Author Topic: Group Size  (Read 6646 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Kronos

  • Newbie
  • Posts: 26
Re: Group Size
« Reply #30 on: February 14, 2014, 01:03:28 PM »
As a player that has been around since the late 90's I feel that I should throw my hat into the ring considering these massive changes coming to Arctic.


1. Who is the MUD pandering too? Hardcore players or players who play a few hours a week? With reducing the group size, you are drastically hurting the hardcore player base. As it exists, the current purpose of a major clan is to create the best 10 man you can if you want to finish end game and be dominant in the PK arena. So, our clan is consistently spreading out the equipment to everyone in the clan and helping each person become a better player to compete in PvE and PvP. Having 10 people in your group allows for leaders to see more of their clan at one time and identify and fix play problems. Having 5 reduces that.

2. I have been in many clans and with many different leaders. Leaders that equip 2-5 members of a clan and leave everyone else with fodder is a poor way of playing this game. It creates dissension, jealousy and does not help anyone progress in game knowledge... and that is exactly what will happen with 5 player groups. Every clan leader will realize that having 5 characters with all their elite eq will drastically increase their chances of winning pk and finishing end game. A 5 man "elite" group would be created in every clan, and ranking/xping/equipping them is all that will be important, leaving all the progressing players and newer players sitting in the cleric guild of every city hoping someone from the elite group has to rent. "I'm next in the group and %1 is after me." Take a number because that is how the top level clans will exist.

3. Typically the top 2-3 leaders in any clan are friends and want to zone together. Those three people are not going to spend the entire wipe separated running three different groups. It won't happen. Even if the mult-group idea worked in clans, imaging having 10 people in a voice chat that were in separate groups. Each group with their own agendas and be prepping for fights. It would be mayhem and eventually you would have 2-3 different voice chats one for each group. That is not how I want to play this game. WE have a lot of fun all being together in one chat, all working together to accomplish one goal.  I can see your logic, trying to give incentive to players to start new groups and learn zones. But as you said, the player base is getting older. (Some of us) have jobs, children, wives or spouses. Having a ten man group allows for someone to log on, join the group for a zone or two and get back to RL without having to scour for a group, shout for a specific needed member or lead when they don't have the time.

The way I see this playing out is you would have a bunch of 5 man groups leveling as fast as possible, running just XP zones...not for rank/gear, just experience. Then when everyone is level 30, come together form a 10 man group and blast through high level zones. Even if you created a MASSIVE negative bonus, we would all still want to zone together....splitting up takes all the fun out of the game.

Honestly, from what I have read I feel like the game is going down a slippery slope. I understand things change and the game needs to evolve but what is causing the need for change? I honestly feel like the code is strong, PvP needs to be tweaked, for sure, but other than that I do not think it's the code that is making the player base shrink. And I do understand that when there are 30 players, this idea is probably a good one...but we start the wipe with 120+....Where do all the players go? They do not leave because of group sizes, that's for sure...its something else entirely.

All of these changes are scary in a game where balance dictates enjoyment. There are just so many moving parts to consider....This seems like this is a pretty massive change, I think its bigger than most of us realize.......can you be sure that your loyal players will be here once the dust settles and the game balances once more....


gulca

  • Zone Leader
  • ***
  • Posts: 308
Re: Group Size
« Reply #31 on: February 14, 2014, 01:26:40 PM »
Another item to note is that while I am seeing folks say people will be excluded, we are actually hoping that is the opposite and that when a 5 man group fills up, a new group would be created.

You are assuming that everyone is a leader and anyone can start a 5 man group when players are around.

That is probably not the case. We have a handful of "leaders" and many tag-alongs. Solo'ers aren't necessary group leaders and even if they are, they probably would not lead a 5-man.

So when you have a 5-man clan/group, chances are the leaders are in that one group (efficient use of limited group space). The tag alongs would probably idle or go solo mode or log-off.

