Time to take a page from Nightfall?

[SaiKosis.4587]

So is it time? Time to bring in heroes to save the game and keep some interest for solo players who don't play on a daily basis? Just as you had to do in GW to breathe some more life back into it?

Let's face it, GW2 isn't doing so hot. Although I'm sure the diehard fans will disagree.

I've been around for the original, and I've played GW2 since beta (crashing servers with mass spam and a ton of champion black moas was comical). I was here for all the hype about how GW2 was going to be so different for the solo player while keeping the MMO feel. No more grinding (yeah right, there will ALWAYS be a grind). No more having to hunt for a group to do content, etc, it was all going to be so magical.

And while the game mechanics definitely changed (love being able to jump and swim and also the changes to equipment) and it did get more beautiful to look at, it still feels like much the same game. Not commenting on musical score because honestly the original sounded just as awesome so don't make me choose between the two. You just can't actually solo to do everything in the game. Sure you can try for a PUG, but that rarely if ever pans out and we don't all have hours to spend waiting for the random chance of planetary alignment and luck for that to work.

And a guild for someone who doesn't play daily? Rigghhhtt. You'd be lucky if you weren't kicked from that guild on your next login or on the flip side lucky to even see more than one or two members online on your next login.

I still login to do a living story line now and then, but honestly that's about it. I just don't feel like grinding things out on my own or staring at content I can't do solo. Joining a PUG and failing miserably over and over isn't really my idea of fun. And whipping out the CC to get shiny items from the gem store isn't my idea of gaming either. I'd rather be able to earn them myself.

[Omega.6801]

Your individual and personal experiences with group content vastly differ from mine.

Everything's fine and dandy then, I guess?

[Randulf.7614]

Heroes do not fit this style of game. It just wouldn't work here - it worked in GW1 because it was an evolution of the henchman system which the game was built around. GW2 is a lot more coop multiplayer based - it's a big part of what Anet have designed the game to be about. Heroes are not in line with that even if they did work. GW1 and GW2 are different styles of games with some overlap. Heroes is not one of those overlaps.

Imagine the AI trying to cope with a strike or a fractal, let alone pathing. And in open world would they take up a player spot?

I'm not a "diehard" fan and I've levied my fair share of criticism at this game, but 8 years on, it's doing pretty well.

Is it time to bring heroes in? No and that time will prob never come either for this game.

[SaiKosis.4587]

@"Randulf.7614" said:Heroes do not fit this style of game. It just wouldn't work here - it worked in GW1 because it was an evolution of the henchman system which the game was built around. GW2 is a lot more coop multiplayer based - it's a big part of what Anet have designed the game to be about. Heroes are not in line with that even if they did work. GW1 and GW2 are different styles of games with some overlap. Heroes is not one of those overlaps.

Imagine the AI trying to cope with a strike or a fractal, let alone pathing. And in open world would they take up a player spot?

I'm not a "diehard" fan and I've levied my fair share of criticism at this game, but 8 years on, it's doing pretty well.

Is it time to bring heroes in? No and that time will prob never come either for this game.

No it isn't. They had a bad 2019 and likely will be a worse 2020. It will only be around as along as they're making money, won't be much longer and it will be over.

[Omega.6801]

@SaiKosis.4587 said:

@"Randulf.7614" said:Heroes do not fit this style of game. It just wouldn't work here - it worked in GW1 because it was an evolution of the henchman system which the game was built around. GW2 is a lot more coop multiplayer based - it's a big part of what Anet have designed the game to be about. Heroes are not in line with that even if they did work. GW1 and GW2 are different styles of games with some overlap. Heroes is not one of those overlaps.

Imagine the AI trying to cope with a strike or a fractal, let alone pathing. And in open world would they take up a player spot?

I'm not a "diehard" fan and I've levied my fair share of criticism at this game, but 8 years on, it's doing pretty well.

Is it time to bring heroes in? No and that time will prob never come either for this game.

No it isn't. They had a bad 2019 and likely will be a worse 2020. It will only be around as along as they're making money, won't be much longer and it will be over.

Got any numbers to back up that hard and convinced "NO!!! GaEm DeD!!!" of yours?

