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

I've been gone for the last few days, so I apologize for missing some of the flow of this thread. I've read over the comments so far, and I find quite a few things interesting. Here are some of my observations:

It seems that the vast majority of the people giving their opinions here are either on one side of the spectrum or the other. I assume this is because we're on a forum, and those without a qualm just don't comment.

One example would be how people answered the question: What kind of impact have you personally seen or felt stemming from the introduction of Mercenary Heroes?

Everyone seemed to assume that this question meant, "Is there an in-game advantage to Mercenary Heroes?" When, in fact, I was hoping for people to post positive results as well.

There seems to be two main camps of thought on the advantages of Mercenary Heroes. I don't think anyone could appropriately argue that Mercenary Heroes don't provide at least a small advantage (regardless of how many have said so).

The main argument seems to be either that the advantages are so small that they're trivial or that they're justifiable due to similar purchases (new campaigns) providing a similar advantage.

The contrary arguments (seemingly led by lemming) pose the question: how much are we willing to forgive? For example, if larger advantages begin to be sold, such as a new profession, would you be willing to forgive that?

And the last argument that I've seen pretty common is the value of the product. We have to justify if spending $45 USD (the cost of a full game) is worth the reward of 8 customizable heroes. And then, there's the lack of a "free" mercenary hero.

There's something I'd like to say here that I'm just not seeing in this thread.

Yes, 7 players of the same profession (or otherwise) will always be better than the advantages you can gain from 7 heroes. However, what people seem to be forgetting is that forming a party with 7 heroes is typically much easier and faster than with 7 people. Just an observation.

The last thing I'll say is that I'm surprised how many people have been repeating the same arguments. I know we tend to hive mind around here, but I'm genuinely surprised that there aren't more varied responses, especially from those of the "No Advantage" camp. I keep expecting to see a new perspective.....


However, I appreciate everything you guys have posted here and it's opening my eyes to what people think about this. I'm starting to wonder if we should add some type of poll to this thread.

I'm not sure why wrapping a game advantage in content is the difference between OK and not OK.

A small amount of money will allow me to purchase Prophecies, but if you have more money, you can purchase the full series and almost immediately gain access to heroes and new skills, without needing to experience these games. You will blow through the rest of Prophecies, while I will comparably struggle.

This is something everyone has come to accept. MH is an option that's available to everyone, regardless of the campaign purchased. This means heroes for Factions and Prophecies players, finally, without needing to buy, install and play a new game. It's a win for everyone, yet it seems envy wins the day.

It's depressing how the focus is not on how something can benefit all, but how it's unfair to help others more than themselves.

And still there is no answer to this from those who are against mercenary heroes.

One can buy a HUGE advantage right now over some other players by getting the EOTN campaign with its profession-agnostic PvE skills, cons, and additional heroes. It is already converting real life money into in-game advantage there!

You forgot to include the argument that everyone can only have a max of 7 heroes so if you have 7 necro heroes, that means you would have 0 mesmer and 0 rit heroes in your team. It is a trade-off! So that small advantage cancels out and one can even argue that a 7 necro heroes team would be a weaker team than a team with 3 necro, rit, and mesmer heroes.

PvE skills are part of the game, they come with each campaign when you buy the game. Yes they give an advantage but not one that you have to buy with RL money, its available to everyone who owns the game regardless of their RL cash flow situation.

On another note the BMP is not playable "off the bat" by new players so does not in any way give anyone an advantage. They are there for the lore of the game, yes it has rewards but then so does completing any campaign.

Merc heros are something you buy for 1 of 2 reasons.

1- You have always wanted to play the game with all your chars alter egos running around with you.
2- You want to be able to run some funky builds that require having more of 1 profession than the games allow
3- You have too much money to burn so bought it because you can(not really a main point but i'll only get corrected if i don't mention it)

Now with this in mind how is this not an advantage over other players who do not have the money to purchase the Mercs. With the BMP it is no advantage as you aren't getting something which can be abused in the game. Using 8 necros is abusing the mechanics of the game, as it allows for people to make builds that were previously human only but can now be done by anyone who can buy it.

