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

There's nothing to balance, really. Look at how mercs were introduced: take other characters on your account with you as heroes. They didn't come out and say, "Don't like our profession selection? Use a party of necros, ritualists and mesmers; we know you want to."

I'm curious to know how else they could have implemented this (if at all). If you add your monk, would you get one of your current monk heroes disabled? Do you start setting limits on the number of heroes by profession? The regulation becomes more ridiculous as it tries to preserve the illusion of balance.

You don't have to pay for any of it, it's optional and there's nothing with a merc slot that you can't do with one other human player, and do a better job of it. Like it or not, this is a team game and solo play shouldn't be called an advantage.

Completely disagree because heroes, PvE skills and consumables of those games can be taken into the other games created before their existence. Balance, by that nature, is already compromised.

What game are you playing? Make a ranger and a ritualist. Using only their primary skills, make a range of builds and compare effectiveness in PvE. Do the same with warrior and dervish. I peek into the PvP forum every now and then, and it's depressing to read how much improvement that entire side of the game needs. Could you please state the balance you are referring to, specifically? Because I'm having trouble seeing these attempts to correct imbalance.

Like I said a few times before: add a few general heroes of each profession (or add a few heroes with changeable primary profession, but I don't know if that's possible, see Razah). General skins, nothing too fancy.

Result?

People who don't care about hero looks can make any party they want and not be disadvantaged by not paying for Mercs.

People who care about hero looks can make any party they want with the looks that they want by paying for Mercs.

Making Mercs a solely cosmetic feature.

How is this hard?

The advantage of brining another player should be that you can bring PvE skills and you can control heroes better (see hero 4-7 control flag), not so that you can make parties that other solo people can make by paying for them...

Mercenaries don't need to be purely cosmetic.

People are just bitchin because they have to pay for them and they want them. Then when asked why it's different from Campaigns they say that the campaigns are additional/real content.

Then make Mercenaries like the Bonus Mission pack.

How is this Hard?


The advantage isn't even PvE skills.
It's that people can understand things and carry out objectives with intelligence where the mercenaries & heroes have a much more limited capacity to carrying out strategies. For this reason they are always sub-optimal.


Why aren't you outraged that Prophecies and Faction characters don't have nightfall skills, profession and heroes? Those are in-game advantages that come as a result of payment. The actual storyline isn't an advantage...though Kamadan is also a more advantageous starting area than kaining and Ascalon. Plenty of advantages from buying nightfall.

BMP does not give something you cannot get in-game (aside from skins, which are purely cosmetic).

And yes, we are bitching because you can buy a non-cosmetic advantage in the store (for an exorbitant price too).
Because I find comparing a microtransaction of €35 to a full game of content ridiculous.



Let me turn the argument around: why would Merc buyers be outraged if everyone else was given generic heroes so they can also fill their parties with whatever setup they want? Because they know it's not cosmetic?

Even Anet knows it's not cosmetic, otherwise they would just add those heroes. It would appease everyone except Merc buyers who think they should be entitled to advantages because they pay.

If something is unfair, then there is an imbalance. I personally dont feel mercenaries provide a large enough advantage to require rebalance. However, some players do feel it provides an advantage. So, I suggest adding more heroes with the next GW:Beyond chapter.

Like I said before, you cant limit the number of hero professions per player. The bar has already been set to 6 heros of the same type per team(pre merc heroes). 2 players could easily use 6 Necro heroes. No one complained about that. And if you limit the number of hero professions per single player, it would be unfair to the solo player. This type of regulation would just be silly.

Going on the assumption that there is an ingame advantage, is there anything else besides adding more heroes that could be done to fix the situation?

The BMP still gives you an advantage in giving you quick access to weaponry for both yourself & your heroes, that players without the BMP do not have. The BMP also gives money if you forgot from Discovery mode. If you Buy the BMP you can get in-game currency from each mission though you may only collect that money once.
Free money isn't an advantage?

/bonus isn't an advantage?

While Mercs may be overpriced, I can compare it to a full game of content easily.
At the end of the day it's money spent, and you either say "this was worth the money I spent" or "this was not worth the money I spent".

Because you assume everyone who paid or will pay for the Mercenary buys them for cosmetic purposes and not because they want more heroes.
In which case to add cosmetic heroes is to make those who paid money for the purpose of the actual heroes a waste.

If having a game or storyline is all it takes for people to stop whining, why shouldn't they just add came content/storyline with the Mercenary hero pack instead of giving free heroes.

And this is precisely the argument. Some of us find it weird that you are so easily willing to pay for an in-game advantage and not regarding the slippery slope or other people's wallets. I'm all for paying for purely cosmetic features, don't mind them at all. What I don't understand is how you cannot see our point of view.

Hardly, I downplayed it.
Mercenaries are an expansion on the limited selection of heroes that you have to pay for.
So this is deemed an advantage, and people want them free instead.
If it was about a slippery slope, the slope should've sailed from the Collectors Edition.

I don't want free Mercs. Mercs should be cosmetic only. There's a difference.

I am worried though that Anet isn't going to add more heroes like Keiran Thackeray, because it would probably upset Merc buyers...

The key word was "attempted". I never said that there was "actual" balance. Every skill balance has an "attempt" no matter if it actually balances anything or not.

@Ensoriki...aside from the cosmetic skins the bmp does not offer anything that others cannot gain w/o it and thus is not even on the same playing field as merch heros.

