Selling In-Game Advantages (The Great Debate Over Mercenary Heroes)

No, we're just having a difference of opinion.

I think it's perfectly fine to have non-gamebreaking new options for sale in the online store, separate from new campaigns.

You think it's not, for reasons I consider arbitrary.

But that's fine, opinions don't need a logical basis. That's why they're opinions. There's no logic, rhyme, or reason to be expected in any of this.

If I need to pay for items that are more powerful that those obtained in game then that is a game I won't be playing.

But since they are getting rid of the great party composition of Guild Wars, it will probably be just another MMORPG and I have no interest in those.

EDIT: Went googling for Transmutation stones

Seems like an aesthetically thing.

At least this is better than our previous discussions.

And as for:

You missed the point multiple times and instead decided to attempt to pick apart my post for some unknown reason.

How can you compare Mercs to campaigns and justify that they should be included?

I gave multiple examples of why campaigns are the common denominator between players and how microtransactions aren't.

Campaigns are the metagame vs. microtransactions merely being extensions to the metagame.

But since campaigns are officially terminated, why can't updates and microtransactions fill that role?

Or what you're saying is that the ideal metagame should be the one existent right after GWEN?

Except for the fact that originally they were a cash shop item only, so having to pay to have something you like and decent stats. If they weren't there it would be either you have a good looking item with useless stats or have great stats on a fugly item. Pay for the privilege of having both is not what GW was founded on.

I would be perfectly fine with costumes or exclusive mounts and the like, but I know better, it never stops there.

Good thing it isn't Guild Wars.

Although, I can't exactly see how people know beautiful items will have crappy stats and ugly items will have godly stats.

They are comparable in the sense that they offer similar kinds of new options to the game, the only difference being that campaigns add a little more substance. That difference doesn't tell me the mercs are a bad thing, it only tells me that campaigns have better value for money.

Why would the mercs have to conform to that common denominator? I find the advantage they offer to be very slight, and certainly not game-breaking. Their effect on the metagame will be negligable, because their advantage won't even come into play when people meet up. As a purely solo advantage, the worst they can do is have an ever so slight effect on an economy that is far too large to be seriously impacted by the small cadre of elite players who can make optimal use of mercs to shave a few minutes of a run.

In other words, much ado about nothing.

No it's about Anet the company, and their business model seeing as thats what others started to say as an argument against paid for advantages being in the game. So quit switching tacks to suit your purposes.

And really?? you have always had perfect max items drop. Wow you really are the luckiest person going seeing as everyone else gets items with crap stats 9:10 times. And before you switch tacks again and say we don't know about GW2 drops.... erm we do from the demos and what they have told us.

Provide a coherent argument don't keep trying to pick holes in what others are saying by changing tack.

I though this was about selling gameplay advantages that put those that don't buy them at a disadvantage?

Having a pretty weapon or a ugly weapon when both deal the same damage doesn't seem to provide any gameplay advantage.

Really pretty/ugly is a question of taste, or for those that have no taste, a question of the most expensive/harder to obtain is prettiest.

Anyway, are you telling me you never got a max weapon, can pay a weaponsmith to get one or get one from collectors?

Actually, I would like very much if all campaigns adopted the inscription system - getting gold weapons that have decent skins and useless mods is so yaaaaaawn.

Just to finish if I find holes on someone else argument then that is because the argument isn't coherent.

If people aren't providing coherent arguments, why do I have to be the one providing them?

And I've provided some by the way as did some others, even those that I disagree with but are basing them on starting points that are debatable and a question of opinion.

I was under the impression that it was about the impact they had. The impact they had one me was/is that I am now very concerned where Anet/NcSoft are going with the GW/GW2 franchises.

From the release of Prophs they said they would make their money off the intial purchases and save using their server architecture model to minimizing the bandwidth costs associated with maintaining game servers.

