Guild Wars and Solo Players

Some of the discussions in other threads got me to thinking about the way Guild Wars is designed in terms of missions, quests, and now dungeons with respect to player groups versus solo players.

I enjoy soloing in Guild Wars and for the most part that's how I play it, although I have also had great fun playing with a friend or two or with a full group of players through a difficult mission.

My general observation, however, is that Guild Wars seems (to me) to be designing its campaigns and now the expansion to be increasingly and particularly harder for players who prefer to solo with an h/h group. As a general rule, a group composed of two or more player characters is generally going to move faster and have an easier time of it for most missions and dungeons. I acknowledge the sense of that. But I sometimes wish I could ask the developers whether (and how much) they play test the content to evaluate its accessibility to solo players using just heroes and henchmen. The difficulty gap, in my opinion, for solo vs. group play seems to be widening.

The Heart of the Shiverpeaks mission is a prime example of, to me, a night-and-day difference between a solo-h/h group versus a player group. With a player group, this mission is not bad at all; with an h/h group it's a real bear. Many of the dungeons in EotN seemed designed this way as well.

In terms of "soloability" I see it as: Prophecies > Factions > Nightfall > Eye of the North, with Eye of the North being the least "solo-friendly" of the four. The apparent trend here makes me uneasy, I will admit, with regard to GW2 and the general direction ArenaNet seems to be headed.

In WoW, you CANNOT complete dungeons at your own level by yourself and there are no henchmen available, so you MUST form a group with other players or skip past the dungeon altogether. What makes the dungeons in GW so much better than those in WoW is that you can form your own group of NPCs and complete a dungeon on your own and at your own pace, if you want to. Will you still be able to do that in GW2?

GW2, from what I have heard, is eliminating the henchmen/Heroes. (Yes, I know about the Companion NPC, but I doubt that will replace the need for an entire group.) This change, more than anything else I have heard about the new version of GW, is what concerns me most.

For me, the henchmen and Heroes in Guild Wars are one of its best features. If they are eliminated in GW2 in favor of "enforced grouping to complete instanced areas", that will be a deal-breaker for me, since I can get essentially that (if I want it) in WoW.

I am curious to know what other players think about this.

Having companions doesn't necessarily mean the abolition of henchmen.

I don't see GW:EN as being the least solo-friendly.

It's more like a power creep. So it's more difficult.

It's just that, like all other parts of the game, it's easier when you have other real players with you.

I can see where you're coming from, but I think you'd agree that in comparison to other games, GW is still very solo friendly.

Just make sure to adjust your hero builds according to what you're doing and that should make things easier for you.

I hear you on Heart of the Shiverpeaks. No matter how much I yelled at them, I just couldn't get the h/h to pick up those darn barrels...

I solo almost everything without heroes or henchmen, so I'm not sure what the fuss is about...the game is relatively easy with a full party, whether it be with H/H or humans, unless you're in hard mode or in one of the elite missions/areas.

Oh, I absolutely agree with you on that. I just hope it stays that way for GW2.

Dumb as they are, I will really miss the henchmen.

I sincerely hope that GW2 will have all of it's content available for solo players. I quit WoW because I was forced to join a guild to get endgame equipment, this is not my playstyle.

It's extremely easy to solo every single thing in EOTN in normal mode with Heroes/Hench, other than Cyndr in particular (although even that can be done, I did it myself with full H/H team other than me on my first try on the first day EOTN was out). Sure Cyndr is one example of things being harder with H/H, but that's the only semi-difficult thing to do with H/H in the whole EOTN game (other than HM). Therefore I disagree with the OP's claim that EOTN is harder to H/H with. All the GW games have a few zones where Heroes/Hench teams are made to have an arbitrarily more difficult time simply by virtue of Heroes/Hench not having the ability to pickup, hold, or drop mission-necessary items.

