I have to agree with the previous poster. The limitation for group sizes is in all honesty irrelevant for the game. For example, if you have the option for 8 people, but only want to run tight 4 man groups, then just run your 4 man group. If you have another 4 man group that works well with you guys, then you now have the option to combine your 2 units into one super kick butt group.
In DAOC, we often split our 8 man groups into smaller attack parties when the situation suited it. It honestly allows for more flexibility when you have more room then less. The common example is you and 3 of your buddies are slaying some mobs like its going out of style, then your guildmate "ooberslayingmachine" logs on. With a 4 man group your left with a few options: 1) let oober find another group even though he's your best melee class player. 2) kick one of your guildmates out of your 4 man group for benefit of oober. 3) Have oober solo until one of you 4 logs off so he can join you. To me, and I've been stuck in situations like this, all three options suck. Allowing for larger groups with increased flexibility is essential.
Another situation where this becomes necessary is when healers are involved. Healers tend to be one of the hardest class players to hang onto in guilds. Often you maintain 3-6 players who are healers, but as everyone can attest to, you rarely have a healer on when you need one. You have smaller groups = more rezzing because the healer now has to not only manage his 4 man group, but has to create a large series of macro's and/or become click happy to keep the other smaller group alive. Same goes for 6 man groups as well even though much less.
In the end, IMHO, its much more beneficial to allow for slightly larger groups, 8 or more, then restricting people to smaller more defined manned teams which will alienate classes once the balancing gets sorted out. Inevitably you will eventually end up with one or more specs on different classes that will be considered less effective then other specs etc.
perhaps in a game where there are many distinct classes you might have a point for larger groups but this game has 4 classes per race..
sooo..
in a 6 man group.. who do i take.. i have a tank and a healer.. 4 more dps?
wouldnt the perfect group just be one of each class. Seems like making larger groups really only makes room for more dps type players.
You also mention that healers are the hardest to keep. Did you ever wonder why? Ive played healers in every mmo from eq to daoc ( all three realms) to wow ..
the larger your group is the more time you will spend healing them. The smaller the group size the more you can contribute, and more than that, the more you will have to contribute to the fighting.
if you were a healer, do you want the 6 man group where 100% of your activities is healing people, or would you choose the 4 man group where you spend 60% healing 40% combat because the incoming mob dps is much less in comparison to your abilities available and your tanks overall armor. This matters because in order to keep it challenging the mobs dps must be linked to the expected group size it will face.
the bottom line for me is that mmo's are holding onto the past in this regard. Players want to form groups fast, want limited downtime waiting on people, want a more intimate combat experience where they arent relegated to a specialist role only, but at the same time want enough people where their unique talents can contribute to overall teamwork.
i mean exactly what do you gain from the 5,6,7 or 8th man? You have all the roles covered. Everything else is just over duplication that forces specialization because the duplication is in the dps department.
the size of most fun /most efficient is 4. everything is covered.
think about it this way. you have 7 friends. that makes 1 group of 6 and 1 person left out. That last person forming a group is going to be a pain, if even possible.
same scenario you now have a group of 4 and a group of 3. All you have to do is pick up one more person.
now think about times when not many of your friends are online. You only have 3. Can you still group up and do content based on 4? Yes you can. You dont have to pick up 3 unknowns, but you can pick up 1, if you want to.
i challenge pretty much anyone to actually show how 6 is "better" in any way shape or form. There is very little supporting evidence, and years worth of grouping enigmas that no one seems to be able to solve with even the best LFG game options.
with years and years of grouping as a healer behind me, i am convinced that the 4 number is what players really need to fulfill a grouping experience. Sure you can have more, but overall more is not more fun.
hence the zillion soloers in todays mmos where you have to force grouping down their throats. Its not hard to figure out why players dont naturally want to group when they can avoid it.
Trust me you WANT larger groups. Dont think of it as
"omg larger groups are harder to make"
think about it like in terms of how many HEALERS are around. 90% of the population plays non healer classes so expanding the number of people in a group is easier to make a group ... not harder. For every "group" in every RPG since creation you only NEED 2 classes, 1 to get hit and the other to tank with the rest being filler. DAoC you had your CLeric/druid to buff and heal and then you had your Armsman/Hero to get hit and the other 6 classes could be almost anything.
I have played a healer in every game since Neverwinter nights. (plays trump card to above poster) You pretty much heal the person who is taking damage and below 75% life, which 9 times out of 10 is the tank in pvp and its YOU or the other Healer in RvR Group heals, group buffs and group insta heals are the reason why its more effective to group as a healer in large groups.
