Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Henchmen - specifically Player character henchmen... think of the possibilities


Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Crimthan.9308 said:

You're not getting it. 

You're not looking from a point of curiosity but one of cynicism.

 

You can lead players who are leading units. 

You're still avoiding the question. You say you enjoy commanding and taking care of people -that's already available in the game, you can tag up and have a squad of people. Npcs are not needed for that.

4 minutes ago, Crimthan.9308 said:

No one is talking about making a game the same as another game.  It's about expanding a part of the game.

I must be somehow misreading your repeated "but that game has it and I like it" then.

 

2 minutes ago, Crimthan.9308 said:

Well I suppose they should eliminate all pets then.  *shrug*

Well, if it's the same then you don't need more npcs implemented. If it's not the same (and it's not) then you understand this is a strawman.

Edited by Sobx.1758
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Sobx.1758 said:

You're still avoiding the question. You say you enjoy commanding and taking care of people -that's already available in the game, you can tag up and have a squad of people. Npcs are not needed for that.

I must be somehow misreading your repeated "but that game has it and I like it" then.

 

According to what you're saying, I need to reach out to the developers of Conqueror's Blade and tell them that all the units be composed of people.  Tell the designers of baldurs gate and all those types of games that the party has to be composed of players.  

According to what you're saying, NPCs aren't useful in a party, as part of a unit, Squad, etc and they never have been.  

Is that correct?  Does that break it down better for you?

 

• Conqueror's blade doesn't have player characters that are copied over as henchmen to form a small squad.

• GW1 didn't have massive warfare with players leading units of NPCs.

 

I'm talking about doing something new and putting it into GW2.  Taking henchmen of copied player characters that a player leads as squads while still being able to play with other players.

 

All points are probably mute as it appears as though (from what I read from other players) Arenanet doesn't have much lined up for WvW/PvP in the future anyway, let alone a new game mode that would have this.

If that is true then GW2 is just a PvE game with the warfare aspects as an after thought.

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Crimthan.9308 said:

According to what you're saying, I need to reach out to the developers of Conqueror's Blade and tell them that all the units be composed of people.  Tell the designers of baldurs gate and all those types of games that the party has to be composed of players.  

According to what you're saying, NPCs aren't useful in a party, as part of a unit, Squad, etc and they never have been.  

Wait what? According to me at which point exactly? Where did I say anything remotely like this? (to both of these claims)

9 minutes ago, Crimthan.9308 said:

Is that correct?  Does that break it down better for you?

No, not at all, I have no idea where you came up with those, I don't recall writing anything like that, so exact quotes and explanations would be appreciated.

9 minutes ago, Crimthan.9308 said:

• Conqueror's blade doesn't have player characters that are copied over as henchmen to form a small squad.

So the skin of character is a key feature for you and not commending people or npcs? At best this seems like a flavor which is completely secondary (at best) to the changes your idea makes to the game and how it's played. "but different skins/models!" has nothing to do with what I'm saying.

9 minutes ago, Crimthan.9308 said:

• GW1 didn't have massive warfare with players leading units of NPCs.

So it's not the same and yet you're bringing it up as some sort of "see, it was there so it can be here too"? Might just be me, but I don't see much sense in bringing up these examples which are simply different. Luckily if the only "why not just play CB instead" complaint you have is "beacuse it's not skinned with my other characters" then it seems like you have your perfect match for your fantasy commanding gameplay, as mentioned before.

9 minutes ago, Crimthan.9308 said:

I'm talking about doing something new and putting it into GW2.  Taking henchmen of copied player characters that a player leads as squads while still being able to play with other players.

And I'm (and it's not just me as far as I saw) talking about how it completely changes the game, replaces players with npcs and is detrimental to the overal gameplay design gw2 has.

"but I want to command people!" -great, as said before: either command players in ow/wvw or play CB which apparently what you're looking for (with the exception of "not being those particular skins of my alts")

Edited by Sobx.1758
  • Like 3
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Crimthan.9308 said:

According to what you're saying, I need to reach out to the developers of Conqueror's Blade and tell them that all the units be composed of people.  Tell the designers of baldurs gate and all those types of games that the party has to be composed of players.  