Since then we have seen the campaigns/expansions come, but not nearly at the rate of 2 per year. The purpose of the stand alone campaigns were to draw us back in to GW...since they were supposively not gonna "milk us" in between them. Now we have seen the introduction of microtransactions and dlc. Since the microtransactions started they have become more frequent. I don't think anyone can deny that. I feel that these are ways of "milking us" in between expansions/campaigns. If not getting it via fees they will get it via microtransactions and dlc.

Now atm it's not that bad...BUT I'm more concerned about whats to come. If following the current trend, there will be more and more microtransactions and dlc. Since they have shown the willingness to provide these in manners which effect game-play, there is no reason that they won't continue doing so in the future. So in turn chances are that more cash shop options will be available more frequently that will effect the community. While one purchase standing alone might not cross that line....the sum of all of them will.

What's to say campaigns won't get smaller and dlc won't get bigger? Buy the campaign...and then dlc comes out that is about the same size as the campaign. Then more dlc comes out and more and more....All the while microtransactions are comming out faster and faster. All of a sudden the microtransactions and the dlc are larger than the campaigns themselves.

I'm not saying that all this will happen. I am merely pointing out that is where the trend is leading and this is why I have an issue with it.

Sigh... This is about selling gameplay advantages but i was answering the point about Anet's philosophy changing.

No the skin of a weapon is immaterial unless you like the looks of the game more than just steamrolling through it. But allowing it so that the way someone can get a good weapon with decent stats it to pay RL money thats a problem.

Pretty versus fugly is actually important to some people, same as having decent stats.

If you actually read my post. You would see what i said was most people get rubbish 9 out of 10 times with weapon drops. And yes thankyou i have plenty of decent max weapons(if you really want to know 8 storage chars full of decent skin max weps), so don't try to get me upset/angry with your little dig.

I prefer the way it was before NF came out and inscriptions were inherent, but that is personal opinion.

No you do not you focus on one part of what someone says ignoring the whole of their statements so as to make yourself look oh so superior to them. Well i've known alot of people like you and what can i say...(nothing that wouldn't lower me to your level). If you actually read everything and take it in then you would find that it all makes sense, but that wouldn't satisfy you need to feel better than everyone.

I did not say everyone was providing coherent arguments but i was replying to you specifically at that point so yes i would expect a coherent reply. But maybe i'm just hoping for too much from someone who seems to think they are better than everyone.

To finish i really don't understand why you want to try and turn a simple debate/discussion into this argument. You have always won your debates by bullying the other person into submission because they give up the will to actually carry on with the discourse.

So please stay on track and stop trying to be the winner, this is a debate not a competition!

Like it not this is where online gaming has been headed for years. The devs have always defended it as either a fiscal necessity and / or "it's what the players want" and they are right. If the game doesn't produce revenue there's little reason to maintain it (promises != squat) and if the players really didn't want DLC and microtransactions they wouldn't buy it, but they do and it's very high margin. It's now getting to the point where games, particularly MMOs are little more than vehicles for such content.

• What kind of impact have you personally seen or felt stemming from the introduction of Mercenary Heroes?
  Nothing really. I don't see it impacting me in any way. Everything I want to do in this game I can do with the existing heroes (I suppose Foundry HM would be a bit easier with an extra mesmer, though), and the game economy is governed by bots.
  
• Do you consider the introduction of Mercenary Heroes to be an unfair game advantage for those with excess real-life money or an aesthetic fan-service that benefits many of the game's players (or both)? Explain.
  More of a fan service, as it's no secret that this has been requested for years. That said, those who buy these extra heroes will have, depending on their goals in the game, some advantages.
  
• Are teams consisting of 7 heroes of the same profession consistent with the game's themes and/or felt values? Why or why not?
  Irrelevant imo
  
• Do you believe that this is a "trend" that the Live Team and Anet may continue to follow in the future? In your opinion, is that a good or bad thing?
  It's pretty obvious that there have been more and more things added to the in-game store over a shorter period of time. I guess it's a good thing for people who want whatever's being offered...
  