If people disgaree it is an advantage then why not get Anet to create 5 more heros that can be given any profession, then put it in the game with a quick quest update. I bet the majority of people who bought the Mercs will complain and the reason is because they had an advantage that others didn't, any that don't complain about it bought them for aesthetics only.

Define game. I can still play the "game", as in GW, without EOTN. But the guy who bought EOTN would clearly have more PvE skills than I do, giving him an unfair advantage due to him spending real life money.

How is this an advantage? Lets look at your reasons:

1. You have always wanted to play the game with all your chars alter egos running around with you.
Ans: Is that an advantage? No, that is purely cosmetic like the costumes that have been in the store for a long time already.

2- You want to be able to run some funky builds that require having more of 1 profession than the games allow
Ans: Is that an advantage? Maybe yes or maybe not. The best builds that people have came up with in the heroes forum do not require merc heroes. Just because a build is "funky" doesn't necessarily mean it MUST be a good build or that it is the best build possible, giving an advantage in the game.

In order for this to be advantage, you must PROVE once and for all that the BEST POSSIBLE HEROES TEAM BUILD IN THE GAME REQUIRES MERC HEROES! Which nobody here has proven.

3- You have too much money to burn so bought it because you can(not really a main point but i'll only get corrected if i don't mention it)
Ans: Is that an advantage in the game? Not everyone playing this game is as rich or as poor as everyone else. That would and has always been the case for ALL games. Totally irrelevant argument here.

Game as i define it is that a game has playable content and a storyline(as everyone has different interpretations even with clearcut facts).

Yes that person has an advantage for buying a game/expansion that you didn't but it's still not a purchasable upgrade to the game which Merc heros quite clearly are.

EDIT: As i said before it takes time for things to be discovered, tbh we have not give it enough time for people to find that, 8 same prof build, thats runs through foes like a hot knife through butter. At the moment most people seem to be waiting for someone else to discover it and post on PvX and in the meantime are just running rit's and nec's(mes too, to a lesser degree).

And as for an advantage a friend of mine who purchased the upgrade ran a 8 Para FoW run in 40 mins, so just shows how broken this upgrade can be.

The point being that in-game advantages have been purchaseable before Mercenaries. In addition while I don't deny there is an advantage, there is not always an advantage of Mercenaries. Though I know you are aware already, I'll restate that the advantage is in scenario's where having more of a profession than we normally can have in a hero team is faster. That advantage is not going to pop up in every situation, and I would even say that unless the player base found those situations it's not shown that there is an overall dominating advantage to mercenaries. While the advantage is greater to BMP, you did say that BMP's advantage was insignificant.

So then I'll ask a question. Just how significant does the advantage have to be to the point it matters. Or is it just permanence of the advantage, as again unless otherwise shown I think it can safely be assumed the Mercenaries are not always advantageous.

@ OP
I don't have a qualm with it. I don't have mercenaries, and if I think the benefits are here to stay I'll consider picking them up.

Isn't this thread just about "Selling In-Game Advantages" (presumably through real life money)? Whether it is a purchasable upgrade or a campaign is besides the point.

Buying a campaign already grants you an in-game advantage, against those who don't own said campaign, through real life money.

I think many of you who have complained about merc heroes are twisting the words "in-game advantage" when you really mean additional "in-game FUN". Why? Because none of you have proven that the best possible heroes team build in the game now, requires merc heroes. Otherwise, give me a 7-hero team that REQUIRES merc heroes and show (through clearing an elite area in the fastest time) that it cant be beaten using regular heroes. If you can't, then how can you call merc heroes as granting any unfair in-game advantage?

If the best possible heroes team build, doesn't require merc heroes, then having merc heroes would just be a FUN element (to play around with builds and so on) which people want to be provided FOR FREE by twisting this to an in-game advantage argument.

Daesu, that point has already been made ad nauseum. Maybe we could try to move past it? Unless, of course, you have some new element to add to the discussion. Otherwise, it's becoming rather emotional and unhelpful to the thread.