[Randulf.7614]

@SaiKosis.4587 said:

@"Randulf.7614" said:Heroes do not fit this style of game. It just wouldn't work here - it worked in GW1 because it was an evolution of the henchman system which the game was built around. GW2 is a lot more coop multiplayer based - it's a big part of what Anet have designed the game to be about. Heroes are not in line with that even if they did work. GW1 and GW2 are different styles of games with some overlap. Heroes is not one of those overlaps.

Imagine the AI trying to cope with a strike or a fractal, let alone pathing. And in open world would they take up a player spot?

I'm not a "diehard" fan and I've levied my fair share of criticism at this game, but 8 years on, it's doing pretty well.

Is it time to bring heroes in? No and that time will prob never come either for this game.

No it isn't. They had a bad 2019 and likely will be a worse 2020. It will only be around as along as they're making money, won't be much longer and it will be over.

Yeah it is. People have been saying that the game is dying and has no future since 2013, then again after LS2, then again after HoT, then again during LS3, then again after PoF, then again during and after LS4. Yet here we are, a strong population, regular updates, an expansion on the way.

The game has a bigger dev team and vastly bigger population than older mmo's which are still going.

It has problems and has had problems since launch, but GW2 is nowhere near the end nor is it "dying" no matter how hard the minority wish it to be the case.

[Astralporing.1957]

Won't really work. The playstyle here depends too heavily on things like positioning and movement, as well as reacting to things before they happen, which gw1 heroes were never good for. Notice also, that GW1 hero skillset revolved around independent skill use. They were unable to combo skills because the AI could not understand the interdependencies between them. That means, that any hope for potential GW2 heroes to comprehend the idea of skill rotations is in vain. Basically, for this to work in the current system, you'd need to give heroes specific builds and hardcode the rotations for those. That could be done, but would have two downsides - first, if something went wrong with that rotation for any reason (which is something that always happens in anything that isn't a golem fight), heroes would have way, way more problems than real players reacting to that (which would mean significant dps loss, boon loss, heal loss... you get the picture). Second, with the speed and attention Anet gives past content, those predefined builds would be at least 2-3 balance patches beyond the meta (and that's an optimistic assumption where they'd get updated at all).

[maddoctor.2738]

@"SaiKosis.4587" said:Time to bring in heroes to save the game and keep some interest for solo players who don't play on a daily basis?

Heroes worked well in GW1 because it didn't require any kind of intelligence (from an AIs perspective) to play and be good at it. Not only that but in GW1 the AI did a lot of things -better- than an actual human being because the game was very static and had too few things for an AI to wonder about. GW2 is a vastly more complex game (again from the perspective of an AI) meaning the computer won't be able to "play well". Just take a look at how mobs/pets/allies behave and you will understand.

Edit: the MOST important difference is that GW1 is a reaction game, meaning the AI is responding to something happening in front of it, meanwhile GW2 is not a reaction game, it's a prediction/anticipation game, requiring the AI to do things -before- they happen. Anticipation is MUCH harder to code in an AI than reaction.

Slightly longer explanation:As an example, in GW1 the AI would use a spell like Protective Spirit -after- you take your first damage. There is NO WAY for the GW1 AI to use Protective Spirit anticipating a Meteor dropping in the next few seconds. Also, the GW1 AI moves away of area of effect skills -after- it takes damage once, it won't move away of a Firestorm while it is being cast, but wait to take damage one time. It's the reason why the GW1 AI, with all its insane reflexes, cannot quarter-knock (interrupt a skill with 1/4 cast time) because in order to interrupt something, it must be already mid-cast, the AI cannot anticipate the use of Reversal of Fortune (a 1/4 cast skill) and send a Savage Shot to interrupt it, but an experienced player can.

On the other hand, waiting for things to finish/damage and THEN react to them, means certain death in GW2.

[Kurrilino.2706]

Heroes are exactly what this game is missing.One of the best things in GW1 is to outfit and skill you heroes.Running around like a well oiled machine is a far superior experience than complaining, elitist, kicking groupmembers.And while we are at it, bring weapon customizing back. It was so satisfying to equip yourself against fire damage and just go rampage.