Speaking to the broader issue, it seems like Anet has made comments (in threads about allowing 7 heroes per player) to the effect of purposely somewhat gimping the players' ability to play solo in GW via the silly 3 Hero limitation to "encourage a social game". However, in my view that is the wrong stance to take. The original GW box states as as a selling point on the back of the box that you are allowed to play solo with henchmen if you want to. Therefore, to semi-gimp that choice after the fact with things like arbitrary Hero limits is wrong. To semi-gimp the abilty to solo in GW2 would also be wrong. Every player should have the individual choice to play how he or she chooses to in the spirit of how that was advertised on the original GW box. Not be shoehorned into partying with other players if they don't want to. Because GW in normal mode is an extremely easy game (any version of GW), this stuff isn't all that big of a deal in GW1 except for in hard mode where henchmen don't really cut it (that is not to say HM can't be done with H/H) and the 3 Hero limitation per player becomes extremely annoying "feature" of the game that serves no purpose. I know the official stance is that it "encourages a social game", but it doesn't really --- to circumvent this limitation, those who hate PUGs will still always hate and never join PUGs and will always "tough it out" with H/H instead of ever joining any PUG. Therefore all it really "encourages" or accomplishes is frustrating players.

Since the OP puts GW2 play-styles in question.

To limit the game down to particular play-styles won't fix things, its just an easy way out for the developers.
I think they should keep the current option, that you can go with a party of AI.
I don't get it, why they try to make things easy for theme self, instead of improving on the current AI.
I bet GW players have tried Baldur's Gate and other rpg's with AI party, and loved that this was brought into GW from day one.
Actually. I would like to see different kind of modes that are used for entering instances. From solo to full group with heroes to full group with players.
As well as reflect it with a wider variety of titles with which play-styles a character advances.

Eye of the North is h+h able with the exception of a dungeon boss that gives you the bomb.
Baron Geddon anyone?
Hopefully this will be auto scaled upon entering an instance depending on with what you enter an instance in GW2.
Some may say now: "But... that is a lot of coding blah blah blah.."
So what? At the end it will just give a better game in terms of pleasing a much wider variety of players then what currently is announced.

It's about time that Anet opens their eyes for a wider aspect, instead of scaling it to a narrow limit like so many others do.
Honestly, I thought wider thinking was once and still is the vision of the company.

the difference between WoW and GW is that in WoW you dont have to do the instances to progress in the game (atleast not the 10-55 ones, even then you dont have to do the raid dungeons either) you can always pvp and get your items there. In GW you have to do all the missions (i think) but you dont have to do the bonuses/masters. but some of the missions can be quite hard even if you go only for completing it (not total completion) even with heros/hench. Or maybe its just me and i completly suck at this game

I couldn't agree more with this. Hopefully in GW2 the challenge will scale according to party size and level. Then everyone can play exactly how they want to.

In any game where I cannot SK/Exemp I want it to be solo friendly. H/H did this admirably and I applud ANet/NCS for doing it. I started solo in GW around launch and after almost a year got a buddy to pick it up. He's got a few more to pick it up but we all mostly play solo. Sure, we have a guild and do a few things together, but since if I make a new character I can't do anything with them, I have to H/H it again.

/shrug

I hope GW2 maintains the same level of solo friendliness. I don't think I should be able to do everything Solo, but things that require a team of humans should be optional.

GW:EN actually feels the *most* H/H friendly to me. Since the campaign isn't organized in any fashion, it becomes a bit harder to find a group for a particular part of the main quest.

That aside, I haven't had much difficulty in any of the dungeons with H/H.

I think they've stated that there won't be a required party size for missions. That said, I think the party system they have in GW is flawed. It's sure fun, but having to have an 8 person party for *everything* is a little irritating.

And just to put it out there, not saying that you said that, heroes and henchies are not an innovative design decision. They are a neccissity or else Guild Wars would've lost a lot of players.

There are ways GW2 can get around hecnhies:

In instances, monsters can be scaled to whether you're in a group or not.

In persistant areas, you should be able to fight alongside people who are there, without need to group.

It will be interesing to see how they do persistant areas, how will the inevitable "Hey, I'm farming this area, get out!" disputes be settled?

