Oxillion said:I just hopped over the FAQ nd did not see anything. Pushing through the forum on GPD now to see if this had a thread.
Good question though.
Ox
There has been threads about it but nothing confirmed. A lot of people seemed to like group sizes of 6-8 though raid size was up int he air anything from 24 man raids (4 groups of 6 my fav) up to 72 man and unlimited no cap
I would really like to see 6 man groups instead of 5 man groups like we saw in the livestream.
6 people groups allows for tank/healer/support, and still having 3 dps. At 5 person groups it feels like you'll have to "sacrifice" a dps spot to fit in a support class. I think support classes are part of what made EQ1 so amazing, and I really want to see them encouraged.
deltaloko said:I would really like to see 6 man groups instead of 5 man groups like we saw in the livestream.
6 people groups allows for tank/healer/support, and still having 3 dps. At 5 person groups it feels like you'll have to "sacrifice" a dps spot to fit in a support class. I think support classes are part of what made EQ1 so amazing, and I really want to see them encouraged.
We ended up with 6 at the end when Dan joined us, we were 1 short the whole time up until then because we were a little over the level of the Orcs and wanted to not steamroll everything :)
seronic said:Hi everyone.
Has it been discussed how large raid groups / party groups will be in the game? I know it's early so maybe it's still not finalized, just was curious about it.
Our FAQ says 6-8 but we will test this during our testing phases and see what is best, I personally like 6 :)
http://www.pantheonmmo.com/game/faqs/#q15
We have not spoken about raid or raid sizes yet as it is a bit too early but we will talk about it later on when we get closer to that stage of development.
Kilsin said:deltaloko said:I would really like to see 6 man groups instead of 5 man groups like we saw in the livestream.
6 people groups allows for tank/healer/support, and still having 3 dps. At 5 person groups it feels like you'll have to "sacrifice" a dps spot to fit in a support class. I think support classes are part of what made EQ1 so amazing, and I really want to see them encouraged.
We ended up with 6 at the end when Dan joined us, we were 1 short the whole time up until then because we were a little over the level of the Orcs and wanted to not steamroll everything :)
Thats great to know! I only was able to catch the first 30-45 minutes of the stream so far, planning on watching the rest on my lunchbreak tomorrow :)
I am actually interested in 8. I guess I am used to the 6 but I would be intrested in the types of combinations I could put together with 8. I think I would prefer no caps on the amount of groups you can link together in a raid (2+ groups) but I imagine from an encounter design perspective this could be chalenging. Either would not make or brake me. I like the idea of larger raids vrs 24 man. I did that in EQ2 for so long I personally have just beat that raid set up to death.
Kilsin said:seronic said:Hi everyone.
Has it been discussed how large raid groups / party groups will be in the game? I know it's early so maybe it's still not finalized, just was curious about it.
Our FAQ says 6-8 but we will test this during our testing phases and see what is best, I personally like 6 :)
http://www.pantheonmmo.com/game/faqs/#q15
We have not spoken about raid or raid sizes yet as it is a bit too early but we will talk about it later on when we get closer to that stage of development.
Thanks everyone for the replies. I personally like 6 also... so let's make it happen! :P
I wonder how difficult it would be to create separate content for larger groups. Perhaps something in between a full blown raid and your typical 6 man group. Maybe have a few a zones in the game that allowed 10 people in one group and the content balanced for around that number.
This could be a good balance between your regular experience groups and the anonymity of larger raids. You would still have regular large raid encounters, and 6 man groups, and expanded groups as to give a sort of "mini-raid" feel without losing the feeling that you are playing an important role.
VG's group size and raid group size were perfect for me, 6 man groups and 4 group raids. I'd either like to see Pantheon stick to this formula. I would be willing to experiment with 8 man groups with r groups raids which would put them at 32. 8 man groups might be fun, definitely would be new and intriguing.
I suppose it entirely depends on the difficulty of the encounters, and how much versatility is needed per each. Will off-tanks be required? Two Healers, or at least one healer and one off-healer? Multiple CC/utility? I'm hoping that's the case as opposed to encounters simply needing MOAR DPS.
That said, it would be great if 8 man groups of varying strategies are required to take down content. Sounds new and exciting. Either way, I'm happy with 6.
For raids, I never did get the opportunity in the old EQ days to be a part of those huge raids. It would be cool to have a chance at that.
Raids should be dynamic. Every encounter can be different. If you take too few people you wipe, if you take too many the raid target summons exponentially more enemies to assist that you can handle. That way the cap can be adjusted per encounter and it's up to players to figure out what the best balance is.
I don't like it when MMO's set 'raid caps' per expansion, which always change based on how server populations are at that time time, ie, 72 man raids when population is high, 24 man raids when it's low towards end of life,etc.
I like the traditional 6 man groups. Anymore and it becomes hard to find enough people to fill the group.
As for raids I like the idea of dynamic raids that change the encounter based on the number of people in the raid. That way it should be impossible to just zerg content. I think that would work for both small guilds and large guilds and let players decide which type of guild they would like to join. Some people prefer smaller guilds where you know everyone really well and others prefer larger guilds where there is more of a dynamic with different sub-groups of players within the larger guild. Having raids that accomodate both styles of guilds can only be a good thing for the future of the game.
I'd like to see content for small groups, large groups, small raids and large raids of various sizes and compositions. Basically stuff I can do with anywhere between 1 and ~75 people. The point being, I don't think everything should be created to require an exact number of players. Obviously, content will be designed for a certain number of people in mind, but it should vary from one place or encounter to the next. I don't think there should be any hardcoded rule that prevents me for taking more or less than that amount.