Just an opinion.

lemming has already linked to a screenshot of a speed clear done with mercenary heroes.

It would be in your best interest then Karate if you want to get some variations of perspective to summarize and include the various arguments already made in your opening post.

I only mentioned it because Saint Scarlet addressed that point. My main point is shown in bold above.

If nobody can prove that the BEST possible heroes team build requires you to have merc heroes, then how can they say that having merc heroes grant an in-game advantage?

As far as I know right now, the BEST heroes team builds, do NOT require you to have merc heroes. Having merc heroes is just a FUN element which people are twisting it to an in-game advantage argument to demand merc heroes for free.

What about the consequences of not selling advantages? Perhaps less skill updates? No winds of change? Live-team gone? Servers closed? Ever hear the expression win the battle lose the war? Maybe only selling costumes doesn't pay the bills or provide accetable profit?

Examples Anet removes all advantages....bans people with 2+ accounts...removes fire imp and bonus weapons...removes extra storage panes...etc. Than says they don't have enough money and closes guild wars 1.

The questions were left open-ended for a reason. I wanted to see what people felt without leading them.

I think a poll would probably be an easier way to summarize the perspectives of the thread.

Well, lemming already linked this.

And I think you're misrepresenting those who have the opposite opinion of yourself, which just isn't fair.

As far as I can tell, no one has claimed that mercenary heroes should be free. 2-3 people suggested that giving one mercenary hero would be a smart business move to tease us into buying and a few have suggested that they should be cheaper, but that's it.

Also, your arguments are becoming increasingly emotional and disassociated. Maybe you should slow down a little. Again, just a suggestion. I don't want this thread to become the trollfest the last one was.

One of the things that makes GW an awesome game is that you can play through the entire game(end game content included) without ever playing with a real player. However, the solo player with only one account never had the chance to say, set up a spike team of 3-4 Mesmers on his team. Merc Heroes bridges the gap(slightly) between the solo player and the social player. The social player(real players) will always have an advantage, so I dont see the issue. If anything, it promotes more balance between different types of players.

The solo player with two accounts has had access to 8 necros for a long time now. They paid money for an ingame advantage. No one complains about that. Granted your other "real necro" isnt very effective unless you do alot of microing. Merc Heroes just makes this an easier process and adds one more AI hero.

The only slippery slope I see here is Anet giving the community what they want. And at the bottom of that slope is customer satisfaction. The more bells and whistles we buy, the better our odds are of getting content and skill updates. So if a slight ingame advantage gets content out faster, it's a price I'm willing to pay. DLC is here to stay, and I'm glad Anet is testing the limits of what they can sell players in GW1. I'm sure the feedback of DLC from GW1 will be taken into consideration when they make DLC for GW2.

I was being ironic or maybe sarcastic never was good with big words.

About this image, everyone should really read through the thread if you going to use this as an example. It takes tactics, experience, lots of microing, and most importantly alot of skill to accomplish times like this. Not just anybody can replicate that time, I dare anyone to try it. My hat goes off to PoM for this accomplishment, job well done sir. But, he admits it takes alot of work. If 4 mesmers made DoA HM cake walk w/o cons for everyone, then we might have an issue. Thats simply not the case. Take away the obviously OP SF/ER combo and Cons, having the 3-4 mesmer becomes trivial in comparison.

You have this the wrong way around.

Consider two players with the same primary profession trying to achieve something (e.g. a dungeon or a vanquish). Both have identical progress but one has Mercs, the other does not.
It is clear that the player without mercs does not have an advantage over the one that does (any setup run by this player can be run by the other).
However, since the player with mercs has open to him, more options, it is possible that he can construct a setup that is superior to anything the other player can for whatever it is that they want to do.

If you want to state that mercs do not confer a strict advantage, it is you that must show that the best possible setups for every profession in every circumstance does not require the use of Merc heroes.


To actually claim that is ridiculous. No matter how small of an advantage it may be, having mercs is an advantage and it is an advantage you have to pay for. You may never make use of that advantage, but it is still there.
That said, this is not something that hasn't been pulled by A.Net before; we have the Fire Imp for example and the comparison to owning the expansion and all the campaigns has been made (and I still have not seen a decent reason as to why that comparison is invalid).