• Profit is obviously always a concern for any for-profit business. However, over the years many game companies have added features to games specifically for the benefit of their fans, whether for monetary gain or not. What do you believe is the primary motivation for the addition of Mercenary Heroes - profit, fan service, or a mixture of both?
  The chief motivation is obviously profit, but at least they decided to add something that the fans wanted. This doesn't bother me. I'd rather have some fans buy stuff that is(in my opinion) a waste of money than have to pay a monthly fee.
  
• Does the addition of Mercenary Heroes change your opinion on the direction of the future of the company; namely - Guild Wars 2? If so, in a positive or negative way?
  No

An in-game advantage that has not attracted as much attention is the availability of the fire imp and bonus weapons in pre-searing. You pretty much double your firepower and gain a tank with the imp. Sure, only a minority of the GW community regularly plays in pre-searing, but this is far more of in-game advantage than the merc hero update.

What on earth makes you think that I don't care about PvE?


If I use my mercs to farm a Xunlai chest full of ectos to buy my Jesus sword and the "totally impenatrable, you will never die" armour, (given the fact that I'm not a RL-money gold seller) what advantages will this get me other than epeen?


Yes, it IS just about cosmetics.
I currently have only 72K in the bank, and no ectos or armbraces.
My main character has max armour (a mix of Ascalon and Shing Jea which was chosen for the look.) How would having vast amounts of money improve this characters survivability?
The character has max weapons. How would having vast amounts of money improve her damage-dealing?
(All this equipment was obtained long before mercs were available)

Give me a concrete example of how how me having mercs could make my main "better" than your main, in anything other than a cosmetic sense.

I never played with or seen anyone request mercs. Pretty much sums it up here, players who buy it will get some advantages.

lolwut? wtb balance between professions

avoiding the word yes much?

Profit is always important but so is the customer and it's obvious many of them don't like this one bit. On the monthly fees, yea most people don't like them but they pay for many things. One thing WoW subs pay for is great servers, I hardly ever lagged, and when I got hacked all my stuff was restored. Last time I checked GW servers cant handle an event very well and when you get hacked your SoL and have to start all over.

and even more ?????. Leaves me to wonder what his current opinion is...

Pre is an enclosed area with very little to do. No one cared much about the bonus weapons/summon since you can just leave and get them in post. I have to agree though it was a good covert move to see if the so called "fans" noticed. Also that's hardly an in game advantage in pre compared to merc heroes in post. Post is the real game, not pre

I have 15 char slots. Paid for. This gives me the opportunity to run 7 more sets of Z quests per day.. and my ability to gain z coins is far greater because of that. I am able to purchase elite tomes and equipment packs faster than a person with 8 default slots. This is a flat advantage not based on loot rolls, clear times or hypothetical rewards.. repeatable quests for a known value.

So.. why no hype regarding char slots. Why the focus on Mercs. This is what I fail to understand.

There were no repeatable z quests when I bought my slots. The financial advantage in earning z coins is a byproduct of another game mechanic, repeatable daily quests for items of value. It is not a financial advantage inherent to the character slot and had nothing to do with buying the slot. Anet certainly did not offer the slot as a means to farm z quests.

I see the Merc the same. There is no inherent advantage beyond cosmetic, only a percieved advantage because of another game mechanic..certain professions deemed to be more powerful and others less. That is a balance issue, and a farming issue.. not a Merc issue. Removing Merc heroes from the game would not remove the perceived superiority of single profession-heavy teams. Removing Mercs would not allow a ranger or Ele to Buy a slot in a team looking for another Mesmer.

Not much different than the Ursan days, people didnt buy EoTN for Ursan Form, but, it became a req because of mechanics. Ultimately, the mechanics were addressed and having Ursan form became no advantage.

This supposed merc advantage is not exclusive or inherent to mercs. It could be changed at any time in the future, much like gimmickway builds have in the past. It is a group balance issue.. if it is an issue, and is part of the game with or without Merc heroes. You have to look at WHY there is a perceived advantage.