Well what would your reaction be if someone made a post on the forums for those games, requesting just that ... get rid of NPCs. GW2 doesn't use NPCs, so why do you? Would you chime in to say, yes, lets try playing with just other players. You know, in the spirit of curiosity?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, costepj.5120 said:

Well what would your reaction be if someone made a post on the forums for those games, requesting just that ... get rid of NPCs. GW2 doesn't use NPCs, so why do you? Would you chime in to say, yes, lets try playing with just other players. You know, in the spirit of curiosity?

 

I would chime in and say we can have both at the same time. 

  • Confused 6
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Crimthan.9308 said:

I would chime in and say we can have both at the same time. 

But then they make another two dozen posts insisting you can't have both. You have to get rid of NPCs, becaise, you know, GW2 doesn't have both and that game is great.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Crimthan.9308 said:

 

According to what you're saying, I need to reach out to the developers of Conqueror's Blade and tell them that all the units be composed of people.  Tell the designers of baldurs gate and all those types of games that the party has to be composed of players.  

According to what you're saying, NPCs aren't useful in a party, as part of a unit, Squad, etc and they never have been.  

Is that correct?  Does that break it down better for you?

 

• Conqueror's blade doesn't have player characters that are copied over as henchmen to form a small squad.

• GW1 didn't have massive warfare with players leading units of NPCs.

 

I'm talking about doing something new and putting it into GW2.  Taking henchmen of copied player characters that a player leads as squads while still being able to play with other players.

 

All points are probably mute as it appears as though (from what I read from other players) Arenanet doesn't have much lined up for WvW/PvP in the future anyway, let alone a new game mode that would have this.

If that is true then GW2 is just a PvE game with the warfare aspects as an after thought.

 

The gameplay of conquerer's Blade is not dynamic like GW2.  The goal of GW2 is to use movement and active skills to not get hit while simultaneously putting pressure on the enemy.  The game you refer to is merely two people beating each other's health bar until one dies.  There is also no vertical considerations in the gameplay of Conquerer's blade.

Baldur's gate has no 3-dimensional movement.  Also, Baldur's Gate is turn-based combat.

Again, you are comparing completely different things and vastly underestimate the complexity of free-range, 3-dimensional, active combat.

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Crimthan.9308 said:

If that is true then GW2 is just a PvE game with the warfare aspects as an after thought.

 

WvW in GW2 was modeled after Dark Age of Camelot, not something like an AI driven Warhammer game with units. 

 

The devs aren't going to waste time and resources on creating henchmen units, new zones for these henchmen units, and redesigning the game to have henchmen units all over the place.

 

If you like the henchmen stuff, I would just take advantage of the games that were designed for and offer that, because it's certainly not going to happen here.   

 

GL!

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Crimthan.9308 said:

 

According to what you're saying, I need to reach out to the developers of Conqueror's Blade and tell them that all the units be composed of people.  Tell the designers of baldurs gate and all those types of games that the party has to be composed of players.  

According to what you're saying, NPCs aren't useful in a party, as part of a unit, Squad, etc and they never have been.  

Is that correct?  Does that break it down better for you?

 

• Conqueror's blade doesn't have player characters that are copied over as henchmen to form a small squad.

• GW1 didn't have massive warfare with players leading units of NPCs.

 

I'm talking about doing something new and putting it into GW2.  Taking henchmen of copied player characters that a player leads as squads while still being able to play with other players.

 

All points are probably mute as it appears as though (from what I read from other players) Arenanet doesn't have much lined up for WvW/PvP in the future anyway, let alone a new game mode that would have this.

If that is true then GW2 is just a PvE game with the warfare aspects as an after thought.

Well, that certainly went to strawman really fast.  Here's the problem, these games you're going to be reaching out to were built with a party based system in mind, at least as far as Baldur's Gate goes.  This game was not.  So, one would have to completely revamp it, for next to no return.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean, whenever I tag up in DrizzleWood, I always end up having more than 40 folks following me as further I progress into Citadel, we really don't need this function as there's no use with it, since we have tags and lfg systems already doing what they're supposed to do, lead and find players to play with.