6 is the number W.A.R is currently at, I myself hope for 7
your logic is self defeating simply because there would be more healers if the role of healing wasnt so demanding.
healing demand rises with group size.
not only would there be more healers for the smaller groups, but also healers wont be as necessary because the content is tuned for 4 and not 8. Your tanks armor wont change, but the dps hes sujected to will.
thus a class who is a healer for this content will be more fun because they actually have to spend less time looking after people and more time getting in the thick of it.
there is no way you can say that looking after 3 people is more demanding of a healer than looking after 6.
This is exactly why players wont play healers in the first place. They have said they are trying to change this, but fixing symptoms wont cure the problem.
the problem is that group sizes are too big for 1 person to be able to commit to a healing role and still contribute in other ways, since those other ways will always be seen as a waste of healing resources.
cure the problem, not the symptoms. People will play healers if it is inherently fun.
Trust me you WANT larger groups. Dont think of it as "omg larger groups are harder to make" think about it like in terms of how many HEALERS are around. 90% of the population plays non healer classes so expanding the number of people in a group is easier to make a group ... not harder. For every "group" in every RPG since creation you only NEED 2 classes, 1 to get hit and the other to tank with the rest being filler. DAoC you had your CLeric/druid to buff and heal and then you had your Armsman/Hero to get hit and the other 6 classes could be almost anything.
I have played a healer in every game since Neverwinter nights. (plays trump card to above poster) You pretty much heal the person who is taking damage and below 75% life, which 9 times out of 10 is the tank in pvp and its YOU or the other Healer in RvR Group heals, group buffs and group insta heals are the reason why its more effective to group as a healer in large groups.
6 is the number W.A.R is currently at, I myself hope for 7
Exactly, i love playing the healer in PvE and most of all in RvR... and 8-10 group are the most fun to run with. As a bard in DAOC it was so much fun keepin my group up... i didnt mind not getting to dealing dmg and therefore not getting the glory for the kills, because in the end my group recognized that reason for their glory was all do to me keeping there ass alive.
Alot of people don't recognize this fact, that and good healers really arnt all that common. People want to play the Hero, not the guy beside the hero that allows him/her to do what Heros do. I understand that, i just dont care about mass recognition. Just recognition from my peeps.
7-8 are good numbers, anything less is just brings to ming PvE combat groupage, which is ok some times, but this is a RvR game. Let the group number justify WAR size combat.
so what hapens when they change how healers work so that they have to do combat activities to do healing? This is the developers goal to avoid healbots, and to make sure that players healing is very combat related and very not "stand back and heal" related.
if group size is 8, are they going to give healers combat abilities that allow them to keep 8 people up at the same time?
i just dont see how it will work with so many people.
its like a paradox. They want combat healers, but also want dedicated healers..
they cant have both with large numbers of people to heal, unless they can do both activities at the same time. Even then, how much healing will they have to give to healing classes to make that model viable?
i applaud the goal to make healers more combat oriented to make them more popular, but there will surely be a cost to this, an i think the main cost is smaller groups.. so there less to heal...
so what hapens when they change how healers work so that they have to do combat activities to do healing? This is the developers goal to avoid healbots, and to make sure that players healing is very combat related and very not "stand back and heal" related. if group size is 8, are they going to give healers combat abilities that allow them to keep 8 people up at the same time? i just dont see how it will work with so many people. its like a paradox. They want combat healers, but also want dedicated healers.. they cant have both with large numbers of people to heal, unless they can do both activities at the same time. Even then, how much healing will they have to give to healing classes to make that model viable? i applaud the goal to make healers more combat oriented to make them more popular, but there will surely be a cost to this, an i think the main cost is smaller groups.. so there less to heal...
A heal bot in RvR = a dead group. I’m not really thinking in concepts of PvE because quite frankly in PvE I think every class is rather static.
I’ve always had the view that healers were like reverse mages, rather then nuking for damage they nuke for reverse damage, so I guess I don’t get the argument of this healer stigma. Couldn’t the same be applied to other caster classes?
As far as the combat being incorporated into a healer class, in essence bringing healers into the fight, I’m all for that. But that is going to be tricky for “melee” healers. Seams kind of adverse for the welfare of the team to have your support figures in the line of fire, but if they can make it work then great!