If Anet somehow managed to wave a magic balance wand and balanced teams became the "WAY" to speed clear, the supposed advantage of Mercs would evaporate overnight.. leaving the only true inherent value of the purchase.. Cosmetic.

There are no more incoming campaigns in Guild Wars, so they can't get smaller.

I think it is because ANet made a bold move. One of the concerns is where NCS is heading because of this. The character slots came long before zquests and it was just a content update to keep players busy while ANet is working on GW2. ANet has created big hype for GW2 and it would just be a total gunshot in the balls if they abandoned their main philosophies and added clear in game advantages in the GW2 store, using GW as a sort of beta testing for advantageous micro transactions. Many of us have grown quite attached to this game and are awaiting GW2 and we really dont want our hearts broken because this game company hooked us with good philosophies and ethics and later abandoned them by slowly doing so without telling us to our faces.

What an utterly disappointing response from someone who seems to understand the profession balance issues in game. The advantage of Mercs is totally reliant upon broken profession balance..and I don't personally see ANET offering them as a means for players to exploit that imbalance.

No slippery slope in my opinion. All I see is player exploitation of a cosmetic option based on profession balance. As with many things in gaming, the intended use of something can be radically altered by player use of that thing.

Well then the real question is will these broken profession balances will get fixed. For me its mixed feelings about what ANet will do. For some time players have been calling for ele,para and ranger changes and we have not heard from ANet about this issue to my knowledge. ANets approach in other parts of the game have been disappointing to say the least such as the ToPK stealth nerf. Instead of just banning bots they nerfed the farm for everyone. I don't hold much faith in ANet atm but dont get me wrong I hope they can restore it.

As do I, but prof balance has been a problem in every game I have ever played, in EQ2 there were 6 tank classes.. but at any given balance pass only one was ever perceived as THE tank class and any other could not buy a group slot, regardless of the actual ability to tank successfully. Player min/max perception always trumps actual utility. No game company can code in player perception, or counter the min/maxer fanatical devotion to minor advantage. Being successful has never been "enough" for a min/maxer.

My opinion of this is more based on intention of the offering of the Merc pack. Was the intention OOO players can run with their alts or.. OOO players can make 5[insert prof] speedclear teams? Personally, I believe the offering was intended as cosmetic.. and see no breach of faith or ethics.

Not all possible outcomes are ones that are reasonable to think about.

I can't pick holes in an opinion unless the opinion is straight out false.

People want only cosmetic crap to be sold in the in-game store. What a world, sell stuff so players can play dress-up. If advantages are at a reasonable price, and everything in the game is doable without them then there shouldn't be any problem other than people crying "It's not fair he cleans his house 3 seconds faster than I do, he has a vacuum and I have a broom".

I think the only real issue is how much should in-game advantages should be sold for, not if they should be sold. In a game like GW1 where the only incoming revenue is box sales when you ignore the cash shop, and someone like me has em all, and has had them all for years now, wheres the new revenue coming in from that player? I don't play dress-up in my opinion dress-up is ridiculous. So you make something that's useful. Xunlai storage, character slots, BMP, Mercenaries, skill unlocks, pet unlocks.
Real question should be "Are these advantages affordable? Or are they unreasonably priced for what they give? Are these advantages TOO advantageous".

For example that Jesus Sword example brought up. That's TOO advantageous. A sword that kills everything in the game in one hit, removes any idea of it being a game, and just makes mobs themselves cosmetic. Different skins of things you one hit kill.

Mercenaries though? Nothing like that.
Now I've seen some people bring it up before, that Mercenaries cost too much, all the power to them, if you think Mercs cost too much well hell lets talk about that.

If Mercenaries, 4 character slots, all xunlai panels, BMP, all skill unlocks & the pet unlock were all sold as a bundle, for a penny.
Would we be complaining?
It would seem like complaining just like the sake of complaining.
Every advantage sold....for a penny.

If these advantages were sold in Wal-mart in a box called "Guild Wars :Mercenaries expansion" where you knew all you were getting was the Mercs would it be different. Is their a psychological thing where it matters if one can buy it in walmart or only online?