I dont see Mercs as cosmetic only to begin with, so when i say people want free shit I don't mean you want to bring in a hero that looks like your Alt, you want to have additional heroes of every profession and you want it free.

I doubt there not going to add additional heroes, because it seems quite likely that we're getting a new assassin hero. How useful that is I don't know since Assassin heroes suck.

I didn't get free platinum for playing Discovery mode the first time?
Wait yes I did, unless a one-time source of platinum is not an advantage, in which case I'm guessing theres no objections to them selling platinum then, since Platinum comes with playing the bonus mission a second time.

The Mercenary heroes are an advantage I'm not denying that, but lets not act that it hasn't been and is not currently possible to gain some sort of advantage from other purchaces.

I bought the Merc pack, and I wouldnt feel upset or QQ if they released more heroes. Its apples and oranges. And I can make my apples look however I want

On a side note, I personally do feel entitled with the right to QQ to Anet when my updates dont come out it in a timely fashion. Why? Because I have supported Anet by buying alot of DLC. If you havent been buying any DLC lately, then you dont have much right to complain about a game you have been playing for free for 6 years. It will be a perfect world when all game servers run on hopes and dreams. Until then, go buy some costumes or one of those little fire imps for your pre toon.

I have all costumes, but that is not of any relevance to the current argument I think.
Yeah, I should have said 'certain' or 'some' Merc buyers.
Yes. And if I want to bring a hero that looks like my Alt and have to pay for that, I'm perfectly fine with it. Even though I would not buy that feature at this price.

As far as I see the limit for any profession is placed at 3, with currently a few professions not having the full 3, assassin, rit, mesmer (am I missing something?). Thinking that I think the Mercenary pack is fine, to collect some additional money so everybody can eat at the end of the day.

I still assume the assassin, rit and mesmer will eventually have 3 heroes.

What kind of impact have you personally seen or felt stemming from the introduction of Mercenary Heroes?-It gives a player more choices.

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.
I don't see it as an unfair advantage. Although it can provide an easier way to do things in game. And yes, I believe its a great aesthetic fan-service. I pretty much agree with John Stumme's comments on this issue. For instance are three Mesmers heros better than two? Sure they are but is it a game breaking advantage that is going to affect the entire playerbase? Hardly.

Are teams consisting of 7 heroes of the same profession consistent with the game's themes and/or felt values? Why or why not?-Sure why not all human teams could already do that if thats what they chose to do.

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?- I hope so, we got a lot of great free aditions in this update (IMHO), and one that if we want to use doesn't cost all that much. Hopefully it will bring a lot of folks back to playing the game, and hopefully put a few bucks back in the pockets of NCSoft/ArenaNet investors. If they keep making $$$ on GW1, we will continue to have GW1.

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? Its both and its a good thing. Consumers want more and better. Producers want to give it to them. If both sides win, its a good thing.

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? -Positive, just when I thought the live team had gone to sleep, we got a great addition to the game. In either case I was going to get GW2.

Not really, the thing that makes me question GW2 is the direction Anet has taken to completely dumb down every aspect of GW so that everyone can do everything with the minimum of effort. Challenges in a game are good, facerolling you way through everything is not.

12 characters oh yea

I don't think that the merc heroes are unfair in any way. Some people believe that because you have to pay real money for them, that guild wars now gives an unfair advantage to people who pay more money for things like this. I would agree that having merc heroes would make the game easier to beat and maybe easier to vanquish with but this is for pve. In pve you aren't exactly competing against the other players so it is not unfair that pve may be easier for the people who have merc heroes as opposed to the people that don't. I did not and will not purchase any merc heroes but I still believe it was a nice addition to the game for whoever would like to use them.

Ensoriki is making so much sense, I can't believe people are arguing against him, in such that he isn't claiming that previous expansions and the merc heroes are the exact same thing, but that there is similarities between them.

Altough it should be kept in the back of the mind that when you bought an expansions or campaign, you were in fact buying a "stand-alone"-game. (Maybe even including EOTN) Whereas with this merc heroes thing, you're actually buying an upgrade, which is still "identical" to the BMP.

I've never actually thought about it, but the BMP probably was the first true advantage one could "buy" without actually buying a "new standalone game". The merc hero just stands out so much more because, as said before, it's no story content whatsoever, but pure, straight, in-game advantage, albeit being very minimal.

As I said before tough, I am a bit weary as to where this is heading for GW2, as I do not have the money (And I have no troubles admitting this) to spend each month on micro-transitions solely to keep up with the rest, gameplay-wise. Then again, I still have some doubts that Anet will actually "sell" in-game advantages in GW2 which can't be gotten any other way. Because whereas BMP and Merc Heroes do offer some advantage, they're still a step away from a true advantage, in the sense of having weapons higher than the max damage, having armor with more AL, etc...

The second Anet start throwing out swords with 20-40 damage ranges, monk armors with 80 base for money, I'll worry (in a deep sense) for GW2, but untill then, I think we can be mildly positive...

BMP gets you 30k if you complete all discoveries. This takes at least a few hours (first you have to complete each mission to unlock discovery mode and then you need to complete all discoveries). Farming 4e in topk/uw, or doing an hour (or 2 taking it generously) of raptor/vaettir farming will net you the same amount. That is all. BMP does not give you something you cannot gain (and faster) without it.