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Crimthan.9308 said:

GW1 lost momentum due to the limited movement in the game engine - it couldn't compete with other game designs using updated physics.  

 

Those concepts being blamed for the fall of GW1 are actually some of the items that kept the player base as a whole interested.  They just couldn't keep people dedicated when the engine had so many limitations in the physics.  Something GW2 doesn't have much of an issue with.

Really, and all those issues just happened to reduce group play and player retention right after a highly liked and praised expansion hit? What an unfortunate coincidence. /s

Sarcasm aside, if you implement elements which reduce the necessity for grouping, the result will be less grouping. That's not rocket science to follow or ununderstand.

Those elements which might have kept some players interested a moment longer in the short run, now being able to solo content, can very well cause issues in the long run especially if they reduce or negatively impact some fundamentals of a game.

Edited by Cyninja.2954
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/22/2023 at 8:55 AM, Crimthan.9308 said:

 

No one says you have to.  That's the whole thing - people that want to play with henchmen can in certain areas, and those who don't want to play with henchmen, can continue doing what they're doing.  It would have ZERO impact on someone who doesn't want to lead henchmen.

The more people who can use them, the less people will sit around and wait for people. You may think adding henchmen doesn't affect anyone, but I've seen what adding heroes in Guild Wars 1 did to finding people for groups in Guild Wars 1. Honestly, I'd rather not see that happen here.  

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Crimthan.9308 said:

 

You fight and your npcs fight.  Neither detract from the other as evidenced in Conqueror's Blade or Samurai Warriors.  You're fighting, leading and shouting orders. 

Only this is GW2 where there are even more RPG, char creation/development elements.

It would make Guild Wars even more a warring faction game.

I don't think you've grasped it friend.

I don't want to give orders and I don't want to have the AI fighting for me. 

The closest we have at the moment is pets, minions, ele summons and mechs. They are relatively minor and require little micromanagement. I would say most people playing an RPG aren't interested in having to tell other units where to go and what to do, this isn't an RTS.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Crimthan.9308 said:

 

 I just can't believe for a moment that the GW2 development/design teams couldn't handle this - especially if zones were made with this specifically in mind.

The devs would also have to go back and change all of the existing zones.  You couldn't just have zones for this -- that's how gliders started.  At first, they were HoT zones only.  Your request would require all of the current content to be modified to account for it.

  • Like 2
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Mungo Zen.9364 said:

Why an expansion?  Because it is the single largest payday they can manufacture for themselves. 

Seems more like "because NCSoft". After PoF they went to IBS which was going back to a no expansion approach until NCSoft told them to make an expansion and we ended up with a rushed EoD. Either the previous ANet leadership really don't like expansions or maybe expansions are just not as good for ANet financially but better for NCSoft.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Doggie.3184 said:

I want Henchmen but through a "Thieve's Guild" buff 😛 where my Thief can have them out almost forever like Elementalist minions. If you want Henchmen you gotta play Ele, Necro, Ranger and Engineer.

Here you go

 

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the AI was good? Maybe in instanced content only. Keep it out of openworld, it'd be a lag fiesta. But say you're struggling on a story step, you recruit a geared healer from your roster to pocket you or another dps to help you kill a thing, maybe? Would be kinda cool.

But let's be real, NPC AI in GW2 is nothing compared to OG GW. Unless Anet somehow managed to un-bork pet/ally AI and made them useful, I'd have to pass.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/25/2023 at 1:28 PM, Sobx.1758 said:

Giving example of another game with different mechanics and gameplay does nothing to show how it would work in this game. So if you won't attempt to be specific, while also specifically respond to the feedback you get (whether it supports what you want or not) then I don't see how "but those random games have it" is supposed to be meaningful in any way.

I checked those games (or one of them? I don't exactly remember at this point) and it seemed they just featured a bunch of meat shields. Something I consider detrimental to the player experience in mmorpg, which also aims at "throwing bodies at enemies" in order to avoid using the actual game's mechanics GW2 involves.

On the other hand "if you were interested at all", you'd start responding to what is being said instead of repeating "but that game has it and it works". Cool, good for them, but that's a different game with different gameplay and gameplay I see 0 value in when talking about gw2.