In regards to group size, it wasn’t ever that big of an issue for me the more the merrier, in fact the more people in the group the more fun I had because, I had to work. Also In large groups you will more often find multiple healers. But what I’m trying to stress more is that I, as the player, would like more freedom to decide the size of my group. I like more options, freedoms (if you will) to fit my prefered play style rather them one standard generic. With a group cap of 8, someone who wants a group of 4 can still go with 4, people who like groups of 6 can still do 6. Seeing that the game is based around RvR I just don’t see why limiting group size would be so important.
personally i think daoc crippled itself going for a group size of 8. I liked the game and played a long time ( till they crippled themselves again with PVE raids).
the max group size sets the pace of the game and its content. If group size is 4, youll be seeing squads of 4 players going up against eachother in awesome battles that last longer than 3 seconds for squishy classes.
youll be seeing healing classes that are also on the frontlines duking it out.
if you go with 6-8 youll be seeing daoc all over again.
not saying i didnt enjoy the game, but times have really changed in the mmo world and players are not content with zerg bands slaughtering everything in their wake at mach 7.
it will be a mistake to not embrace the current trend in mmo's, which is toward smaller sizes and more player interaction.
personally i think daoc crippled itself going for a group size of 8. I liked the game and played a long time ( till they crippled themselves again with PVE raids). the max group size sets the pace of the game and its content. If group size is 4, youll be seeing squads of 4 players going up against eachother in awesome battles that last longer than 3 seconds for squishy classes. Why is this not the case with 6 players? You do not prove a point, you just state something that could be said with any numbers inserted as appropriate. Also, you are not taking into consideration multiple groups working in concert. Why bring 1 group of 4 when you could bring 5 groups of 4? Then there are 20 people.
youll be seeing healing classes that are also on the frontlines duking it out. Uh, we will be seeing that anyway. That is in the game design. This statement is meaningless with respect to 4-man groups.
if you go with 6-8 youll be seeing daoc all over again. Broad, irrelevant statement with no proof. Since there are Elves in WAR, will we see EverQuest or WoW or any multiple of other MMORPGs again? No. One similarity does not amount to sameness.
not saying i didnt enjoy the game, but times have really changed in the mmo world and players are not content with zerg bands slaughtering everything in their wake at mach 7. That is why a fair chunk of RvR will be instanced, so one is guaranteed to have a battle of X vs. X number of players. As for non-instanced combat, zerging will happen regardless of group size. You seem to not grasp the concept of multiple groups working in concert. Hopefully, though, with multiple fronts, people will need to use strategy to determine where to put the manpower.
it will be a mistake to not embrace the current trend in mmo's, which is toward smaller sizes and more player interaction. 6-man groups are smaller than many past MMORPGs. They are obeying the 'trend', just not to the extent you like. As for 'more player interaction', this is just a buzzphrase that has little bearing on the discussion. What do you mean by it? In a sense, it is counterintuitive to say smaller groups will lead to more player interaction, since there are fewer players in your group to interact with.
Anyway, I do not think you are supporting the benefits of a 4-man group in a manner that speaks to logic and reason. All of the points are either misinformed, irrelevant, or illogical.
i am a warrior priest, the only healer in my group.
im currently smashing you in the face with my hammer.
how am i going to heal 5-7 other people while doing this?
Remember that the other team will have 5-7 players worth of dps to throw at my weakest armored teammate.
I know that if the 4 model is used, the healing demand will be alot lower because my weakest players armor has not changed, but the dps that person is subjected to has been reduced considerably.
therefore its more viable to be a combat healer in a small group where armor counts for more, than in a large group where the dps is far too much for any single player to withstand for more than 3 seconds.
large groups eliminate armor advantages, and thus more healing is required, which makes doing nothing but healing more required which makes players feel like healbots which makes players roll dps classes.
thats all thats to it. Show me where this isnt true?
its actually quite simple. answer this. i am a warrior priest, the only healer in my group. im currently smashing you in the face with my hammer. how am i going to heal 5-7 other people while doing this? Remember that the other team will have 5-7 players worth of dps to throw at my weakest armored teammate. I know that if the 4 model is used, the healing demand will be alot lower because my weakest players armor has not changed, but the dps that person is subjected to has been reduced considerably. therefore its more viable to be a combat healer in a small group where armor counts for more, than in a large group where the dps is far too much for any single player to withstand for more than 3 seconds. its quite logical incoming dps< healing capability+single players armor=survival large groups eliminate armor advantages, and thus more healing is required, which makes doing nothing but healing more required which makes players feel like healbots which makes players roll dps classes. thats all thats to it. Show me where this isnt true?
The issue you are describing, about healing your team mates... is not dependent on your group size... it is dependent on the size of the other force you are fighting.
Based on the information we have right now regarding the instanced RvR, the current players in a single instance is 36. That means it will be a multiple of 2. That means 9 groups of 4, 6 groups of 6 or 4 groups of 8. If I had to guess, I'd say groups will have 6 people in it. However...none of this conjecture has any meaning whatsoever, because I highly doubt Mythic has decided on final group sizes at this point. The 36 player teams in instanced combat isn't set in stone either.
Until Mythic says how large or small groups will be, it's a pretty fruitless argument.
its actually quite simple. answer this. i am a warrior priest, the only healer in my group. im currently smashing you in the face with my hammer. how am i going to heal 5-7 other people while doing this? Well, first of all, Warrior Priests will have some sort of aura of healing, based on interviews. Secondly, you assume there will only be one healer. That is a choice the group makes, and it can be a poor one. Perhaps the group should have two?
