfing of skills and using them tentatively because they don't want them nerfed and don't want public attention drawn to them although pain inverter is getting some chatter.

Either way unless they do something there going to run out of time before GW2, D3 is on it's way that is going to create a dent in our population, GW the complete collection is just desperation they can already see it coming, and releasing new content once a month is just a carrot on a stick to keep people in the game those content updates help no one, people that have done everything will log on complete the quest and log off there not doing anything in game.

In fact if I had not started playing again I wouldn't even know about MOX it's not like on my time off I was doing anything anywhere near where I might find out what was happening with GW, to be honest at the time I really didn't care what was going on in GW I'd had a guts full of the game.

Granted, I don't think it's accurate to say that pugs=human parties. But there is one chief factor that I've mentioned many times in this thread: PvE skills. An H/H'er can only bring 3, while a full human group can have as many as 24. That's a lot of OP right there, and sometimes is just enough to bridge that gap

It's not about being more better or successful in the game - as mentioned numerous times already, if you can't beat a huge majority of the game already than you're bayad - it's about being able to have a team build that's personalized and your own. In general, it's just to have a bit more fun. It's not about making things easier for soloers.

Hm. That's not a very accurate metaphor, but what I think you're trying to say is that most people just aren't going to get the point no matter how many times you tell us?

If so, then that's not the case. It's not that we're not believing you, it's that we're not seeing any reasonings for it - i.e. you haven't really shown us *how* pugs are going to be "damaged", at most more than they already are.

What we do know is this:
-A lot players are "bad"
-A "bad" player is not going to find much benefit from heroes because you need to be not bad to use them well
-If the "bad" player still wants to use heroes anyway, even though he's likely to fail, than he's actually doing a service to other pugs by keeping his badness to himself rather than with other people
-A "bad" player, in this instance, would in this instance be better off with henchies, not heroes

im all for money for GW2, $10 a hero gogo, and then just block them in some areas.

what are you talking about H/H IS truly solo, theres no real players other than yourself. Look at heros are some sort of boss that you can add to your party, and than you have 4 other nubs that you cant change builds on.

"dont feel like going over your other points... again..."

you cant get any more spot on with my analogy imo.

nightfall much?

-A lot players are bad, and still dont pug cause they think they are better then they are.
-A bad player is not going to find much benefit from heroes because they are bad.
-If the bad player still wants to use heroes anyway, then he needs to join a group and learn something.
-A bad player, in this instance, would be better off learning from other players cause things are not going to go his way most likely and he may find a easier way to do things, other than failing over and over and blaming it on the IA.

fixed imo

...And you're still not explaining/providing for your viewpoint. 'grats, you just proved my point.

3 huge continents and a decreasing playerbase much?

So, the "bad player" in this instance will stay with heroes and continue to fail. If so, then let me ask you this: If this person isn't learning from his continued deaths and losses, what makes you think he's going to learn anything from pugs? And if he's blaming all of his failure on the AI* then why is he staying with the h/h?


*again, it's AI for "artificial intelligence". There's no such thing as IA for "intelligence artificial".

Let me say the idea of selling extra heroes in the store is stupid. I was always against them selling any in game stuff.

Somebody brought up a good point earlier. You can tell that Anet doesn't want people using 7-11 AI characters because they didn't add hench to some areas...

To *some* areas, though. Not to mention they're elite areas that concern a very small portion of the playerbase.

And an ever decreasing one at that you will know when the game is done and dusted when ToA turns into DoA.

I kind of consider it like that right now, people aren't playing the content there farming.

the point is that they will not care cause they dont pug or play with guilds/friends, so they will want 7heros and not care about what it does to the game.



the game is 3 years old people will leave just cause they dont want to hit their 8 skills any more, 7heros is not going to slow it down much.




cause things will not go his way, he may find a different way to do the mission thats a lot easier that he may have not found if he didnt join the group.


so what its a typo get over it.

The bolded is what you need to explain to us. What will it do to the game, and how?

Doesn't this show support for 7 heroes?

Well of *course* things will not go his way. They *aren't* going his way currently; he keeps failing over and over again. But that doesn't stop him from doing the same thing, over and over again.

The point is: Given that this "bad player" hasn't learned that he's bad from repeated failures and deaths, he's very unlikely going to learn anything ever. He's going to make the exact same mistake(s) in PUGs, which, given his "bad player" status, is going to be a liability and a bad thing for anyone he plays with.

To reiterate: If you're not getting the very clear message that what you're doing is wrong, I highly doubt that you're going to change much when you play with other people. This can be evidenced by people playing with horrible bars all the way to the last mission in campaigns. If adding 7 heroes will further prevent these people from ruining pugs - then that's a *good* thing.

Also: You've been making that same "typo" numerous times in this thread. I'm not saying it to be a "mr. righty" correcto maniac, I just don't want you to further confuse other posters.

They'll do this when the player base gets lower but they are actually doing decently from revenue charts, so nah.

The only people who have a valid argument here is the one revolving around the declining playerbase, but it's not gone too far off of the deep end yet if they are still earning a substantial profit from a not p2p game.