[Kurrilino.2706]

@Randulf.7614 said:

@SaiKosis.4587 said:

@Randulf.7614 said:Heroes do not fit this style of game. It just wouldn't work here - it worked in GW1 because it was an evolution of the henchman system which the game was built around. GW2 is a lot more coop multiplayer based - it's a big part of what Anet have designed the game to be about. Heroes are not in line with that even if they did work. GW1 and GW2 are different styles of games with some overlap. Heroes is not one of those overlaps.

Imagine the AI trying to cope with a strike or a fractal, let alone pathing. And in open world would they take up a player spot?

I'm not a "diehard" fan and I've levied my fair share of criticism at this game, but 8 years on, it's doing pretty well.

Is it time to bring heroes in? No and that time will prob never come either for this game.

No it isn't. They had a bad 2019 and likely will be a worse 2020. It will only be around as along as they're making money, won't be much longer and it will be over.

Yeah it is. People have been saying that the game is dying and has no future since 2013, then again after LS2, then again after HoT, then again during LS3, then again after PoF, then again during and after LS4. Yet here we are, a strong population, regular updates, an expansion on the way.

The game has a bigger dev team and vastly bigger population than older mmo's which are still going.

It has problems and has had problems since launch, but GW2 is nowhere near the end nor is it "dying" no matter how hard the minority wish it to be the case.

I strongly advice to look at their recent quarter numbers.China as a new member had a 45% raise while the overall sales stayed roughly the same as the 25% drop from last quarter.That means beside China, players dropping like flies. Lot's of A-Net employees have been fired and it shows, looking at the new content.How long do you think, will NC-Soft look at that before they pull the plug and put it in maintenance mode.I agree the game is not yet dead yet but it already laid down and pulled the blanket to the chin.This is a slow painful struggle and it hurts me to see a game going down like that.

[thepenmonster.3621]

@"SaiKosis.4587" said:Time to bring in heroes

What other genius great leaps backwards do you suggest? 8 bit sprites?

Anyway, this thread is just a stealth "Game ded".

[SoftFootpaws.9134]

I don't think Heroes would work in this game but I DO think you should be able to customise the common NPCs (like Rytlock) Final Fantasy style in order to fit more with your playing style instead of them just being useless.

[Randulf.7614]

@Kurrilino.2706 said:

@Randulf.7614 said:

@SaiKosis.4587 said:

@Randulf.7614 said:Heroes do not fit this style of game. It just wouldn't work here - it worked in GW1 because it was an evolution of the henchman system which the game was built around. GW2 is a lot more coop multiplayer based - it's a big part of what Anet have designed the game to be about. Heroes are not in line with that even if they did work. GW1 and GW2 are different styles of games with some overlap. Heroes is not one of those overlaps.

Imagine the AI trying to cope with a strike or a fractal, let alone pathing. And in open world would they take up a player spot?

I'm not a "diehard" fan and I've levied my fair share of criticism at this game, but 8 years on, it's doing pretty well.

Is it time to bring heroes in? No and that time will prob never come either for this game.

No it isn't. They had a bad 2019 and likely will be a worse 2020. It will only be around as along as they're making money, won't be much longer and it will be over.

Yeah it is. People have been saying that the game is dying and has no future since 2013, then again after LS2, then again after HoT, then again during LS3, then again after PoF, then again during and after LS4. Yet here we are, a strong population, regular updates, an expansion on the way.

The game has a bigger dev team and vastly bigger population than older mmo's which are still going.

It has problems and has had problems since launch, but GW2 is nowhere near the end nor is it "dying" no matter how hard the minority wish it to be the case.

I strongly advice to look at their recent quarter numbers.China as a new member had a 45% raise while the overall sales stayed roughly the same as the 25% drop from last quarter.That means beside China, players dropping like flies. Lot's of A-Net employees have been fired and it shows, looking at the new content.How long do you think, will NC-Soft look at that before they pull the plug and put it in maintenance mode.I agree the game is not yet dead yet but it already laid down and pulled the blanket to the chin.This is a slow painful struggle and it hurts me to see a game going down like that.

Lets not overlook they have also rehired recently, with some veteran devs returning to the fold and have brought in at least one big name for VA in Graham McTavish to add to what is already a pretty stellar VA cast. They wouldn't do that if on the verge of closure.

The fact they are working on an expansion after 8 years will extend the time on this game for a long while so no, it hasn't already laid down.