Remember that the other team will have 5-7 players worth of dps to throw at my weakest armored teammate. Yes, they will. This is why you should have your tanks protect him (collision), which already could potentially block a lot of melee DPS. Also, keep in mind that Mythic has stated damage will be low relative to health totals, because they want long battles. I do not think we will see any class killed in seconds. Finally, bear in mind that for every tactic your enemy uses, there is one you can counter with. Unloading all their damage on one guy? That can make it easier to heal, as you only need to then focus on one target, and there may even be neat things like invulnerability shields and other things that make focusing on one guy silly. Also, while they are all focused on your one guy, they leave your other members alone to wreak havoc. I do not see a gross imbalance here.
I know that if the 4 model is used, the healing demand will be alot lower because my weakest players armor has not changed, but the dps that person is subjected to has been reduced considerably. Why, why, why?! I will say it again: Just because the group sizes are X, does not mean you will fight X players! You might fight 5 groups of X, or 5X players. The odds can always be good or bad in non-instanced areas, and even within instances, if they are large enough, you will sometimes encounter bad odds based on tactical positioning. In PvE, they will balance healing strength for group sizes of whatever number they choose.
therefore its more viable to be a combat healer in a small group where armor counts for more, than in a large group where the dps is far too much for any single player to withstand for more than 3 seconds. Large groups require more skill and coordination to pull off well, yes. However, the rewards are great for doing so. I do not see the purpose of dumbing things down to 4 players, especially since you continuously assume the game will break down neatly into one group versus one group. This is in no way true, and would be a stupid way to play.
its quite logical incoming dps< healing capability+single players armor=survival In a basic sense, I suppose that 'formula' is somewhat true.However, you discount a lot of variables (other spells that mitigate damage that are not healing, positioning, etc.). You assume your group will be too unorganized to protect the weak, and that the other group will be so organized as to solely attack the weak. You are assuming the worst-case scenario and arguing from that. A bad group is a bad group is a bad group, and no group size will fix that.
large groups eliminate armor advantages, and thus more healing is required, which makes doing nothing but healing more required which makes players feel like healbots which makes players roll dps classes. They do not eliminate armor advantages - it still is in proportion. It is just that armor does not scale with damage, nor should it. Yes, a guy who would die to one attacker in 60 seconds will probably die to 5 in about 12 seconds, but that is not an elimination, and it makes sense. Like I said earlier, attacking one person is a tactic the enemy may employ, but there are measures against it.
thats all thats to it. Show me where this isnt true?
I still do not see why WAR should have these woefully small group sizes.
When you are calculating how many people are beating up on one player, you need to remember that there is collision detection. Playing WoW or EQ, it's easy for 6 guys to gamg up and pound a single target into the groud. But in WAR, most classes are melee oriented. Granted, the Ranged DPSers will be able to hit anyone. But it's not going to be easy for 5-7 guys to be all hacking at the same target, unless that target happens to be alone.
If the target is in a group, only 1-3 melee characters might be able to reach them. Tanks and melee DPSers will take to the forefront, forming a kind of Shield Wall. Standing close together so that enemies cannot slip through the cracks and get behind them. So then a War Priest could slide in between two of the frontrunners and get some whacks in, only exposing themselves to a couple of the enemies.
Combat will be fast, and melee classes will have to learn to position and re-position themsleves in the battlefield in such a way as to block the enemy from attacking the squishies.
Seriously. It's Are'el. This forum doesn't allow apostrophes in usernames.
We have NO IDEA WHAT SO EVER ABOUT HOW HEALING WILL WORK!!
Let me say it again, just to be clear, we have no idea how healing will work for each class. All we know so far is that the Rune priest will put on runes to heal other players (and these are might be Heal over times, or damage percentage based heals. We just are not sure yet).
Trying to calculate how heals will work on a large or small group is kind of preposterous, until we know how healing works.
We are all assuming direct heals. We have no idea. For all we know, we could get healed every time a War Priest does damage, or every time a Zealot cast a offensive spell....
So lets not make suppositions about party size based on healing, when we know nothing about it.
There are several reasons to have a 5-6 man group as optimal for PVE.
There are several reasons to discuss why 4 or 8 man groups are optimal.
I personally think 4 is too small. Players get stuck in a "This class has to be in the group" mentality, even when its not true of the game system.
8 men parties tend to be harder to get together, and coordinate. As we have seen time and time again in older games.
Well, first of all, Warrior Priests will have some sort of aura of healing, based on interviews. Secondly, you assume there will only be one healer. That is a choice the group makes, and it can be a poor one. Perhaps the group should have two?