Hi

I definitely agree with the OP that WE should have the choice whether to team up with other players or go solo. Personally I usually always go solo, as it suits my play style better. On any char I work on, I always clear the area (for cart title) and with missions, again area needs to be cleared fully. And sometimes halfway through a mission or area, I sometimes take a break. This cannot be really accomplished with PUGs. Most of my friends haven't been online for a while so taking a H/H group suits me fine. It would be much better to have a full 7 hero party rather than taking 4 henchmen, and especially since i've outfitted all my heroes with proper gear etc.

With regard to the difficulty of EotN i disagree. I managed to complete all quests, missions and dungeons (in NM) with no real problems. HM though is more challenging obviously, but by being persistant most can be donw solo...

Adding the ability to have 7 heroes though would be much better for all imo.

The glass is half empty for you
My glass is half full
Your solo ability is not partly gimped with 3 heros , it is buffed above 7 regular henchmen.
Besides this would get confusing

I like to clear areas at my own pace as well... and since I have kids at home most of the time, there are lots of occasions when I have to step away for a few minutes at a time. Which is a pain if you happen to be in a group, since its not often that everyone needs a 5 min break.

Its very frustrating when you're in a group and someone invariably says "Aw man someones at the door/brb phone" etc.... so I try not to ever do that because of my kids. Missions that require 2 or more players to complete (w/ bonus) at times, have to wait for the kids to be in bed, or at school, before I even attempt to start them.

Just my $0.02.....

I feel like the persistant areas will be aimed at 1 player and 1 companion (not a big deal because if you choose to not have a companion you get a buff) with the instances being scaled to party size like Hellgate: London. Even though that game itself isn't terribly hot, they are going in a good direction.

Farm instances, yo.

Bryant Again had to edit this post three damn times to not make himself look stupid.

Well, it seems to me that EotN was supposed to be harder than the previous areas. A team of human players, (provided they are good players, etc.) is usually better at the quests/missions than a solo player with H&H. So naturally, as the areas ramp up in difficulty, it's the H&H teams that will run into trouble first. But I don't see any particular attempt to make things harder for solo players - after all, just making a dungeon require two things to be done simultaneously would do it.

At any rate, I've been through EotN with H&H (in Normal Mode) with 5 characters so far (Ranger, Mesmer, Assassin, Dervish, and Warrior). Some parts were difficult, and required me to rethink some of the groups and their skills/equipment - but isn't that the way it should be?

Lately, I've been doing dungeons with my Ranger with H&H in Hard Mode, but I haven't done Heart of the Shiverpeaks yet (in HM).

The difference is, in WoW most of the game (except dungeons) can be done solo, only grouping for end chain quests or dungeons. The same is true for GW, I've done almost everything with H/H (solo) and not found it hard. I did the whole of slaver's HM with H/H and it wasn't a problem.

I can't see the future, but in GW2 I suspect there will be a more solo side to the game. They said something like, go solo or halve your power and take a companion. I bet it's something like you can be a really powerful ele, or a pretty decent ele with a hero monk to help. I doubt though that anything but dungeons will require a group of people, it'll be a solo game.


Edit--------------------------------

And about the 7 hero argument again. It's not about a social game, the reason we don't have 7 heroes is because it wasn't planned from the beginning. 7 heroes would make most of proph and factions an absolute cakewalk, even in HM. It would be silly, that's why we don't have 7 heroes.

Movement to change the name of GW2 to WoW2 (sounds like WoW2 from all I've heard).

Guild Wars has changed a lot since Nightfall. Nightfall was nearly the worst expansion in the history of any game I've played (for many different reasons). It almost totally eliminated the need for other players, thus PuGs suffered. How the hell are you going to make friends in this game if you just play with AI all the time? Unless you want to farm elite areas efficiently, there is not need for other people.

Why is that a bad thing? Some of us don't have time to join groups.

Or, to ask the question a different way:

Would you rather have solo options in GW2, or more people quitting your group?

I dont know i soloed all 3 chpters and the expansion With exaptance of 1-3 missions overall dont seee a problem

Like everyone else, I can only make guesses. I was chatting with a few friends a few nights ago about this very subject. We were asking ourselves, "How will Guild Wars 2 keep its user-friendly 'solo' style, while also moving to persistant areas?"