Of course I'm a pessimist, and everyone might just turn up and start zoning 5-man style. 

corey

  • Zoner
  • **
  • Posts: 224
  • Favorite Zone: Brogs
Re: Group Size
« Reply #32 on: February 14, 2014, 03:18:19 PM »
I'm going to go ahead and reply before I read the rest of the comments in this thread so my mind doesn't get warped from them. Keep in mind (looking at you Hoss) my comments are going to be based off any news we've received in the game so far or the current game in its entirety because I'M NOT A MIND READER HOSS OKAY!??

So...

Bob (shaman) and I (paladin) likely had the two most powerful characters this wipe. His gear was 1 away from "the perfect set" and mine was 2 pieces away. We were both rank 27-29 or something.

There wasn't much we couldn't 2man. Name a mob in the game and unless it high-level stunned -every- round (Sleet) or was tuned for the buffest of the buff groups (Cyan, other mobs that some of you might know about), we killed it or at the very least had more than enough capacity to kill it (but not the willingness). Not only did we kill a lot of things that people seem to want the best groups for, but we routinely got through zones a lot quicker than with a full 10man.

I just want to throw in a random comment about my last sentence there...this could possibly have a ripple effect of having the elite of the elite clans cut the slack off the ends and let the newbies fly on their own. This could be good or bad depending how you look at it.

Back on topic - subtracting those few fights from the equation (which would obviously need changes), you could do a straight 5man limit right now and the PvE would be a lot more balanced. PvP, on the other hand, would still need work. I think lower group limits is something that definitely needs to be explored as it might be the only end-all solution to AoE damage. I realise the hp pools will be changed but it's definitely going to have to be looked at closely.

The only other thing that comes to mind right now, and I think it's been mentioned in another thread, is specific spells in the game. Heal has really, REALLY lost its shine these past few wipes. I'm not saying heal is a bad spell or isn't necessary - it's amazing. That being said, lowering the group limit is going to have some kind of effect on its strength again. Right now, heal is either used for bot healing or main tank healing / "oh shit" healing. No other classes have a real "oh shit" button as strong as this. If group sizes go lower, other healers will have to be accounted for in all situations and not just the niches they're put into currently.

This means that every healer is going to have to at least have a little piece of what every other healer has. Clerics need a hot, druids/shaman need a cooldown or super low limit heal-type spell, clerics will need a stoneskinnish/limdam spell, druids need minor mag/gas res, cleric/shaman needs minor elemental resists etc. I could go on but I think you get the picture.

I'm going to post again but I wanted to get what was going through my head down now before I forgot.

Edit* quick after-thought... I know aligns are going to Evil, Neutral, Good and only those three. I'd like to see the align restrictions to gear be removed ENTIRELY from being able to carry them in your inventory. Zap needs to go. Limit the equipment by alignment in the lore saying something like.. "USABLE BY: GOOD, NEUTRAL". With lower man groups, looting gear in PvP is really going to become an issue.

Another quick after-thought...charmies for all healers and their damage output also will need to even out and become more reliable or they're going to start to be excluded. I can tell you from experience I'd take a shaman over anything else every time if the game stayed as it currently is and went to limit5. I'd even take half a shaman.
« Last Edit: February 14, 2014, 03:39:11 PM by corey »

Hoss

  • Elder
  • ****
  • Posts: 648
Re: Group Size
« Reply #33 on: February 14, 2014, 03:48:10 PM »
Quote
I'm not sure how to make it so a shaman/druid can heal without making them way too strong.
Oh, I have ideas, crazy insane and fun ideas.

Quote
Having 10 people in your group allows for leaders to see more of their clan at one time and identify and fix play problems. Having 5 reduces that.
Does it? Wouldn't that be like saying having a huge class size is easier for a teacher, when in fact it is proven that smaller class sizes give the student a much better learning rate?