I am assuming only one healer because healers are traditionally the least played class. What your assumption for two? Certainly not history. Yes, they will. This is why you should have your tanks protect him (collision), which already could potentially block a lot of melee DPS. Also, keep in mind that Mythic has stated damage will be low relative to health totals, because they want long battles. I do not think we will see any class killed in seconds. Finally, bear in mind that for every tactic your enemy uses, there is one you can counter with. Unloading all their damage on one guy? That can make it easier to heal, as you only need to then focus on one target, and there may even be neat things like invulnerability shields and other things that make focusing on one guy silly. Also, while they are all focused on your one guy, they leave your other members alone to wreak havoc. I do not see a gross imbalance here.
I i have a healing aura like you say, and im not casting heal spells on 1 guy nonstop, then i would assume that focusing damage on 1 person would be the easiest way to reduce the other group. Cant have it both ways. Why, why, why?! I will say it again: Just because the group sizes are X, does not mean you will fight X players! You might fight 5 groups of X, or 5X players. The odds can always be good or bad in non-instanced areas, and even within instances, if they are large enough, you will sometimes encounter bad odds based on tactical positioning. In PvE, they will balance healing strength for group sizes of whatever number they choose.
Players fight in crews. If you make the group size 4, youll see mostly 4's. Large groups require more skill and coordination to pull off well, yes. However, the rewards are great for doing so. I do not see the purpose of dumbing things down to 4 players, especially since you continuously assume the game will break down neatly into one group versus one group. This is in no way true, and would be a stupid way to play.
Care to tell me the rewards besides requiring more time to assemble, and being killed much faster. 4 doesnt eliminate any rolls, just extra dps. In a basic sense, I suppose that 'formula' is somewhat true.However, you discount a lot of variables (other spells that mitigate damage that are not healing, positioning, etc.). You assume your group will be too unorganized to protect the weak, and that the other group will be so organized as to solely attack the weak. You are assuming the worst-case scenario and arguing from that. A bad group is a bad group is a bad group, and no group size will fix that.
when the game goes live, perhaps you will choose the easiest to kill class to show how much fun it is to die first in every encounter after about 3-4 seconds. They do not eliminate armor advantages - it still is in proportion. It is just that armor does not scale with damage, nor should it. Yes, a guy who would die to one attacker in 60 seconds will probably die to 5 in about 12 seconds, but that is not an elimination, and it makes sense. Like I said earlier, attacking one person is a tactic the enemy may employ, but there are measures against it.
The fact that armor doesnt scale in the face of massive dps means that it is largely irrelevent. Of course armor is totally irrelevent to magic usually ( except daoc bolts)
I still do not see why WAR should have these woefully small group sizes.Ive tried 6 and 8 in many mmorpgs. Have you tried combat with 4 vs 4? Far more epic battles.
And WAR is far from your standard MMO. Until you know how the mechanics of the game work, you have no idea what would be the best group size, only conjecture as to what you think is best based on other MMOs you've played that don't function like this one does.
Until you know how healing works, there really is no point in saying what is the best group size. It differs from game to game. It's all in how the game was designed to function. We don't know enough about how WAR will function, so 4 man groups may be good, may not be good. Mythic may decide to go with 8 man teams again. It's all in how they choose to balance everything in relation to groups.
And WAR is far from your standard MMO. Until you know how the mechanics of the game work, you have no idea what would be the best group size, only conjecture as to what you think is best based on other MMOs you've played that don't function like this one does.
Until you know how healing works, there really is no point in saying what is the best group size. It differs from game to game. It's all in how the game was designed to function. We don't know enough about how WAR will function, so 4 man groups may be good, may not be good. Mythic may decide to go with 8 man teams again. It's all in how they choose to balance everything in relation to groups.
I think I said this already
And Adythiel is right, we don't know how things will work so making statements about what will work and what won't is counterproductive. Now saying what you would like and why you would like it, thats a whole new ball game.
Since every class is supposed to be able to stand on its own two feet (or tentacles ), ideally the "perfect combination" wouldn't be one of each class in a team, but could vary a lot depending on the situation. A 'core' team is always good, but if the game's design ideas come through then it should be almost as good as, if not as good as, a team composed of characters not exactly 'core' (like, a team of 4 Chaos chosen (Tanks) would have a pretty good chance against a 4-man team of Tank, Healer, Mage, and Melee, to put an extreme example). If they can work that out, then we could expect a pretty good team size of 8 or something similar, which still is, IMO, a better option than smaller teams.
And WAR is far from your standard MMO. Until you know how the mechanics of the game work, you have no idea what would be the best group size, only conjecture as to what you think is best based on other MMOs you've played that don't function like this one does.