None of us could really figure out if they could do it, and if so, how would they. Then we had a brain storm.

What if they provide users with the option? Consider it similar to switching between Normal Mode and Hard Mode. Example: Before you venture out of an outpost, or town, you toggle to "Solo" (or it could be named non-persistant..whatever hehe) so a player can farm in peace, just like we do now. Players who desire to move in large groups, play alongside greater numbers, and battle for territory rights, can toggle to Persistant Mode.

I certainly don't know, programming wise, if that could be done. But I could see it as beneficial. I can say, for myself, I'd make use of both modes.



Anywho, I've gone way off-topic from the OP and I'm sorry. I will say that I agree with him though. That as each new chapter has come more challenges for the h/h player. I prefer it that way though. I don't want to be able to complete every mission, or quest, or area in a single try every time. Having my butt kicked without mercy now & then keeps me on my toes and brings my ego back down to ground level.

I guess it's okay if you don't like conversing with people. Seriously though, aren't we anti-social enough considering we are spending our time playing this video game? =P

I would rather go with groups since I don't buy online games to play by myself.

I am actually hoping for something exactly along these lines. It'd be like having a choice between New Coke and Classic Coke: you'd have the option to play Guild Wars the "old-style instanced way" or the "WoW-like" persistent world way.

Now, that would be innovative for an MMO. Except that we all know what happened to New Coke...

And I agree with a poster above who likes the way henches patiently wait for you if you have to tend to real-life issues for a few minutes.

I, too, have kids and other commitments. The current option of working your way through a dungeon with henches -- who happily dance away if you have to go to do other things -- really works great for me. (I also really appreciate the fact that idle toons do not get booted from the server the way they are in WoW. )

I should add that the difficulty issue is highly debatable, I agree. I only mentioned it because it sometimes seems ArenaNet is taking Guild Wars in a less solo-friendly direction. Henches and Heroes are a great option for solo players. I really hate to see them go.

So guild teams are overpowered then?

7 heroes cant do anything 8 players cant. Infact since players get pve skills they have the advantage.

7 heroes doesnt unlock some godly team build, it wont be anymore powerful than 8 players.

Balance isnt the issue.

Not everyone purchased it to make friends with people ingame.
Not everyone purchased it to pug ingame.

It was advertised as a game you could play solo, thats why I purchased it.

If you still want to pug you can. There are others who also want to pug.
There are also people who want to play solo as well. And doing so isnt the wrong way to play the game. Both solo and pugging should be viable.

I just want to see all online games steer away from forcing party play in any area. Everything should be soloable for those that prefer solo play. While GW has a H/H system, it doesnt work in every area of the game. Im not talking about elite areas, I dont care about or play them much, I mean parts of the normal game in HM like Eternal Grove and Dzagonurs Bastion. From what it seems, Anet believes all of the story line content in GW is solo friendly, which just shows how unreliable it is to believe that all of GW2 will be solo friendly too.

Forcing players to play with others will destroy computer games for a lot of people. Those of you that enjoy playing with others wont understand why, only people that play solo will.

The name of the game is Guild Wars. I don't believe going solo should be an option. Also, it was advertised as a team game (which is what it is).

I hate it when these threads get trolled by twats telling me Im not allowed to play my video games on my own.

/Goes to play maple story instead.

Edit - the name of the game, Guild Wars refers to the GvG part of the game. Where do you see Guilds fighting each other in PVE?

Personally i hope they don't scale things to party size.

I like the missions having a certain amount of difficulty, gives you a reason to ask a guildie for help etc. Would suck if a group of 4 guildies got together to do a tricky mission, only to find it got 4 times harder.

Well I don't speak for the rest of you, but I'm waiting to rant about GW2 until after it's released.

That isn't any fun. I mean by that point we've actually experienced the game and would have a way better opinion of what its like. Why would we want to formulate our opinions based on concrete information when we could do it today using the vague information given to us?