Is it a matter of principle for things that do not destroy the game to be whined about unlike that Jesus Sword example, or is it really about the cost.
I'll agree with the cost, Mercenaries are too expensive, especially 8 Mercenaries, when 8 Mercenaries is definitely purely cosmetic, when you can only bring 7 of them with you at a time to begin with.

wow i woke up to your comments before. Well put in post 467! and more pages of input from the community.

Also the link from snow.

I guess from 2010 the philosophy has changed a bit from 2011 and probably in 2012. Time will tell.

How? How are merc hero packs required to PLAY the game?

Can you complete every single quest, mission, mini-challenge & elite dungeon without them? Yes.

Can you get to every corner of the map without them? Yes.

Can you obtain every single in-game reward without them? Yes.

Is there anything in-game which requires the use of merc heroes over standard H/H/PuGs/Parties? No.

They are a matter of convenience - they do not prevent, or enable, anyone to PLAY the game. Neither do storage panes, skill packs, pet packs, costumes, character slots, etc. They may add to your experience of the game - but they do not prevent, or enable, anyone to PLAY the game in its entirety.

If someone wants to play the game in it's entirety then YES the are required to have MH. Without them you cannot experience what it is like to use certain team setups. So in turn they are prevented from experiencing the game in whole if they do not have them.

How? It doesn't. Did i say MH were required? Please look i did not even edit post #544. I think were not understanding each other.

Let me try again.......... I'm saying, from the article in 2010 they still have a "core philosophy." We are just debating the road Anet is heading because we are not them nor work for them. We just hope they stick to there core.


Yep i agree 4/5 above. My game play has not changed. I got three MH as a "thank you" or "supporting" Anet.

Nothing (to this day) but who knows what will happen in a year or tommrrow.... we don't and that's one side of the debate.

Here's food for thought or the best think i can think of from my brain. A bit off topic but i think same idea......Remember when the wiki gods and some guru gods said Pre-sering would never EVER be updated/changed...... I bet they trust everything Anet tells them....

or let me say that Pre-sering notation again. We (99% of us on guru) don't work for Anet. we don't know what is going on at the meetings. how can we assume anything they tell us they won't change? People quoted Pre would never get updated AGAIN after Nick. and Pre-sering did. So how can we know one day they add some Jesus Sword and go with a "new philosophy" tomorrow... we are debating (some what) if they go that route we GTFO and find a new game or Rage at them till they listen (or something like this)

But , the problem is that it would be true if heroes were allowed for PvP , where small things like 3 sec longer , +5 armor , some energy matter a lot....
You can subsitute almost every caster by using other professions ( i.e El/N , Mo/El , Me/El,...) and the result , concerning PvE , is still good and most players will just afford that instead of paying....

I changed your statement.. merely to reflect that a definition of playing the game in whole can be too all inclusive.

Without buying two Char slots.. you cannot experience the game playing as all professions.. without deleting.

You cannot experience history through the BMP without buying it..also arguably part of the "whole game"

For example (just an example nothing else)...let's just say for lol's someone wanted to experience compeleting FoW as a paragon with 7 paragon heros, all being fueled by eachothers shouts, chants, echos.....there is only one way to experience that in a timely/reasonable manner. (note timely.. as ofc u can group with someone else, but not with the same ease as going with heros) If anyone else besides me has ever tried to get that full paragon group going...you know what a pain it is trying to set that up. Same thing could be said about running all dervs and running pure avatars....There are certain aspects of primary attributes which cannot be replicated via other professions.

We are not debating char slots. We have already established that there are ofc other factors which effect gameplay and gameplay experience...plz stay on topic.

The topic is paid for game advantages, and how Merc heros, in some peoples view offer an unprecedented paid for game advantage. In that light it is perfectly viable to compare merc heroes with previously accepted paid "advantages"

If you are going to make an argument that somehow the Mercs gate someone from a "whole game" experience, you have to apply that same criterion to other paid options..or admit that denying one the "whole game" is nothing new, nor an escalation of paid options.