Until you know how healing works, there really is no point in saying what is the best group size. It differs from game to game. It's all in how the game was designed to function. We don't know enough about how WAR will function, so 4 man groups may be good, may not be good. Mythic may decide to go with 8 man teams again. It's all in how they choose to balance everything in relation to groups.
I think I said this already
And Adythiel is right, we don't know how things will work so making statements about what will work and what won't is counterproductive. Now saying what you would like and why you would like it, thats a whole new ball game. I saw that after I posted, but your post wasn't there when I hit reply. It's been a busy morning for me so I think it took me like 20 minutes to post that.
i think they should have two settings, in order to get your quests done 5m or if your in there getting gear and whatnot then 6 or possibly seven, the difficulty will be the same just the extra peeps will help make it go by faster.
i think they should have two settings, in order to get your quests done 5m or if your in there getting gear and whatnot then 6 or possibly seven, the difficulty will be the same just the extra peeps will help make it go by faster.
since i know that will never happen i vote 6
You'd like for people who are just farming loot to have an easier approach? That makes no sense...
Seriously. It's Are'el. This forum doesn't allow apostrophes in usernames.
I think it will be either 4 (to balance things out 1 of each class) but that could become pretty repetitive, 6 on the other hand would give us the oportunity to play around with classes and how to fill in each role. I hope it is actualy 6
"It's no good coming to our game if you are trying to grow weed, It's no good coming to our game if you want to make pants. It's only worth coming to our game if you want to burn things to the ground." -Paul Barnett, WAR is coming
I talked to one of the game designers and he told me that the group sizes were still being decided on, but most likely 6 or like daoc 8 so I would say most likely one of those two will be picked
i think 4 should be the number of players u would need for most quests. but i would like to c the maxnumber to be 5 or 6 cos u never know whos comming online =P
Comments
I have to agree with the previous poster. The limitation for group sizes is in all honesty irrelevant for the game. For example, if you have the option for 8 people, but only want to run tight 4 man groups, then just run your 4 man group. If you have another 4 man group that works well with you guys, then you now have the option to combine your 2 units into one super kick butt group.
In DAOC, we often split our 8 man groups into smaller attack parties when the situation suited it. It honestly allows for more flexibility when you have more room then less. The common example is you and 3 of your buddies are slaying some mobs like its going out of style, then your guildmate "ooberslayingmachine" logs on. With a 4 man group your left with a few options: 1) let oober find another group even though he's your best melee class player. 2) kick one of your guildmates out of your 4 man group for benefit of oober. 3) Have oober solo until one of you 4 logs off so he can join you. To me, and I've been stuck in situations like this, all three options suck. Allowing for larger groups with increased flexibility is essential.
Another situation where this becomes necessary is when healers are involved. Healers tend to be one of the hardest class players to hang onto in guilds. Often you maintain 3-6 players who are healers, but as everyone can attest to, you rarely have a healer on when you need one. You have smaller groups = more rezzing because the healer now has to not only manage his 4 man group, but has to create a large series of macro's and/or become click happy to keep the other smaller group alive. Same goes for 6 man groups as well even though much less.
In the end, IMHO, its much more beneficial to allow for slightly larger groups, 8 or more, then restricting people to smaller more defined manned teams which will alienate classes once the balancing gets sorted out. Inevitably you will eventually end up with one or more specs on different classes that will be considered less effective then other specs etc.
2 cents.
_____________________________
http://mmofriendslist.com
100% free
perhaps in a game where there are many distinct classes you might have a point for larger groups but this game has 4 classes per race..
sooo..
in a 6 man group.. who do i take.. i have a tank and a healer.. 4 more dps?
wouldnt the perfect group just be one of each class. Seems like making larger groups really only makes room for more dps type players.
You also mention that healers are the hardest to keep. Did you ever wonder why? Ive played healers in every mmo from eq to daoc ( all three realms) to wow ..
the larger your group is the more time you will spend healing them. The smaller the group size the more you can contribute, and more than that, the more you will have to contribute to the fighting.
if you were a healer, do you want the 6 man group where 100% of your activities is healing people, or would you choose the 4 man group where you spend 60% healing 40% combat because the incoming mob dps is much less in comparison to your abilities available and your tanks overall armor. This matters because in order to keep it challenging the mobs dps must be linked to the expected group size it will face.
the bottom line for me is that mmo's are holding onto the past in this regard. Players want to form groups fast, want limited downtime waiting on people, want a more intimate combat experience where they arent relegated to a specialist role only, but at the same time want enough people where their unique talents can contribute to overall teamwork.
i mean exactly what do you gain from the 5,6,7 or 8th man? You have all the roles covered. Everything else is just over duplication that forces specialization because the duplication is in the dps department.
the size of most fun /most efficient is 4. everything is covered.