The game was advertised as soloable from the beginning. The game is soloable (by and large anyway) and Anet is well aware that failing to make GW2 soloable would be financial suicide. Many people don't have any interest in playing games with people they don't know. Providing options to allow those that enjoy teaming and those that don't to both play the game is wise, and is exactly the way GW was designed. Don't like it? Go buy a game that requires people to play together. This isn't one, nor is it ever going to be.

Actually no, no it wasnt.

I quote the holy text of the Prophecies Box

So it was advertised as a game you can play solo.
This has also been supported with the addition of heroes in Nightfall, and again with heroes in GW:EN.

Heres what I expect:
http://wiki.ffxiclopedia.org/wiki/Ad...g_Fellow_Guide

A companion wont ever be as good as H/H though.

All GWEN does is make it more important in the type of build you give to your heroes for the particular dungeon/mission you are going on. This is to prevent boredom of the same hero builds being able to take on anything. So, you have to be "intelligent" to be able to get past some of these quests/mission areas. If you think you can rely on everything you've done in the past to work everywhere then that is where you are ignorant.

It's important to pay attention to what the mobs/npcs/bosses are throwing at you in these places. Then if you wash you have an idea of what you need to build or take from the henchie group of choices to be able to defeat the area. Most people probably or don't want to pay attention to these details and then they end up on some forum whinning about how hard solo is in some areas of the game.

There's not an area I can't beat with heroes and henchies if they give me a full compliment of choices. I may bomb one or two times, but, I eventually get thru all of them. To me Torment was a lot more deadly and those damn Rain of Terrors than anything else I've encountered so far.

I'll give ya a little hint. Protective bonding hero Monk and one of your other heroes using Blood Ritual and you can pretty much take on anything if you know how to pull and maintain agro. I run in UW with this type of setup with just me and 3 heroes. Protective bond still works if you know how to use it and other heroes as well.

According to a preview of GW2, it will actually ENCOURAGE solo play with buffs. What buffs? It wasn't specified. But I can only hope that things are done right to keep solo and team players happy. Some of us actually finish missions far faster solo than we do with a team who have different ideas on how to finish a mission.

LOL yeah my 1440x900 wouldn't be able to handle 7 hero panels, let alone someone on 800x600

I agree with you on that, but you are missing my point. I am all for using intelligent builds to counter particular obstacles and/or dungeons and/or monsters. But, generally speaking, a party of live players doesn't have to do much research to counter Cyndr, they just go in and mop up. A solo-er has a much bigger challenge -- and in this particular mission (and others like it) -- the disparity between the "live"-group and h/h-group difficulties is especially wide.

It is not the fact that going solo can be harder that bothers me (I expect that), but that, in many cases it is inordinately harder due to the way a boss or dungeon or mission is designed and the limitations of hero/hench AI. I can recall some quest early in Presearing Prophecies that required two players to open some gate or other. I recall thinking, "well, this really stinks." I was afraid the rest of the game was going to be like that, but fortunately, it wasn't.

Be that as it may, my main concern in all of this is where ArenaNet is headed in abandoning the hero/hench feature. I do not want a game that forces players into an "LFG hell" the way WoW does. The answer Blizzard (and other players) always gives is that you can do other stuff, like quests and crafting, oh boy. Well, sure. But I did not appreciate having important areas of the game (the dungeon instances) effectively roped off from solo players: "Sorry, you need a group here. No admittance."

I am not ranting about GW2, by the way. I am sure it will be a fine game, as is WoW, though it may not be the game for me the way GW1 is. I do think it is worthwhile talking about what features you hope ArenaNet will retain while they are still developing, designing, and refining GW2 as opposed to waiting until it is released.

I believe that, in an interview Jeff Strain once gave, the henchmen idea was added relatively close to the release of Guild Wars as an added inducement for solo-oriented players. Thus, if ArenaNet "listens" to these boards (and I am certain they do), the time to talk about such likes and dislikes is now.

So far, I have heard that GW2 is jettisoning several of the features I really appreciated most about Guild Wars 1 from a solo-player perspective, including the wide use of instancing and the heroes and henchmen. I just hope GW2 is as accessible and open for solo players as GW1 has been. The standard WoW-ish MMO model for dungeons and groups really stinks, in my opinion.