Re, your Ease of making a full Para merc group.. I submit it would be far easier to recruit one other Para with the 3 heroes already ingame than the time taken to set up 6 merc para, equip and rune 6 merc para, all for one possible runthrough just to "experience" it.

Keyword is Ease.

It is on topic. In one post, you're asserting that because merc heroes offer a convenience factor, offer additional options than those actually required to complete the game, that they are now questionable... that they represent a change in ANet's core philosophy.

In the next post, you're asserting that we ignore all precedent - anything defined by you as something not worthy of consideration or comparison - for the same thing... additional options than those actually required to complete the game.

From the start of this discussion, even in the previous closed thread, people railing against the merc hero addition have been doing the same thing... defining what "counts" as relevant or precedent setting and what does not.

Expansions don't count, even though they offer MASSIVE changes to a player's experience of a different campaign - apparently because at least they come with additional content. So they don't count.

Now for some arbitrary reason, character slots and such don't count - even though they do exactly the same thing merc heroes do... provide additional options beyond what is actually REQUIRED to complete the game. But somehow, merc heroes are different. They do nothing more than add another way, a convenient way, of doing the same thing everyone else is doing: playing the game. Same as storage panes, additional character slots, PvP-unlocks, Skill unlocks, Pet unlocks, etc.

Another way... a convenience... an option. Which in no way stops anyone from PLAYING the game right through to the end.

I can't run an AP build... I suck at it. I cannot get the timing down right to save my life. It requires a type of play style I am incapable of working with. Do we now eliminate it from the game because I - through my own limitations and choices - am unable to play the game that particular way? I'm the one choosing to not continue working at it until I get it right. Just as I'm the one choosing to not pay for the option of playing the game with 7 merc heroes. So because I don't want to experience the game via a certain utterly optional and unnecessary method, no one else should be able to, either? And if ANet allows it to continue, they're violating their core philosophy? Really??

And if you want to do that while having a burning head, you need to buy a costume. Really, you haven't played this game until you've cleared the FoW alone with 7 paragon heroes while your head is on fire.

If you want to experience the entire game, you need to buy the entire game.

The question is not whether or not you gain something by buying the mercs. Of course you do, that's the point of them. The question is whether or not what you gain is an unfair advantage, or just a new set of options.

This has already be established pages and pages ago. There is no reason to keep bringing it up. I guess I could of said it better by saying please stay abreast to the current topic.

In an ideal circumstance, yes it would be easier. There are always exceptions to everything. But in all honesty what are the chances that on the spur of the moment when you want to do this you'd be able to find someone that has...Para main, has Hayda, Morghan, has completed WiK, and HotN to gain Keiran, has them all runed, equiped, and has all the skills unlocked so as to run the same setup you would if you were alone? All of a sudden that ease doesn't look so easy if everything isn't ideal. Not to mention the other person might disagree with some of your ideas of what to run...an issue that doesn't apply with heros.

They offer many things that affect gamplay moreso than cosmetically. They along with other factors are outside of the core philosophy.

I did not say they were not worthy of consideration. I said that they (bmp/skill unlocks/charslots/etc) were already agreed to be same catagory as MH, so there was no point in debating that currently/repeatedly.

Anet said from the get go they would be using campaigns and expansions to reinvigorate the GW community and provide revenue in place of charging fees. I therefor cannot debate them in the context of this thread.

Plz refer to the above comments^^

That example is your option. You chose to do so b/c it is your option to, not because you cannot afford something which has been introduced.


Again it has already been well established in this thread/during this debate that there are various "cosmetic" items and "effecting game-play" options. Costumes are solely cosmetic......and irrelevant to this discussion at this point.

It's also completely obsolete to keep hammering on about getting something new when you buy something new. That's bloody obvious.

I'll repeat the part of my post that you did quote but not address.

Are you getting an unfair advantage, or just a set of new options?