think about it this way. you have 7 friends. that makes 1 group of 6 and 1 person left out. That last person forming a group is going to be a pain, if even possible.
same scenario you now have a group of 4 and a group of 3. All you have to do is pick up one more person.
now think about times when not many of your friends are online. You only have 3. Can you still group up and do content based on 4? Yes you can. You dont have to pick up 3 unknowns, but you can pick up 1, if you want to.
i challenge pretty much anyone to actually show how 6 is "better" in any way shape or form. There is very little supporting evidence, and years worth of grouping enigmas that no one seems to be able to solve with even the best LFG game options.
with years and years of grouping as a healer behind me, i am convinced that the 4 number is what players really need to fulfill a grouping experience. Sure you can have more, but overall more is not more fun.
hence the zillion soloers in todays mmos where you have to force grouping down their throats. Its not hard to figure out why players dont naturally want to group when they can avoid it.
Trust me you WANT larger groups. Dont think of it as
"omg larger groups are harder to make"
think about it like in terms of how many HEALERS are around. 90% of the population plays non healer classes so expanding the number of people in a group is easier to make a group ... not harder. For every "group" in every RPG since creation you only NEED 2 classes, 1 to get hit and the other to tank with the rest being filler. DAoC you had your CLeric/druid to buff and heal and then you had your Armsman/Hero to get hit and the other 6 classes could be almost anything.
Group heals, group buffs and group insta heals are the reason why its more effective to group as a healer in large groups.
I have played a healer in every game since Neverwinter nights. (plays trump card to above poster) You pretty much heal the person who is taking damage and below 75% life, which 9 times out of 10 is the tank in pvp and its YOU or the other Healer in RvR
6 is the number W.A.R is currently at, I myself hope for 7
your logic is self defeating simply because there would be more healers if the role of healing wasnt so demanding.
healing demand rises with group size.
not only would there be more healers for the smaller groups, but also healers wont be as necessary because the content is tuned for 4 and not 8. Your tanks armor wont change, but the dps hes sujected to will.
thus a class who is a healer for this content will be more fun because they actually have to spend less time looking after people and more time getting in the thick of it.
there is no way you can say that looking after 3 people is more demanding of a healer than looking after 6.
This is exactly why players wont play healers in the first place. They have said they are trying to change this, but fixing symptoms wont cure the problem.
the problem is that group sizes are too big for 1 person to be able to commit to a healing role and still contribute in other ways, since those other ways will always be seen as a waste of healing resources.
cure the problem, not the symptoms. People will play healers if it is inherently fun.
Exactly, i love playing the healer in PvE and most of all in RvR... and 8-10 group are the most fun to run with. As a bard in DAOC it was so much fun keepin my group up... i didnt mind not getting to dealing dmg and therefore not getting the glory for the kills, because in the end my group recognized that reason for their glory was all do to me keeping there ass alive.
Alot of people don't recognize this fact, that and good healers really arnt all that common. People want to play the Hero, not the guy beside the hero that allows him/her to do what Heros do. I understand that, i just dont care about mass recognition. Just recognition from my peeps
.
7-8 are good numbers, anything less is just brings to ming PvE combat groupage, which is ok some times, but this is a RvR game. Let the group number justify WAR size combat.
so what hapens when they change how healers work so that they have to do combat activities to do healing? This is the developers goal to avoid healbots, and to make sure that players healing is very combat related and very not "stand back and heal" related.
if group size is 8, are they going to give healers combat abilities that allow them to keep 8 people up at the same time?
i just dont see how it will work with so many people.
its like a paradox. They want combat healers, but also want dedicated healers..
they cant have both with large numbers of people to heal, unless they can do both activities at the same time. Even then, how much healing will they have to give to healing classes to make that model viable?
i applaud the goal to make healers more combat oriented to make them more popular, but there will surely be a cost to this, an i think the main cost is smaller groups.. so there less to heal...
A heal bot in RvR = a dead group. I’m not really thinking in concepts of PvE because quite frankly in PvE I think every class is rather static.
I’ve always had the view that healers were like reverse mages, rather then nuking for damage they nuke for reverse damage, so I guess I don’t get the argument of this healer stigma. Couldn’t the same be applied to other caster classes?
As far as the combat being incorporated into a healer class, in essence bringing healers into the fight, I’m all for that. But that is going to be tricky for “melee” healers. Seams kind of adverse for the welfare of the team to have your support figures in the line of fire, but if they can make it work then great!