When the player base goes really down the toilet, then yeah sure. Until then, no thanks.

Heroes in themselves are not a big boost in keeping the playerbase. They only concern themselves with people who not what they're doing, and those kind of people aren't really in the majority.

If they wanted to keep the playerbase as a whole they'd just make the entire game easier. Increasing hero size would only benefit very few, but as is you can already complete every area in the game with H/H sans elite areas (but that's easily understandable).

What is the point of doing it then? may as well just turn off the servers and say hay well too few where playing it, but we have GW2 available.

So really the time is now or very soon so that people have an opportunity to use it, and hear about it trust me (because I know myself) if I left this game I wouldn't be on this forum, I would not even be visiting websites even remotely related to this game at all.

I think he has a legit point. The game is still selling and somewhat thriving right now. When the game stops selling and thriving they can announce 11 heroes and everybody will start buying/playing again.

7 Heroes...?

I think we should be able to have every hero we have along for the party.

Now thats how to steamroll.

I don't if the game was selling as well as he claims I would not have waited 2 days thus far for a PuG to do slavers, and yes that little location box on the side will update each day, at any rate 1 hour is far too long to wait for a group let alone 2 frigging days!

The reason he doesn't have a point as well is by the time it stops selling and people have left, there isn't any point in putting it in if there is no one to make use of it and I certainly wouldn't come back for 7/11+ heroes by then, well before then I would like to hope I'd completed all my goals.

Bryant Again Do yourself a favor and use the ignore option he is just baiting you into an argument just as he tried with me before I ignored him, he is obviously apposed to the idea of 7 heroes and will do anything including getting the topic locked to service is own end.

ive done that about 9 times now go back and read.



nope if people already find hitting 8skills old, than 7heros will only make them stay for a few more days. No matter how much content they add people will just get bored of the game engine. Players keep players playing, this is why so many games make their games MP based, and why there's so few SP only games "and their all made by biowear"



then hes retarded, not bad.

no, hes going to see some1 do something and then say "ooo yeaaa i get it nao"

Did it ever come to you that maybe a person can not think of every way to do a mission/quest etc by himself?

bad players dont ruin pugs, build nazis that cant just sit back and have fun and think they are the best player in the game ruin pugs.


This would work in a SP game but, making MP games easier is always to wrong way to go when people already find the game easy and leave cause it is so easy, if any thing add content that will make people better and give them a good staff/wand/shield etc.

meh its a habit i have, mess up typing something 1 time and my fingers want to keep doing it when i type fast.

while we are on this topic, why do you quote/high-light random words? Like "when" *you* do things "like" this. When i read your post, it sounds like your constipated or something

It wouldn't as much be for people like you who have already bought the game. It would be more for new players to buy the game with some older players coming back as a nice side effect. Its sort of like video game companies releasing codes for their games years after release. It creates news/excitement and that creates sales and game ressurection.

sry you cant take people disagreeing with you...

I would definately play the game more often if I had 7 heroes. It would make the challenge missions more fun.

Limiting 7 heroes only to HM and Challenge Missions would be fine for me, and this would have no effect at all on pugs because no one pugs in HM anyway.

Yeah I'm fairly certain I'm going to quit playing soon unless they show some signs of actually implementing this, because there just isn't enough people in the game anymore.

Or... start hacking the game.

I'm in the same boat. I'm just sick of waiting, and sick of henches.

Maybe all us slackers should get together, but I highly doubt that we even play in the same time zone let alone up to the same point in the game, and I don't know about you but I don't think either of us wants to repeat content certainly when it comes to hard mode, basically once I've done an area in hard mode I don't want to see that broken trash of game ever again.

oh wait oops your Australian waves from over the ditch at you from New Zealand.

Really, once we have 7 heroes, I'll return to PVE and will enjoy it sooo much more.

To me, it's like what ursan used to be like to FoW addicts, just that 7 heroes with no PVE skills is far more balanced, yet better and more fun then ursanway.

But dont start crying about your precious pugs, I did propose 7 heroes in HM and Challenge missions only.

I'm not bothered in the slightest about NM and elite areas. I did at one point want to be able to use H/H in FoW and UW, but I dont care anymore, I just want to enjoy HM.

So so so so so sooooo tired of retarded Alesia, Mhenlol and co. Dont want a single one of those god awful pre configured henchmen skill bars, although they are still 100x better then pug skill bars.

Yea, someone is gonna start attacking me again because they finished HM already with H/H so I'm a noob. But I'm not complaining about being able to finish it at all, I'm complaining about wanting to have FUN while playing instead of seeing Cynn spam Mind Burn on Lightning Drakes that already have double the amount of energy that she has.

And charge is soooo useful these days when we have fall back o.O. Oh wait, charge must be better cos it has a gold box and uses less energy ......

......

(Leadership).

Oh noes!!! My health is <50% and i'm gonna die ..... erm..... Thank you to both Mhenlol and Khim for casting WoH and ZB on me at the same time, it was much appreciated XD.

/Fail.

P.S. Yes, I would still rather take both Mhenlol and Khim rather then drop one for Elite-less Gehraz, or Charge spamming Devonna.

