The faq says groups will probably be between 6-8 players. I thought the 6-player groups in Everquest were always great, but an 8 player group might be very interesting too. I could see some definite pros and cons to either:
8-player group pros:
- Allows for more challenging content and would allow groups to tackle more diverse scenarios
- Would permit more flexibility in group makeup
8-player group cons:
- Could take longer to form
- May be difficult to fill out groups during off-peak hours
- The flip-side to having more challenging content is that it may make it too difficult to form a group capable of doing things that are perceived as 'worth while'.
I'm sure there are a lot of others, I've never played an MMO that had a group size larger than six. Has anyone else? And if so, what was it like?
personally i prefer the 6 player groups, but i could see an 8 player group working in pantheon. just PLEASE oh PLEASE dont make "raid" content 8 mans like a certain other MMO out there. i dont look at that as raid content. one of the beauties about EQ raiding was that you could go to a PoP progression guild and raid with them even with crap gear, sure you will probably die but any contribution in EQ raiding was better than none.
It's definitely interesting and I hope it will allow unusual mixups being worthwhile. You won't be quite as locked in to some meta comp. Regarding the game being healthly/active enough to fill out these large groups, I only hope it works. I play off peak US hours and always dread being stuck on my own.
I'm all for larger groups especially if it allowes for more deversity within the group. I'm also hoping that raids are LARGE, first game I've raided in was vanilla WoW, and I miss the 40-mans. When they reduced the raid sizes it just never felt as epic. I know there are good arguments for and against raids that large but I really do miss that mass scale of guildies/friends fighting together.
Rachael
Rachael said:I'm all for larger groups especially if it allowes for more deversity within the group. I'm also hoping that raids are LARGE, first game I've raided in was vanilla WoW, and I miss the 40-mans. When they reduced the raid sizes it just never felt as epic. I know there are good arguments for and against raids that large but I really do miss that mass scale of guildies/friends fighting together.
Rachael
40 man raids would be considered small as are my hopes. I want EQ raids or bigger again!
Sevens said:Im curious as to why people think the bigger the raid the better...
I just always felt insignificant on the huge raids. A smaller strike force fighting its way in to face the biggest boss just always seemed more personable to me.
Just a preference, don't really have any reasons. I just always the most fun compared to smaller raids.
Warlored said:Sevens said:Im curious as to why people think the bigger the raid the better...
I just always felt insignificant on the huge raids. A smaller strike force fighting its way in to face the biggest boss just always seemed more personable to me.
Just a preference, don't really have any reasons. I just always the most fun compared to smaller raids.
I can see it has having a more EPIC feel....70 or so of the greatest in the land band together to defeat the mighty dragon
I just always felt more just a cog in the wheel in big raids.
Back on topic...I always loved the 6 man group size, just felt right to me and maybe thats because I started with EQ and that was just the norm.
Well... it depends how they balance it. If its still just one tank and healer it may not be as difficult to set up a team. At least, not any worse.
Id say for a 6 man group, 1 Tank, 1 Healer, 1(insert 4th role), 3 DPS.
8 Man 1 Tank, 1 Heals, 2(insert 4th role), 4 DPS.
That is, assuming there will be some sort of group finder. I really cant see how an 8 man group would be a good idea to just have players spam chat. Specially as content gets older.
As for raids, I dont think a 40 man was ever a good idea, there is just too much set up, youre more expendable and unimportant, a lot of it is just waiting for everyone to either get in place or just get to the freakin dungeon! Jim! >:(
Anything above 20 but below 30, is plenty if you ask me.
I have always been fond of six, it allows for the trinity of Tank, healer & CC. And as we've heard a few times now, they want dps to be apart of the trinity forming a quadinity. So that will take up four out of the six leaving two spots open for mixing and matching, you can take an off-tank, extra dps or any kind of support it leaves for a lot of choice while still ensuring it does not become unstructured and/or overly structured.
Kayo said:Well... it depends how they balance it. If its still just one tank and healer it may not be as difficult to set up a team. At least, not any worse.
Id say for a 6 man group, 1 Tank, 1 Healer, 1(insert 4th role), 3 DPS.
8 Man 1 Tank, 1 Heals, 2(insert 4th role), 4 DPS.
That is, assuming there will be some sort of group finder. I really cant see how an 8 man group would be a good idea to just have players spam chat. Specially as content gets older.
When it comes to roles, we really don't know what the gameplay or mechanics are going to be to even consider a comp. For all we know 2 tanks could be needed...
In EQ CC/support classes weren't "needed" but it would seem they are going to be more of a need in Pantheon, given they have their official "role" now.