I'll say it now; I don't know if I'm against this or not, but the claim that mercs are not an advantage is simply false.

I don't believe the mercenaries are some huge advantage. Maybe a small one as in you can finish a vanquish or dungeon 10 or 15 minutes faster? At Most? That is provided the person knows how to set up a good team. I've downloaded "free" games and many restrict what you can do with the 'free' version.

Honestly, GW has build a model I wish more companies would use. I have no troubles with them trying to raise more cash with things that don't affect 99% of game play. If we want good game-play from Anet/GW then they must continue to pay salaries, etc. to the game developers who create these games. It seems like sometimes people forget that.

No. They have to prove that there are viable, high-end builds that you need more than the available number of primary profession Heroes and which would wipe (not just complete a bit slower) on the proposed content test if you had to resort to a secondary of that profession instead of a primary.

Correct, one could easily make a party using mercenary heroes in such a way that another solo player could not do, and therefore has a technical advantage. However, the discussion needs to turn to dissecting this advantage and judging its power, and when compared to having just one human ally with a library of heroes, any advantage gap not only diminishes, it's surpassed. The human factor will always be superior to AI, and I think that is what's missing in this discussion.

However, I have to repeat the point about game balance. If MH are considered advantageous and unacceptable, as they create a direct purchasable reward, is it not time to consider the root of the problem, that some professions are too powerful? What if mesmers, necromancers and ritualists weren't a cut above the rest? What if rangers, warriors and elementalists were revamped and offered compelling and attractive primary benefits? Arguably then much of the alarm here would diminish, as having a homogeneous party wouldn't be an advantage at all.

The fact remains that a team with 3 (or even 4) mesmers is better than a team with 2 mesmers. In general PvE, mesmer > necro. Domination is just far stronger than Discord, no doubt about it. Merc supporters saying that all us non-Mercers want is a team with 7 Discords are way off, Discord is bad. Yes, a team with 3 necros, 2 mesmers and 2 rits is good. A team with 1 necro, 4 mesmers, 1 rit and 1 optional is better. How can you not see this?
Again, nobody is arguing that they want free Mercs. We want free 7 hero teams of any combination of professions. Mercs should be cosmetic only, in that you can bring a character as a hero on another char. I'm perfectly fine with having to pay for such a cosmetic feature (although, again, I think the price is too high). This would make Merc heroes exactly as you describe it, a FUN element.

If you say 7 hero teams of any profession should be limited to people who pay for Mercs and they shouldn't introduce more generic heroes for people who don't pay for Mercs, how can you argue that it is not an in-game advantage? Why else would you have a problem with a solution like that? We are not twisting it into an in-game advantage argument, you are trying to twist it into a free Merc argument.

I thought that was rather obvious, otherwise I would have qualified it.


I just had a thought. Imagine if every SC'er started clearing with Mercenary Heroes. Even if it took them twice as long, it would still introduce far more elite drops into the market.

We're not honestly going to call that a showing of objective truth for the claims of an advantage. Im sure there is an advantage but I wouldn't consider that showing one at all. For that to be an advantage you'd have to show that a solo team hero could not beat the area as fast or faster than a team with mercenary heroes.

I don't know of anyone who has. And you're really reaching to suggest that this isn't an advantage.

I don't think we can even question whether or not Mercenary Heroes are an advantage anymore. Now I think the question is whether or not it's justifiable or so trivial that it doesn't matter.

It's obviously an advantage, regardless of how small of an advantage you consider it to be.

I do agree mercenary = advantage. Should 7 heroes of any profession be free to eliminate this advantage? Not if it means I have to pay for winds of change, I have to pay monthly fees or Winds of change is cancelled. I'm willing to accept selling advantages in exchange for getting new content free. I payed for a 2nd account strictly for an advantage. Should 2nd accounts be free since they give an advantage?