The problem often seems to come from the perception that players see things as extremely healthy or dead and nothing in between. MMO populations have been in decline for a long time, yet many sustain themselves on a fraction of the population and content delivery GW2 puts out. It may not get everything right, it may not deliver in all areas, but it is still delivering even if things may not be quite at its peak anymore (and why would it be at this time, given the sheer volume of games etc vying for our time)

When it stops delivering at all across the board, then the concern can set in

But, to the point in question - heroes wont really boost the game. They don't fit, would unlikely work in the fast action paced world and would only encourage less cooperation between players - not something that better a game which thrives on players working together

[LucianDK.8615]

Heroes was quite the chore to kit out back in Nightfall. Keep them out of Gw2, the game is easy enough as it is.

[miraude.2107]

The only way heroes would probably work in GW2 if they took a page from WoW's garrisons from Warlords and incorporated them as followers.

• It would add a reason for having Eye of the North as a hud that would be revisitable.
• It would give people something that could gather resources depending on the 'heroes' levels.
• It could make choices in game actually matter. Priory, Whispers, Vigil would all have their unique followers and missions. Choosing Joko, Sunspear or Amnoon would matter, as again, they'd have unique followers and missions. Over all it could easily add a subset of new content and possibilities where instead of fighting the RNG to get Rhendak's Signet for the achievement, it could pop up on the mission board etc with a possibility of the drop as well.

It would also be a huge resource and development bundle for Anet itself which is probably why the hero system wasn't set up in the first place. The cons on getting the system to work prolly outweighed the pros.

Still, if I was given the choice between garrison followers from WoW or the Hero system from Nightfall....the garrison followers would win hands down. It is an easier system to navigate if new, added more depth into the world (at least for me) and gave me a chance to sort of strategize since some followers had better synergy with certain missions than others (like say you had a stealth mission, it'd be better to send Agent Kito than Braham, where if you had a mission to blow something up, it'd be better to send Canach than Lord Faren).

[Leablo.2651]

@Kurrilino.2706 said:

@Randulf.7614 said:

@SaiKosis.4587 said:

@Randulf.7614 said:Heroes do not fit this style of game. It just wouldn't work here - it worked in GW1 because it was an evolution of the henchman system which the game was built around. GW2 is a lot more coop multiplayer based - it's a big part of what Anet have designed the game to be about. Heroes are not in line with that even if they did work. GW1 and GW2 are different styles of games with some overlap. Heroes is not one of those overlaps.

Imagine the AI trying to cope with a strike or a fractal, let alone pathing. And in open world would they take up a player spot?

I'm not a "diehard" fan and I've levied my fair share of criticism at this game, but 8 years on, it's doing pretty well.

Is it time to bring heroes in? No and that time will prob never come either for this game.

No it isn't. They had a bad 2019 and likely will be a worse 2020. It will only be around as along as they're making money, won't be much longer and it will be over.

Yeah it is. People have been saying that the game is dying and has no future since 2013, then again after LS2, then again after HoT, then again during LS3, then again after PoF, then again during and after LS4. Yet here we are, a strong population, regular updates, an expansion on the way.

The game has a bigger dev team and vastly bigger population than older mmo's which are still going.

It has problems and has had problems since launch, but GW2 is nowhere near the end nor is it "dying" no matter how hard the minority wish it to be the case.

I strongly advice to look at their recent quarter numbers.China as a new member had a 45% raise while the overall sales stayed roughly the same as the 25% drop from last quarter.

You mean the drop that affected all of their western market MMOs, and which are all recovering as interest fades from WoW Classic? Will revenue be "roughly the same" each time it goes up by 10%, according to you?

That means beside China, players dropping like flies. Lot's of A-Net employees have been fired and it shows, looking at the new content.How long do you think, will NC-Soft look at that before they pull the plug and put it in maintenance mode.

Why don't you use the data you're referencing to get your own answer? Aion makes less than GW2 and is 4 years older. Why is it still receiving updates? 6.5 million reasons in a bad quarter. Grow up.

[b k.1648]

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@"SaiKosis.4587" said:Time to bring in heroes to save the game and keep some interest for solo players who don't play on a daily basis?