Of course this is all speculation and definitely makes me anxious to see/hear how exactly the game will function on a group level.
I hope there is NO LFG tool whatsoever, more than anything else that could be done. I really want this left out. A LFG will remove so much from a social perspective. (Off topic but I couldn't resist).
Group finders (In the way they have been implemented in many games) have been one of the worst things (IMHO) to ever happen to the MMORPG genre. Press the button, wait for queue, load to dungeon. Nothing breaks immersion more than this mechanic. A LFG chat channel (perhaps make it global?) is and always has been sufficient, and players should definatly have to manually travel to wherever they are grouping to.
I think it would be nice to see different things call for different size groups, say a standard dungeon takes 6, but harder dungeons requires 8-10, then you get into raiding.
Rachael
I would think for a niche game like Pantheon that won't be pulling in 14 million subs 8 man groups and 70+ man raids are probably not achieveable numbers to shoot for as most will be left in the cold. Granted if all you need is a body to meet those numbers and class/skill don't matter it might be doable but still not enjoyable. 6 is a good number for groups. It allows for the 4 main class archetypes with some variance thrown in. I'm all for allowing 10-20 man raids if they need something to meet the needs of an in-between level that doesn't quite offer the rewards of a 40 man raid but better than single-group.
DAoC featured 8 person groups, which was very fun for the higher end single-group content (sub-boss dartmoor style zones, and rvr). It did take a long time to find and assemble groups.
I like the concept of content designed for 6 players, and 6 being the intended group size, but groups being able to accommodate 7 or 8 players at a significant penalty - no one likes to be the odd person out, and this gives some flexibility to include friends to the group while a second guild group gets started, or to teach content strategies.
Rachael said:The group finder as you have said is truly a horrid idea, but a group tool as they have in EQ1 I think would be fine...You flag yourself /lfg and then anyone can check the LFG box and it has a list of everyone who is /LFG with Class and Level, Thats it. It is now up to the player on who they wish to send a /tell to...who they want to interact with, you still need to talk and agree to join the group, nothing is automatic. There are a few things wrong with a /lfg channel....If there are general global chat channels then the LFG channel will be ignored and everyone will just spam general for a group, if there are not general global channels then the LFG would by default become the general chat and would be used by Trolls, Gold sellers, people trying to sell their items...etc etc etc.Group finders (In the way they have been implemented in many games) have been one of the worst things (IMHO) to ever happen to the MMORPG genre. Press the button, wait for queue, load to dungeon. Nothing breaks immersion more than this mechanic. A LFG chat channel (perhaps make it global?) is and always has been sufficient, and players should definatly have to manually travel to wherever they are grouping to.
I think it would be nice to see different things call for different size groups, say a standard dungeon takes 6, but harder dungeons requires 8-10, then you get into raiding.
Rachael
Kellie said:I have always been fond of six, it allows for the trinity of Tank, healer & CC. And as we've heard a few times now, they want dps to be apart of the trinity forming a quadinity. So that will take up four out of the six leaving two spots open for mixing and matching, you can take an off-tank, extra dps or any kind of support it leaves for a lot of choice while still ensuring it does not become unstructured and/or overly structured.
I would rather see a quadinity of Tank, Healer, CC and then Buff / debuff (shammy and bard would be good examples of this from EQ)
So in a 6 man group you have Tank Healer CC Debuff DPS DSP
Hell you could even work in the Debuff as more of a Utility slot...for you Evacer, puller, buffer or such
internalprime8 said:I would think for a niche game like Pantheon that won't be pulling in 14 million subs 8 man groups and 70+ man raids are probably not achieveable numbers to shoot for as most will be left in the cold. Granted if all you need is a body to meet those numbers and class/skill don't matter it might be doable but still not enjoyable. 6 is a good number for groups. It allows for the 4 main class archetypes with some variance thrown in. I'm all for allowing 10-20 man raids if they need something to meet the needs of an in-between level that doesn't quite offer the rewards of a 40 man raid but better than single-group.
EQ TLP pretty much says otherwise in terms of total subscribers being able to field a 70+ raid. That logic doesn't make any sense. It will just mean there will be larger guilds and fewer of them who CAN raid.
Of course we're all just speculating here. A particular raid may only need 30+ yet there will still be guilds who throw probably 100's at it. Zerg forces vs. strategic forces all day.
I'd like to point out that the important thing to note here is the amount of room you could choose to do something.Keep things open ended and not linear and let people figure it out.
My questions would be, would a smaller force benefit over a larger one?