I like the Anet model of being able to pick what advantages I can buy and getting free content whether I buy or not. I don't want to lose out on free content whether announced, not announced or not started yet or worse anet eliminates all microtransactions and makes it so all people pay monthly fees so every one is getting all content and no advantages exist. This does not mean I would tolerate all advantages Anet sells if they become very powerful and very expensive. Then I might question if Guild Wars is the right game for me. At this time however they haven't cross my personal border of whats acceptable.

What? No. People would have still bought Mercenary Heroes, especially if they were able to customize their appearance (which is what Mercenary Heroes should be, considering the price).


No offense, but that is the stupidest argument I've seen in this thread so far. Most people I've been able to read and somewhat agree with, since I couldn't really care one way or the other, but that is just idiotic.

I don't even......

I partially agree. Some people would still buy while others would have not. But this is just one case. All the advantages that Anet has sold stack up to revenue which pays for free content and free server access.


Unfortunately, if you cant see buying a 2nd account is an advantage than call it idiotic. Most people its obvious that it does provide an advantage. Its an optional purchaseable advantage just like merc is. Any dispute of this is Idiotic!

Im started to get frustrated with the amount of people who misunderstand me on Guru. Maybe I'm not communicating myself properly or something I don't know what it is.

I didn't say Mercs can't give you an advantage, I thought I made it pretty clear.If a normal hero team can match that speed or surpass it than based on comparison there is no advantage in DoA. Maybe Mercs allow you faster speeds than normal in DoA but thats a maybe.

If a normal team can accomplish the exact same speed of completition then where is the advantage over other players? There wouldn't be one. I'm not saying an advantage doesn't exist, I'm saying it would be a hasty judgement to say an advantage exists based on one completion time. I'm not reaching for anything, I didn't say an advantage didn't exist, I said that one screenshot is not objective truth.

I want to just type /facepalm, but that seems rude. Also not responding seemed rude, so I'm just going to leave it at this.

Let's just assume that you're right. I have a feeling that regardless of what I would have typed you would have come to this conclusion anyway.

If I learned anything from my educational history, it's that miscommunication is always the fault of the person communicating. Nothing against you. I get your point now and it makes much more sense.

The easiest way out of this for Anet would be to create 5 Zaishen heros which could then be made into any prof. Then everyone is in the same boat.

This is not asking for free Merc heros as the whole point of them were for the cosmetic values. If you disagree then explain to me why else did people buy them other than to gain an advantage.

Can we PLEASE stop making this an argument about whether or not mercenaries provide an advantage or not. To me, this has less to do about some nub running around with a 7 necro hero setup thats better than mine, and more about the fact that i can't unlock all the capabilities of pve without paying $45. Why must i pay to be able to use 3 mesmers, or 5 monks, or 4 paragons.

If they created a new profession that cost $$ to unlock (which they have stated they are considering), would you be ok with it just because you can't prove its better than the other professions? And now, who becomes the godly judge of all things GW who decides what build/proff is better than the next.

Indeed, it is well over due and part of the problem Merc Heroes are controversial. If Eles and Rangers were able to pump out more damage and have greater control effects, Interrupts, etc., it may reduce the homogeneity slightly. However, allowing anyone to aquire more Heroes through gameplay would be the faster and more fair solution.

Oh I see it, I just see it as SF/ER, 4 Mesmers, 2 optionals, and Cons in the hands of a skilled player is better for that scenerio. I'm not convinced 4 Mesmer heroes, left to hero AI, is better for most stuations. I'm sure its viable, but best? Hard to say. I agree that MHs should be nothing more than cosmetic and that more Heroes should be added through gameplay. For the record, discord sucks and there is a tiny advantage to MHs.

Justified. Why? This is a good reason.....

Also, most PvE content is so easy, it's hard to quantify easier. The advantages become so slim in most of the game its negligable.

The problem here is that people have a distorted view of content or its importance.

What is important is the time you spend playing the game.

What if you play 1000 hours more of guild wars with your merc heroes and that makes your game more fun because it gives you more control over the way you play the game?