Heroes worked well in GW1 because it didn't require any kind of intelligence (from an AIs perspective) to play and be good at it. Not only that but in GW1 the AI did a lot of things -better- than an actual human being because the game was very static and had too few things for an AI to wonder about. GW2 is a vastly more complex game (again from the perspective of an AI) meaning the computer won't be able to "play well". Just take a look at how mobs/pets/allies behave and you will understand.

It's interesting you say that, because that's the polar opposite of the impression I have. In GW1 it matters when you use a skill (and you had to be careful with hero builds to make them as 'dumb' as possible while still contributing something useful). GW2 DPS rotations are pretty herp derp by comparison and there's nothing complicated about using damage mitigation either. The reason why mobs and pets play so dumb is their skill selection has all the depth of a puddle.

Edit: the MOST important difference is that GW1 is a reaction game, meaning the AI is responding to something happening in front of it, meanwhile GW2 is not a reaction game, it's a prediction/anticipation game, requiring the AI to do things -before- they happen. Anticipation is MUCH harder to code in an AI than reaction.

I agree that it's harder to code, but outside of certain one-shot mechanics on particular bosses there's precious little you need to anticipate ahead of time in GW2. And the solution to those already existed in GW1: flag the heroes to run out of the way. Why that option isn't already available on pets in GW2 I'm not sure; the only place it wouldn't work, discontinuous navmesh, also caused enemy mobs to become invulnerable if they couldn't return fire so that case was rather irrelevant.

Slightly longer explanation:As an example, in GW1 the AI would use a spell like Protective Spirit -after- you take your first damage. There is NO WAY for the GW1 AI to use Protective Spirit anticipating a Meteor dropping in the next few seconds. Also, the GW1 AI moves away of area of effect skills -after- it takes damage once, it won't move away of a Firestorm while it is being cast, but wait to take damage one time. It's the reason why the GW1 AI, with all its insane reflexes, cannot quarter-knock (interrupt a skill with 1/4 cast time) because in order to interrupt something, it must be already mid-cast, the AI cannot anticipate the use of Reversal of Fortune (a 1/4 cast skill) and send a Savage Shot to interrupt it, but an experienced player can.

On the other hand, waiting for things to finish/damage and THEN react to them, means certain death in GW2.

And that's where things like imbagons came into their own, because they'd just keep the damage reduction up permanently so heroes and henchmen could get away with playing like idiots. I disagree with the assessment that waiting for damage to occur means certain death in GW2 though; were that the case, I would be unable to play WvW because the lag is so bad that anticipating everything is simply not possible. Unless all the damage occurs in one hit, it's enough to simply mitigate the last 70-90% with block or dodge, and build with enough sustain to deal with the rest.

If I were to build heroes for PvE dungeons or whatever, I'd follow the same principle: no thieves or glass cannon builds, high regen, lots of passive mitigation skills, and I'd personally use a support-heavy build that could grant blocks, distortion, etc. to the whole party with high frequency to deal with anything that could potentially one-shot my party.

That was the thing with GW1 as well: it was quite possible to build a party of heroes with something that would work well with real players using the builds, but miserably with AI. It didn't make heroes non-viable, you just had to take AI weaknesses into account when putting their builds together.

There were, of course, places that heroes just could not do the job without impressive levels of micro-management, such as DoA. I don't think heroes could or should ever be used for raids in GW2 either. But other instances such as dungeons, personal story instances, and maybe fractals I can see some value, and the ability to bring some of your personal story allies with you for the later content would help solve one of the long-term problems that GW2 has been facing: neglected story characters.

I'm on the fence for open-world content; there are deserted maps where they'd certainly be helpful, but I wouldn't want to see them flooding populated maps as that could jeopardise player co-operation.

[maddoctor.2738]

@Ben K.6238 said:

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@"SaiKosis.4587" said:Time to bring in heroes to save the game and keep some interest for solo players who don't play on a daily basis?

Heroes worked well in GW1 because it didn't require any kind of intelligence (from an AIs perspective) to play and be good at it. Not only that but in GW1 the AI did a lot of things -better- than an actual human being because the game was very static and had too few things for an AI to wonder about. GW2 is a vastly more complex game (again from the perspective of an AI) meaning the computer won't be able to "play well". Just take a look at how mobs/pets/allies behave and you will understand.