Quote
Bob (shaman) and I (paladin) likely had the two most powerful characters this wipe.
Cool story bro :) Just kidding I appreciate the feedback

Quote
I don't like the proposed penalty to groups larger than 5 or 6. I think it should just be a hard limit.
I don't like beets

Dyl

  • Zoner
  • **
  • Posts: 143
Re: Group Size
« Reply #34 on: February 14, 2014, 03:52:12 PM »
Not everyone wants to learn.  Some people want to just play with their friends.  Unless we are becoming the montessori school of fast typers that is

corey

  • Zoner
  • **
  • Posts: 224
  • Favorite Zone: Brogs
Re: Group Size
« Reply #35 on: February 14, 2014, 04:02:40 PM »
Quote
Bob (shaman) and I (paladin) likely had the two most powerful characters this wipe.

Cool story bro :) Just kidding I appreciate the feedback

Hey now, not everyone knows who we were and the first response if I hadn't said that would have been "yea, but what gear did you have". At least this sets the stage!

See I just have to put exclamation points and I don't sound like an asshole!

Zozen

  • Immortal
  • Zoner
  • *
  • Posts: 225
Re: Group Size
« Reply #36 on: February 14, 2014, 04:16:46 PM »
Corey: As the strongest Order of the Rose Paladin ever on the mud, I think Paladins are weak.

How does this play into your story?

edit: forgot the !!!!
« Last Edit: February 14, 2014, 04:18:35 PM by Zozen »

corey

  • Zoner
  • **
  • Posts: 224
  • Favorite Zone: Brogs
Re: Group Size
« Reply #37 on: February 14, 2014, 04:23:11 PM »
Corey: As the strongest Order of the Rose Paladin ever on the mud, I think Paladins are weak.

How does this play into your story?

edit: forgot the !!!!

In PvP, they are! But let's stay on topic.

reed23

  • Zone Leader
  • ***
  • Posts: 281
Re: Group Size
« Reply #38 on: February 14, 2014, 04:37:26 PM »
Quote
Having 10 people in your group allows for leaders to see more of their clan at one time and identify and fix play problems. Having 5 reduces that.
Does it? Wouldn't that be like saying having a huge class size is easier for a teacher, when in fact it is proven that smaller class sizes give the student a much better learning rate?

If a teacher had 2 classes of 5 people, and spent 99% with Class 1 and 1% on class 2, class 2 would continue to be retarded.  If teacher spent 100% of the time with 1 class of 10, the retards would get smarter.

I was obviously in class 2 because I can't figure out how to do the quote thing.
« Last Edit: February 14, 2014, 04:40:45 PM by reed23 »

gnua

  • Zone Leader
  • ***
  • Posts: 393
Re: Group Size
« Reply #39 on: February 14, 2014, 07:30:17 PM »
a group of 5 legends can probably do most of the content up, probably including 5 headed dragon. but it might be rough getting healing cloud a and/or holy word on a 5 man so it might be tough to become legendary on a 5man. maybe legendary characters should occupy two group slots.

Hoss

  • Elder
  • ****
  • Posts: 648
Re: Group Size
« Reply #40 on: February 14, 2014, 07:51:54 PM »

snax

  • Guest
Re: Group Size, after 24 hours a second thought.
« Reply #41 on: February 14, 2014, 09:01:56 PM »
I'm at my best one of the "better" zone leaders [of a VERY select few zones], and at my worst well i'm good for a laugh [and make no mistake you WILL DIE, more than an endless hunting, I can kill my groups that i lead daily with an unmatched finesse].   I make no claim to being awesome.  I have a mentality of okay let's find the zone entrance, never memorize the zone, and beat the hell out of it and stumble through keywords every single time for all but like 8-10 zones on game.

So i was thinking, if we did go with a 5 limit man group size, how many people would be jealous of the (insert name here) ilya/tim/wild/cheating imm named xxxx groups and do nothing than bitch about being "stuck in randy's group, spamming the same shit or dying everytime they got to the zone" and I'm still not sold on the smaller group size, but you know what....

if you force it upon the playerbase I might actually learn a few more zones, cause I can fill up the 5 slots pretty easily based on my long-term relationships that haven't gotten sick of my leading.