No, it would be the same wvw with simply more npcs meatshield between the players.

How would that not take player space? Do you think those npcs would not influence balance, performance and player caps in the instances/wvw? 🙄 I didn't see you respond to that directly other then just sying "nooo it wouldn't take space" which is more of a dodge than it is an actual response. Almost ironically, since now that's what you claim I'm somehow doing. What did I dodge exactly? Mind that even saying "gw2 isn't [other games]" wasn't an attempt to dodge what you said, but a short version of what I wrote at the start of this post.

 

 

So I'm going to address the Fear in the room.

 

Essentially from what you've expressed and a couple others, it appears that there is a fear that "when NPC X is placed in an environment, Player Y can no longer be there."

In other words, NPC X x 4 are now present, following a player around.  So those 4 NPCs will now magically make 4 players unable to also be there.  The moment those 4 NPCs show up, *POOF* 4 Players are kicked out.

So if 100 NPCs are in an instance, 100 Players are *poof* kicked out...

Someone even went so far as to say that's how GW1 died.  Player character Henchmen were made possible, and so instantly, any chance of that player playing with other players in their group, was eliminated by default.

 

And we know none of that is even remotely true.  It's ludicrous.

It's a fear based on what ifs... an inauthentic fear.  There is an attachment present, one of a hooked mindset on displacement.

It goes something along the lines of "when a new item is placed, we must ditch an already present item."  It's an entirely disempowering construct created by a myopic mind.

 

How about this, how about a mindset I've already mentioned.  Instead of "One OR the Other" we can see the power around "One AND the Other."  

 

Just like when any other new content or instances are added to a game (which happens when an expansion is created, or even new stories), servers are added and/or bolstered and/or repurposed to where needed; in order to anticipate the increased demand.

 

I can see that some are saying "No" straight away without entertaining the possibilities present.  

  • Confused 7
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/26/2023 at 3:57 PM, Caitmonster.9036 said:

If the AI was good? Maybe in instanced content only. Keep it out of openworld, it'd be a lag fiesta. But say you're struggling on a story step, you recruit a geared healer from your roster to pocket you or another dps to help you kill a thing, maybe? Would be kinda cool.

But let's be real, NPC AI in GW2 is nothing compared to OG GW. Unless Anet somehow managed to un-bork pet/ally AI and made them useful, I'd have to pass.

 

I appreciate the common (uncommon?) sense that is made in this statement.  You'd be a "No" unless better AI is incorporated. 

That or perhaps they added the better AI in an expansion along with player character henchmen?

  • Confused 5
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/26/2023 at 3:24 AM, kharmin.7683 said:

The devs would also have to go back and change all of the existing zones.  You couldn't just have zones for this -- that's how gliders started.  At first, they were HoT zones only.  Your request would require all of the current content to be modified to account for it.

 

As I've stated numerous times in this thread - It doesn't have to take place in already existing zones.  There could be new War Zones for massive warfare PVP, or other adventure zones set up with exactly this in mind.

 

Lets say they did want to incorporate this to some zones.  They could choose zones with easier pathing than the zones with more difficult pathing.  We also know that they altered previous zones to accommodate the mounts presented in Path of Fire.  I noticed that in some areas in Maguuma where I could no longer walk in some areas because the Springer mount would circumvent content.  The devs did the work there.

  • Confused 5
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/26/2023 at 3:20 AM, disco.9302 said:

I don't think you've grasped it friend.

I don't want to give orders and I don't want to have the AI fighting for me. 

The closest we have at the moment is pets, minions, ele summons and mechs. They are relatively minor and require little micromanagement. I would say most people playing an RPG aren't interested in having to tell other units where to go and what to do, this isn't an RTS.

 

I'm not talking about an RTS.  I'm talking about real time combat (in some ways sort of like samurai warriors but closer to conqueror's blade) where the unit follows you and you can have them take various actions.

If you don't like classes like the Ranger where they do that with pet, that's fine - I'm sure you enjoy the other classes.  Just like if you didn't want to lead units and fight along with them, you wouldn't have to.

In GW2, we're usually not forced to do much of anything.  We choose where we're going and what mode to do it with.

  • Confused 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...