And that is one reason why Ursan should not have been nerfed, there isn't just game balance to worry about, but the fun vs game balance as well and when you nerf fun you hurt you game immeasurably.

Even if they un-nerfed Ursan now I doubt people would flock back to it, because they might feel spitefully hurt by it before and aren't willing to invest the time they did only to have it nuked off the charts again.

What PuGs? don't you mean farming groups, because other than that I don't see much PuG'ing going on to actually play the content.

Same.

I've done everything but Dungeons and 16 missions in NF and the missions for EoTN (because they all require I add a hero and lose one from my build I say NO I just won't do it) , 90% with h/h I've also vanquished every area in the game, but I'm not going to call you a noob because I don't care what anyone says everything I've done in HM has been well hard, but not hard because it was a challenge no, hard because the AI is that imbalanced that it makes it hard there is nothing tactically new about it all they've done is increased the amount of damage output, and made monks near imposable to kill.

If it wasn't for consumables I wouldn't have done nearly as much, but I should not have to resort to cheap tricks like that the henchmen should be running the right skills and there not to avoid having to use consumables, they should have had 7 heroes so I could construct a build to combat the area without having to waste my gold on consumables.

That is because there is no code that make the monks tell each other "I'm doing this" which forces the other to go "Okay I'll do this instead to someone else or the same person but different skill other than what your using".

I stopped using Warriors when they broke the AI afaik it's still broken and has not been fixed, why they had to funk with the h/h AI and turn it into this abomination I'll never know, and don't even get me started on Zhed he runs into mobs without a single skill on his bar while using a long bow.

Well, on a personal level... I've become quite close with many of my heroes. We talk hours on end on just about anything and everything. Now, I won't say which of these heroes get upset when I can't take them along (due to the "3 hero with ya cap") but some do get jealous with the amount of time they get to spend with me. So I am for the 7 hero system just so I can keep my heroes happy, as they are very dear to me.

I did restart vanquishing a few weeks ago after a long break and got about 10 areas done. At the end of that I was bored and fed up. Bored of having to use the same heroes again and again to synergise with the henchmen I had, fed up of not being able to play as effectively as I could with my own custom builds.

Mas' post reminds me fondly of Baldurs Gate. The game was fully played with you, your one character, and then controllinf a full team of characters which were almost like NPC's, but you controlled them like PCs. There were no voice overs, only dialogue. But I grew immensely attached to the characters, the plots and story lines of each one of them, simply by reading the dialogues and stories. Plus I had my full team under my controll and could play with whichever party I wanted from the great selection of NPC's.

My favorite dialogue line was having Viconia and Aerie in my party. One was the goody goody fairy angel, the other was the evil, sadistic, dominat bitch. Yet both would continuously argue and fight for the player characters attention if you were male, and the immersion and character depth in a 2D game with simple dialogue was simply bewildering.

I havnt had as much fun in any other RPG since then because there is no dialogue or immersion with your NPC party, but I would at least love to have an RPG with party play where I am in controll of the party and their skills. Never Winter nights was ok, but I just didnt enjoy them as much as Baldurs Gate, as in the first you could only have one henchmen, then in the second you could have a party of four, but the dialogue was too static and fixed, and not natural or free flowing enough.

I would like a modern RPG where I can recreate, and enjoy having a full party that I can customise and equip as I like. I have thouroughly enjoyed this kind of gameplay in games in the past, and would like to see a modern game recreate this gameplay. Even if there is no dialogue or immersion, the same gameplay value is still there when I get to customise my party. I suppose this is why I have never really gotten into other MMO's as much, like WoW, LOTRO, and AoC. I enjoyed them all, but like most other games, didnt feel like playing for any more then a few months. I need my own customisable parties to fully enjoy a game, and get the best gameplay experience from them.

Its a shame tha GW2 is dropping the H/H system, it would have been good to carry it over as this is the best feature of the game. But I suppose that from GW2 onwards, custom party play with NPC's is going to be lost forever.

Baldurs Gate - ahh those where the days I hated RPGs before BG1 & 2, NWN it was nice but no match on BG1 & 2, one of my characters in GW is named after Aerie and she has a pet named boo not that she is ranger, but she is my main even in BG you could multi-player or solo, maybe that is where GW should head after GW2 offline game that is lan capable with a server host however I would just go on the rampage with that! just for some oh so sweet revenge for all the trouble & frustration the game coursed be online. (Mega Sword of total Death, 1billion-5 trillion damage, course all conditions on hit 100% chance, lengthens hex duration by 150 years, +50,000 Heal +50,000 Energy, +80 health regeneration +80 energy regeneration) ahh the joy of watching the game suffer.

Oh and Inner Epidemic kills all fows in radar range.

Is that fact there dropping the h/h system? if it is that is yet another tick of the column of I'm not buying it, and further confirms my own hunch that it will be a total flop.

Oh no you didn't....*facepalm*

People will always use the most inbalanced farming mechanism they can find, whatever it may be.

The people who haven't beaten the content are using heroway to beat it. Heros have definately affected the amount of pugs. I don't see how anybody can argue that.