And mind you, you could have full parties of the same profession since day 1 of guild wars. If you didn't, that was your choice. If people preferred to play with h/h instead of playing with another person and have 6 heroes, that was their choice.

Mercenary heroes is again the player choice - you can have a cosmetic upgrade and full control over your party without relying on anyone else for a premium or you can refuse to pay that premium and achieve exactly the same if you play with another player.

People say that $45 is too much for 8 mercenary heroes (and mind you $20 allow you 5 mesmers or 5 rits or 6 necros).

Is it $0.045 per hour of entertainment that bad?

How many hours have people played Guild Wars already?

I'm close to 8000 hours and counting. Even if I frigging spent $500 on it, it still is $0.0525.

Yay a game costs $50! But if I only play it for 200 hours (and I can count on my fingers the games I've spent so much time on) it cost me $0.25 per hour! That is over 4 times the price spent on mercs if you play at least 1000 hours more of GW.

My guild mates bought them and don't use them to advantage, they use them cosmetically.

What about storage panes and character slots? There are 10 professions in the game and not enough character slots to make one of each. Hey, it's not the best example, but there is such a thing as a luxury item. It's like I said, if the professions were more balanced this would be much less of an issue because there would be little point in trying to gain an advantage where none exists.

Quite frankly I'm prepared to support MH stay with no changes to hold skill balancing discussion alive, because this has finally pushed people to start complaining, now you see what I've been arguing for years.

I really think everyone should take a deep breath and calm down before the thread just gets closed down.
There may or may not be a real advantage to the merc pack dunno am not going to spend the money and try to find out.

It may well be that those with the mercs will spend many more hours trying out builds we cannot and failing because they are trying crazy combinations or lots of same class combos as yet no one knows for sure.
Still unlikely to beat 8 humans who are self flagging and probably have loads more experience in their characters than 1 player does.
Will probably be about equal to 2 friends each running 3 heroes.

Lets face it if the pack cost $2 we would all get it or if our income let us spend any amount on our computer games again we would get the pack.
Its expensive for what it is and it will probably be several months before it becomes clear if it is an overwhelming advantage.

I will worry about it if at all when and if that happens.

The whole "buying Mercs supports the Live Team so you get updates" argument doesn't really fly, because we are not arguing that Mercs shouldn't be for sale.

The time you play a game nor the money it costs affect the content's nature. A crap game is still a crap game no matter how much it is, even if you spend 99999 hours on it.

So is the case with MH. Even if it cost only 5 bucks, or less. It still carries an obvious advantage.

And who knows the next item for sell would give such a minor advantage? Everyone would be "forced" to buy it to keep up with the world.

Correct, and that is precisely the point I am making. But wait, look at the title of this thread: "Selling In-Game Advantages (The Great Debate over Mercenary Heroes)".

Then answer this, does having merc heroes gain you any advantage in this game? NO! Because so far the best hero builds do NOT require merc heroes, unless somebody can prove otherwise.

Is it a higher FUN factor to have merc heroes? Of course!

Buying a feature in this game that provides you with more FUN does not necessarily imply an in-game ADVANTAGE, in the way that this is worded.

So far, most people who are supporting MH are reasonably correct. It is not obvious at this point in time, that MH provides any in-game advantage more than providing an extra element of fun.

You didn't read my post properly. Mercs were designed for cosmetic value only, other than that the only reason i can see people paying for it is to have the advantage others don't. If anyone can tell me another reason why people bought them i'm all ears....
If they bought them for cosmetic value then why are people upset if everyone else gets 5 zaishen heros, to make the playing field level for everyone.

There are advantages and there are "advantages".

A 50-50 axe would be an obvious advantage since the person buying it would do more damage than anyone else with an axe.

The merc heroes aren't an obvious advantage because you DON'T NEED/REQUIRE MERC HEROES TO HAVE 4 MESMERS IN A PARTY.

Like 7 heroes wasn't something that would break the game because you could already have 8 full customized skill bars/characters.

So no one is forced to buy merc heroes to keep up with the rest of the world because the rest of the world can replicate anything merc heroes are able to achieve.