Would loot tables be set in stone or cater to the amount of participants?
Would encounters alter in some way based on those engaging it?
There could be so many things that factor everything from all perspectives (solo, group, raid).
If Pantheon is truly going to bring this niche back then I believe players will get to control how they do things again, instead of having their hands held.
I prefer 6 man groups so content will be scaled for 6 versus 7-8. And, many of my best experiences in EQ came from the "small group" with 3-4 players. With 7-8 players, you'd need 5-6 players for a small group. In a group oriented game, I'd rather not have one more obstacle to obtaining groups and tackling content.
We've had several threads discussing this in the past, but here's a more recent one discussing group sizes:
http://www.pantheonmmo.com/content/forums/topic/423/group-sizes/view/post_id/28863
Sevens said:The group finder as you have said is truly a horrid idea, but a group tool as they have in EQ1 I think would be fine...You flag yourself /lfg and then anyone can check the LFG box and it has a list of everyone who is /LFG with Class and Level, Thats it. It is now up to the player on who they wish to send a /tell to...who they want to interact with, you still need to talk and agree to join the group, nothing is automatic. There are a few things wrong with a /lfg channel....If there are general global chat channels then the LFG channel will be ignored and everyone will just spam general for a group, if there are not general global channels then the LFG would by default become the general chat and would be used by Trolls, Gold sellers, people trying to sell their items...etc etc etc.
Having never played EQ (sadly) that sounds like a great option to finding groups. That wouldn't break immersion at all :D
And I've got to admit I overlooked a global channel like that being filled with trolls and such (though I hope there aren't many drawn to Pantheon, I hate trolls so much lol)
Rachael
Rachael said:Sevens said:The group finder as you have said is truly a horrid idea, but a group tool as they have in EQ1 I think would be fine...You flag yourself /lfg and then anyone can check the LFG box and it has a list of everyone who is /LFG with Class and Level, Thats it. It is now up to the player on who they wish to send a /tell to...who they want to interact with, you still need to talk and agree to join the group, nothing is automatic. There are a few things wrong with a /lfg channel....If there are general global chat channels then the LFG channel will be ignored and everyone will just spam general for a group, if there are not general global channels then the LFG would by default become the general chat and would be used by Trolls, Gold sellers, people trying to sell their items...etc etc etc.
Having never played EQ (sadly) that sounds like a great option to finding groups. That wouldn't break immersion at all :D
And I've got to admit I overlooked a global channel like that being filled with trolls and such (though I hope there aren't many drawn to Pantheon, I hate trolls so much lol)
Rachael
EQ had a great LFG system I hope something like that is implemetned /LFG and everything else is on the players to form groups and meet together.
Sevens said:I would rather see a quadinity of Tank, Healer, CC and then Buff / debuff (shammy and bard would be good examples of this from EQ)
So in a 6 man group you have Tank Healer CC Debuff DPS DSP
Hell you could even work in the Debuff as more of a Utility slot...for you Evacer, puller, buffer or such
I'd champion for that, I feel that buffers and buffers don't get enough time in the lime light and often end up being rolled primarily into other classes. I miss the days where we had classes that core focus was on buffing the party, actually offering meaningful buffs or debuffs. And at a party size of six, that leaves room for two "pure" dps still.
I'm really disappointed Bard didn't make it into launch, I don't play Bards myself as I love Cleric Or Paladin types of characters but I love seeing them around and I love what they bring to games. But if they make Shaman a heavy buffer / debuffer, that may end up being an alt, and I very rarely play alts. One of my most enjoyable classes (it's changed a great deal now) was the Captain in lord of the rings online, when the game first launched it was a very buff, debuff and curative heavy class, with a pet so you could buff your pet when solo too. That was the last time in a mmorpg, that came after Everquest where I truly fell in love with a class.
I've always felt 4 was to small, but 8 might be too big. Seems like 5-6 should hit the spot nicely.
I've always felt that when raids get overly big, there's a ton of dead weight that get pulled along with the train. 10-20 seems about right for me there. Big, but structured.
Ive read that this is a game that will be mostly about group content, and I'm glad for that. Some of the best moments I can remember from MMOs came from being in a group: the times when it all looked lost, but all the members pulled out all the class tricks, blew all their cool-downs, and played together as a true team and beat what every last one of us thought was a no-win situation. I live for going in a dungeon just a bit too far, pushing the mana/health bars to the bottom, squeaking through and laughing about it later. I rarely feel that way when raiding in large groups; I like to watch the individual team members shine, not the raid zerg en masse.