It's interesting you say that, because that's the polar opposite of the impression I have. In GW1 it matters when you use a skill (and you had to be careful with hero builds to make them as 'dumb' as possible while still contributing something useful). GW2 DPS rotations are pretty kitten kitten by comparison and there's nothing complicated about using damage mitigation either. The reason why mobs and pets play so dumb is their skill selection has all the depth of a puddle.

GW1 doesn't have damage rotations. GW2 does and they play an important role in your damage output. In GW1 the AI will interrupt literally anything, in GW2 you need to pick and choose.

Edit: the MOST important difference is that GW1 is a reaction game, meaning the AI is responding to something happening in front of it, meanwhile GW2 is not a reaction game, it's a prediction/anticipation game, requiring the AI to do things -before- they happen. Anticipation is MUCH harder to code in an AI than reaction.

I agree that it's harder to code, but outside of certain one-shot mechanics on particular bosses there's precious little you need to anticipate ahead of time in GW2. And the solution to those already existed in GW1: flag the heroes to run out of the way. Why that option isn't already available on pets in GW2 I'm not sure; the only place it wouldn't work, discontinuous navmesh, also caused enemy mobs to become invulnerable if they couldn't return fire so that case was rather irrelevant.

Flagged heroes move really slowly. Boss mechanics and skills require fast reflexes and execution, something the GW1 does not require. In GW1 there are very few cases where flagging is important because the AI doesn't know to respond to, for example the rotating boulders at Ilsudur are invisible to the AI. GW2 would be like every single boss mechanics is similar to those boulders, in the end it won't be practical.

Slightly longer explanation:As an example, in GW1 the AI would use a spell like Protective Spirit -after- you take your first damage. There is NO WAY for the GW1 AI to use Protective Spirit anticipating a Meteor dropping in the next few seconds. Also, the GW1 AI moves away of area of effect skills -after- it takes damage once, it won't move away of a Firestorm while it is being cast, but wait to take damage one time. It's the reason why the GW1 AI, with all its insane reflexes, cannot quarter-knock (interrupt a skill with 1/4 cast time) because in order to interrupt something, it must be already mid-cast, the AI cannot anticipate the use of Reversal of Fortune (a 1/4 cast skill) and send a Savage Shot to interrupt it, but an experienced player can.

On the other hand, waiting for things to finish/damage and THEN react to them, means certain death in GW2.

And that's where things like imbagons came into their own, because they'd just keep the damage reduction up permanently so heroes and henchmen could get away with playing like idiots. I disagree with the assessment that waiting for damage to occur means certain death in GW2 though; were that the case, I would be unable to play WvW because the lag is so bad that anticipating everything is simply not possible. Unless all the damage occurs in one hit, it's enough to simply mitigate the last 70-90% with block or dodge, and build with enough sustain to deal with the rest.

Talking about PVE here. The AI won't know -when- to dodge or block. In GW1 it doesn't, it just fires its skills whenever they are ready.

If I were to build heroes for PvE dungeons or whatever, I'd follow the same principle: no thieves or glass cannon builds, high regen, lots of passive mitigation skills, and I'd personally use a support-heavy build that could grant blocks, distortion, etc. to the whole party with high frequency to deal with anything that could potentially one-shot my party.

Passive mitigation does very little in GW2.

There were, of course, places that heroes just could not do the job without impressive levels of micro-management, such as DoA. I don't think heroes could or should ever be used for raids in GW2 either. But other instances such as dungeons, personal story instances, and maybe fractals I can see some value, and the ability to bring some of your personal story allies with you for the later content would help solve one of the long-term problems that GW2 has been facing: neglected story characters.

Since you said "dungeons", GW2 requires a lot of teamwork to finish many encounters, something GW1 does not. How do you suppose the AI is coded to move to the green circles of Vale Guardian? Or do the cannon phase of the Crucible of Eternity. Or the Simin fight in Arah? Or the pressure plate part of Underground Fractal? Or the final boss of the Underground Fractal? Using flags? That would be insane. DoA was perfectly playable with Heroes and required no micro-management, there is no place in GW1 that requires insane micro-management of Heroes, it's all perfectly doable because GW1 does not have teamwork mechanics.