That was what I liked about EQ. You never knew exactly which classes or how many they designed content for. Some camps could be held down by 3 people, while others needed a full 6. Then there were areas, sometimes right next to spots that demanded less people, that required a couple groups (see fire giants in Sol b, see reets/juggs/mycos in Seb). One raid might require 3 groups (see Sev or other outdoor dragons), while others required 30+. Look at the difference between the King in Kael Drakkel and the Avatar of War.
You just never knew, and that is what I liked about it. None of this super sanitized crap that leaves you feeling like you're just playing a game. I want a world with mystery, unpredictability and less rules dictating how I play.
Based on the "quarternity" idea a max group of 7 or 8 might be possible.
6 is what i am most familair with but I shy away from the mindset that it sometimes generates over "needed classes". Like if you dont have the best slower, a shaman, but have a BST that can slow a little- to some, that would not be good enough and they would rather wait around another hour instead of adventuring.
I have found it is the non-standard groups that you learn to play your class well or is learned, and likewise in the optimum group more challenging encounters can be confidently pursued.
Just as long as there's an actual raid system that lets guild leaders manage groups instead of having to write things down on paper next to your desk (someone has to know what I'm talking about lol), I'm golden. I think there have been some great suggestions as far as raid/group min/max's, just be sure to give us a HUD to control it.
Oh, and I vote 6 for group size. 8 just seems too crowded IMO. Having 2 healers in a group tends to lead to a huge pissing contest and results in overhealing inefficiencies.
~Talv
It would be nice to have an option of 8 people in a group, however I hope its not a requirment for the majority of camps in a zone. Obviously your deeper camp spots will require a full group, but being able to 4-man at the entrance or even partially inside a dungeon would be nice. My brother and I will be trying to set up the ultimate duo, so two man content is acceptable as well!
Just another day waiting for Pantheon Pre-Alpha....first world problems.
So just thinking outside the (sand)box, why is there any group size restriction - other than max size, which I assume would be purely based on technical limitations?
Why can't I have a group of 3, 7, 12, 18, 21, etc.?
It's very sandboxy and dynamic.
Obviously sharing xp between XX party members could get measly, but still, why not just have one set of code for grouping. Any size up to X.
All that would probably be required would be better grouping tools and loot sharing mechanics. Nothing monumental or groundshakingly new.
A group is a group, regardless if its 5 doing a dungeon crawl or 50 raiding on something.
I just had a weird visual of everyone in Lower Guk being in the same group at all their different camps. :)
zewtastic said:So just thinking outside the (sand)box, why is there any group size restriction - other than max size, which I assume would be purely based on technical limitations?
Why can't I have a group of 3, 7, 12, 18, 21, etc.?
It's very sandboxy and dynamic.
Obviously sharing xp between XX party members could get measly, but still, why not just have one set of code for grouping. Any size up to X.
All that would probably be required would be better grouping tools and loot sharing mechanics. Nothing monumental or groundshakingly new.
A group is a group, regardless if its 5 doing a dungeon crawl or 50 raiding on something.
I thought about this, and its very doable. The trick is, when you are doing normal mobs in groups that are too large, it should give little to no exp because it trivializes it. Killing trivial mobs should not be incentivized further (they already drop items) because it eliminates xp content appropriate for others. You would want to seek out mobs that were geared towards small raids to exp in larger hunting parties. I totally think Exp, AAs or item farming should not be something relegated to normal 6-8 man groups only.
Dullahan said:zewtastic said:So just thinking outside the (sand)box, why is there any group size restriction - other than max size, which I assume would be purely based on technical limitations?
Why can't I have a group of 3, 7, 12, 18, 21, etc.?
It's very sandboxy and dynamic.
Obviously sharing xp between XX party members could get measly, but still, why not just have one set of code for grouping. Any size up to X.
All that would probably be required would be better grouping tools and loot sharing mechanics. Nothing monumental or groundshakingly new.
A group is a group, regardless if its 5 doing a dungeon crawl or 50 raiding on something.
I thought about this, and its very doable. The trick is, when you are doing normal mobs in groups that are too large, it should give little to no exp because it trivializes it. Killing trivial mobs should not be incentivized further (they already drop items) because it eliminates xp content appropriate for others. You would want to seek out mobs that were geared towards small raids to exp in larger hunting parties. I totally think Exp, AAs or item farming should not be something relegated to normal 6-8 man groups only.
Well that was partly my point, low xp distributed to many members would naturally motivate players to keep their groups to optimum size as they perecieve it for best xp and survivability. And no one does raids generally for the XP.
I think the decision of group size is best left to players, not hard coded. If players want to have a huge group and get a trickle of xp, that is up to them. Don't handcuff the player.
Enpower your players, set Pantheon free.
zewtastic said:Dullahan said:zewtastic said:...
...
...
I think the decision of group size is best left to players, not hard coded. If players want to have a huge group and get a trickle of xp, that is up to them. Don't handcuff the player.
Enpower your players, set Pantheon free.
I agree with both of your sentiments, allow groups of any size and reward them based on it. Many people may mean an easier time but less reward, and vice versa.
Most people will stick to the standard 6 (if thats the standard they decide) but 4 skilled players may pull it off and should be rewarded for it, or perhaps 9 less skilled or slightly under leveled people can do it but will reap a smaller portion of the spoils. I like when the game doesn't force you into a mold. :)