...just something for you and adam to consider.

Kthxbai.
-randy

Ezio

  • Fodder
  • *
  • Posts: 80
Re: Group Size
« Reply #42 on: February 15, 2014, 05:55:38 AM »
1. If 5 was the norm, 5 would be fine. A day or two of adjustments, finding the best combo, etc. I do no believe it would affect the majority of players as suggested.  I feel like there is a segment of the player base that (generally) prefers to follow for various reasons (insert wife nag), but could lead a group with some 85% efficiency.  I do agree with previous posters that we only see half the puzzle right now, so it is hard to really forecast.

2. If you want a strong group, you need strong characters.  Therefore, I would encourage 5 man groups right up until I was max strength (Legend). If there is no legend (or equivalent), then you don't (mostly) need ranks....at 1x experience doesn't matter either..so yeah stack the groups to max.  At that point, who cares?  Get your clan the strongest max group, in order to pop whatever you need fastest. In either case, I'm looking to get the most out of my time.  What I'm looking to do most times is load spells/gear for myself/friends, learn something, pkill enemies, pkill friends.  If I only have 2 hours to play, I want to do as much of those things as I can, and progress as far as possible. I don't know about the 2 man faster zoning than 10 propaganda, sounds made up.

3. This is where I might be missing something. There is going to be a level of grouping that is best, from the sounds of it.  If you WANT only 5 man groups, it should be coded that way.  If we are talking about increasing lag or saves or skill/dam mods for more people than really what is the point of allowing it? Just scale down the game to 5 man stuff and we can all start up a freshnew game.

Malaki

  • Immortal
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 42
Re: Group Size
« Reply #43 on: February 15, 2014, 08:35:11 AM »
I would work it so there are no group size limits for a zone, they would actually scale based on the number of players in the group and potentially their levels/rank number.

I would also work instances into more of the more popular zones, like the heal quest has.  So more than 1 group can do the same zones, and not have to kill time just waiting for a zone to pop.

The first example that comes to mind is the mechanics from WoW on Instances/Raids.  How the difficulty scales with the number and level of the group members, being able to do the same zones/instances on 1 really beefy character all the way up to 25+ Raid of high end characters.

I think putting any deterrent to how many want to group and play together is a huge negative, even at the current 10 limit, leaving some people out, decreasing the limit even more so.

If your goals is to only have groups of 5, then putting any negative on it above 5 will accomplish that.

Anthony

  • Newbie
  • Posts: 38
Re: Group Size
« Reply #44 on: February 15, 2014, 11:59:00 AM »
Last I heard, the current implementation of the heal quest was not real instancing. It is three different znums with a spec to push a PC into the right starting room based on which znums have people in them. Start going too far down the rabbit hole of instancing, scaling equipment (and zones) dynamically, etc. and it is going to push Arctic even further away from what so many old veterans enjoy and even closer to the MMORPG experience we are dodging in the first place.

The idea that more leaders will emerge is probably sound... but without taking the sort of measures that some clans take by handing out detailed zone walkthroughs, most folks are going to be pretty frustrated having their character advancement gated by the fact that the majority of these new "leaders" can't completely finish the zone/unlock the last vault/open the last mob room/etc. Folks will pretty much follow anyone around when they are leveling but once they get to the point where they need specific spells, equipment, etc. spending hours idling in zones while a new "leader" tries to figure out the kw is anything but fun.

As far as players coming/going, I think as it was said elsewhere in this thread, there are a lot of dynamics at play. I started and abruptly stopped this wipe and last wipe for many of the same reasons. I can level multiple characters to 30 really quickly but the frustration of advancing your character past that point adds up quickly even when you are running around with a competent clan. Spending inordinate amounts of time to load spells, empty zones with no equipment, etc. is all stuff that makes the whole game feel like a waste of time with no advancement aspect. Every RPG-type game deals with this to some degree, there are a number of approaches WoW tries to take to deal with it (like daily quests), separating out character skill/spell acquisition from zoning, etc.