[Naxos.2503]

I dont understand the reasoning behind your asking that we get heroes as Guild wars 1 did.

First : the engine is different, and the AI of non player characters is notably linear, they Always act in the same way, with cooldowns on their ability and crude priorities as to which skill to use. Using that to participate in combat where timing, positioning and correct skill use is primordial in all facets of the game is likely to result in nothing more than a glorified pet.

Second : The game can be invariably soloed in a multitude of ways through proper playing. And no, I dont mean meta builds. Careful dodging, synergies between your skills and positioning do the job just fine. I can clear dungeons with a necromancer minionmaster with no power or condition damage, just through sheer Healing power and life leeching, the devs probably didn't intend for that to be possible, but so few people do it (because let's face it, it's a 2 hours long experience) that it might as well be considered viable. My point is, if you're sufficiently dogged and ingenious about it, you can go far with just your own character.

Does that means I dont want companions ? No, I actually would like to be able to select 1 NPC out of all I encountered to act as a sort of ever present companion, if only to replace defunct or non existent pet skills on some of the classes, such as warrior, engineer, guardian and revenant. Pets/companions/summons have their uses, even if limited, but it certainly wouldn't work like in Guild wars 1. The two games are far too different for it to be even remotely possible.

[kharmin.7683]

Due to player population, heroes have been hidden.

They already hide minis when there are a lot of people on a map. That's just one add-on per character. Imagine how often this would have to happen with four heroes per character.

[Fueki.4753]

If it was done like in FF14, that the story characters are only available for instances, it'd be possible.It worked in GW1, because there was no Open World.

However, I doubt they'd be all that useful anyway.

[GummyBearSummoner.7941]

As much as I like heroes I prefer being able to solo on my own without any help. Plus I don’t think this is the game for heroes. Maybe if they made a guild wars 3 but not guild wars 2. I would feel like we would be taking a step back if we went back to heroes .

[Hamfast.8719]

Heroes in GW2 could be an interesting money sink. You'd have to level them, and equip them, and set them up almost like another character. More time and money spent. (Maybe we could use Tomes of Knowledge on them, giving those items new value?) Good for ANet as well. It adds whole new possibilities to the Gem Store.

Heroes would not be part of PvP or WvW for obvious reasons.

The only way I can see Heroes in Open-World PvE content is in a situation where they operate like minipets. They'd be there for low population World Boss events until enough "real" help arrives to make them disappear. Then when all's clear, they pop up again). But no, I don't really see that as a viable possibility.

Heroes for storyline instances would be fine, I suppose. Right now they assign Personal Story, Destiny's Edge, or Dragon's Watch "Henchmen" to your various storyline instances as required. I wouldn't object to being given a CHOICE of which pre-defined henchmen or player-created heroes to bring with me to compliment my play style and profession, but I'm sure certain Heroes would still be ASSIGNED for plot reasons. And some Instances wouldn't allow ANY Heroes. Party size would still be limited to 5, so you can mix and match Heroes/Henchmen/Players, but not exceed that limit. I don't really want to equip and maintain my own PERSONAL Heroes for each character like we did in GW1 though.

More than any other area I can think of, Dungeons and Fractals could maybe benefit from the addition of Heroes. On my server, the LFG is usually pretty quiet there. As in GW1 though, you must expect that Heroes are a poor substitute for real people. Helpful, certainly, if for nothing more than acting as meat shields. And don't forget, they can be aggro magnets as well. I'm sure they'd never pass muster in Raids.

If Heroes DID get added, I would hope for only ONE per character, and they'd be called "Sidekicks" or something like that. Then have pre-defined "Henchmen" to round out a short Dungeon or Fractals party.

[kharmin.7683]

@Hamfast.8719 said:

Heroes would not be part of PvP or WvW for obvious reasons.Once implemented for OWPvE, how long do you think it would take for those same players to then start wanting heroes for PvP/WvW?

[Westenev.5289]

Here's some food for thought - what if Heroes weren't pseudo players running player builds, but instead regular combat NPC's with scaled up numbers and simplified abilities (kind of like an extra pet or a permenant ogre whistle)?

So basically like [insert story npc here], only they provide real support or dps.

Would they be acceptable then?