MH definately offer both. The extent of each however is debatable.

I didn't buy the HM pack and I don't feel inferior to people who did
What advantage do they have ? 8 mesmers/necros party ? They have less skills/weapons/equipment to toy with so from that point of view they are not able to experience the game in its entirety...
Beside that the effectiveness is nothing compared to SC teams.

That's your opinion. ANet does not agree. Many others do not agree.
Opinion ≠ Fact.

If this:

represents the core philosophy... and ANet is not requiring additional money in order to play the game you bought... then the philosophy stands intact and unabridged. Nor has the game changed so as to become difficult or painful to play without buying things from the store.

All they have done is offered another option you can utilize while playing the game. It has not changed, even one iota, your actual ability to play the game. It simply offers another utterly optional way to experience the game. You can choose to exercise that option or not. It still will not prevent you from logging on every single day, for free, and completing all of the missions/quests/dungeons of the game, for free, and obtaining all of the in-game rewards, for free... and even giving you some cool baubles to play with in their NEW game... for free.

The game you paid for is still there, still completely playable. The changes made to that game (skill balances, GW:B content, new armors, new ZQ's & ZV's, etc.) did not cost you any monies. You have not lost anything you had before. You have not been restricted from anything you bought. What ANet has done is offered another way to experience your existing paid-for content, and stated that if you wish to experience the game in that completely optional way... if you wish to experience their new and utterly optional content (merc heroes) which is completely unnecessary for finishing the actual game you and everyone else bought... then you can. By paying for that option. Paying for the convenience of it.

They're offering you an opportunity to utilize something completely new, something that was NOT part of "the game" you paid for. Something which is also not part of "the game" people buy today (Proph/Fac/NF/EotN).

No one is restricting you from playing the game you bought. They are saying that if you want to experience this completely optional opportunity which has zero to do with your ability to utilize the content you've already paid for... you can.

You'd have access to more Heroes of specific primary Professions than people without Mercs! That's obviously a huge, insurmountable advantage!

Oh, having Ursan is still an advantage, though a lot of people ended up with the mindset of "If I'm going to have to use the other 7 skills on my bar half the time, why bother with Ursan?". It is still up there near the top in Elite skill power levels.

So, they added grind that was required to level up and advance the game? (Well, there's the Sunspear rank needed to get off of Istan, but that's only an issue if you didn't stop at each shrine you passed to pick up the bounties while doing quests in the area. And the needed Kurzick/Luxon faction, but that's also taken care of by doing quests in the area and taking bounties, so no mandatory grind)

Or did they add a subscription fee somewhere that they forgot to tell me about?

"Skill > time" was never really true, especially for PvP where you have to slowly unlock more skills and weapon mods in order to compete, so those who have been playing longer have a clear advantage that doesn't come down to player skill.

"Advantageous items in the in-game store is wrong" was never one of their philosophies, as far as I can tell. My search-fu is a bit weak, though, so if anyone can find proof of it....? Their actual philosophy, stated in that Transmutation Stone thread linked earlier, seems to be "our core philosophy of not requiring you to spend additional money to play the game and not making the game difficult or painful to play in order to encourage you to buy things from the store still stands.”, which has not been violated in any way.

Frankly, they should nerf all farms, whether it be by rearranging spawns (spreading them out so that they're harder to clump, or moving in stuff normally avoided by the farmer), adding skills to the enemies that can counter the most common farming builds, etc., etc....

(Oh, and remove Nicholas and make trophy drops more common, but have no merchant value, so that people can outfit their Heroes at a reasonable pace during each stage of the game instead of the current glacial pace for those without well over 135p per character)

You can only bring 7 Heroes with you at a time, maximum, but you have 8 character slots by default and you cannot bring a Mercenary along if he's the character you're playing. At least that's what the rationale seems to be to me.

$10 for 1 slot. $20 for 3 ($6.67/slot). $45 for 8 ($5.63/slot). Sounds like 8 is way too cheap rather than too expensive.