In regards to group size, it wasn’t ever that big of an issue for me the more the merrier, in fact the more people in the group the more fun I had because, I had to work. Also In large groups you will more often find multiple healers. But what I’m trying to stress more is that I, as the player, would like more freedom to decide the size of my group. I like more options, freedoms (if you will) to fit my prefered play style rather them one standard generic. With a group cap of 8, someone who wants a group of 4 can still go with 4, people who like groups of 6 can still do 6. Seeing that the game is based around RvR I just don’t see why limiting group size would be so important.
personally i think daoc crippled itself going for a group size of 8. I liked the game and played a long time ( till they crippled themselves again with PVE raids).
the max group size sets the pace of the game and its content. If group size is 4, youll be seeing squads of 4 players going up against eachother in awesome battles that last longer than 3 seconds for squishy classes.
youll be seeing healing classes that are also on the frontlines duking it out.
if you go with 6-8 youll be seeing daoc all over again.
not saying i didnt enjoy the game, but times have really changed in the mmo world and players are not content with zerg bands slaughtering everything in their wake at mach 7.
it will be a mistake to not embrace the current trend in mmo's, which is toward smaller sizes and more player interaction.
its actually quite simple. answer this.
i am a warrior priest, the only healer in my group.
im currently smashing you in the face with my hammer.
how am i going to heal 5-7 other people while doing this?
Remember that the other team will have 5-7 players worth of dps to throw at my weakest armored teammate.
I know that if the 4 model is used, the healing demand will be alot lower because my weakest players armor has not changed, but the dps that person is subjected to has been reduced considerably.
therefore its more viable to be a combat healer in a small group where armor counts for more, than in a large group where the dps is far too much for any single player to withstand for more than 3 seconds.
its quite logical
incoming dps< healing capability+single players armor=survival
large groups eliminate armor advantages, and thus more healing is required, which makes doing nothing but healing more required which makes players feel like healbots which makes players roll dps classes.
thats all thats to it. Show me where this isnt true?
The issue you are describing, about healing your team mates... is not dependent on your group size... it is dependent on the size of the other force you are fighting.
Until Mythic says how large or small groups will be, it's a pretty fruitless argument.
When you are calculating how many people are beating up on one player, you need to remember that there is collision detection. Playing WoW or EQ, it's easy for 6 guys to gamg up and pound a single target into the groud. But in WAR, most classes are melee oriented. Granted, the Ranged DPSers will be able to hit anyone. But it's not going to be easy for 5-7 guys to be all hacking at the same target, unless that target happens to be alone.
If the target is in a group, only 1-3 melee characters might be able to reach them. Tanks and melee DPSers will take to the forefront, forming a kind of Shield Wall. Standing close together so that enemies cannot slip through the cracks and get behind them. So then a War Priest could slide in between two of the frontrunners and get some whacks in, only exposing themselves to a couple of the enemies.
Combat will be fast, and melee classes will have to learn to position and re-position themsleves in the battlefield in such a way as to block the enemy from attacking the squishies.
Seriously.
It's Are'el. This forum doesn't allow apostrophes in usernames.
Let me say it again, just to be clear, we have no idea how healing will work for each class. All we know so far is that the Rune priest will put on runes to heal other players (and these are might be Heal over times, or damage percentage based heals. We just are not sure yet).
Trying to calculate how heals will work on a large or small group is kind of preposterous, until we know how healing works.
We are all assuming direct heals. We have no idea. For all we know, we could get healed every time a War Priest does damage, or every time a Zealot cast a offensive spell....
So lets not make suppositions about party size based on healing, when we know nothing about it.
There are several reasons to have a 5-6 man group as optimal for PVE.
There are several reasons to discuss why 4 or 8 man groups are optimal.
I personally think 4 is too small. Players get stuck in a "This class has to be in the group" mentality, even when its not true of the game system.
8 men parties tend to be harder to get together, and coordinate. As we have seen time and time again in older games.
The current standard is 5-6 men for a reason.
/rant off
Until you know how healing works, there really is no point in saying what is the best group size. It differs from game to game. It's all in how the game was designed to function. We don't know enough about how WAR will function, so 4 man groups may be good, may not be good. Mythic may decide to go with 8 man teams again. It's all in how they choose to balance everything in relation to groups.
And Adythiel is right, we don't know how things will work so making statements about what will work and what won't is counterproductive. Now saying what you would like and why you would like it, thats a whole new ball game.
And Adythiel is right, we don't know how things will work so making statements about what will work and what won't is counterproductive. Now saying what you would like and why you would like it, thats a whole new ball game. I saw that after I posted, but your post wasn't there when I hit reply. It's been a busy morning for me so I think it took me like 20 minutes to post that.
since i know that will never happen i vote 6
Seriously.
It's Are'el. This forum doesn't allow apostrophes in usernames.
I think it will be either 4 (to balance things out 1 of each class) but that could become pretty repetitive, 6 on the other hand would give us the oportunity to play around with classes and how to fill in each role. I hope it is actualy 6
"It's no good coming to our game if you are trying to grow weed, It's no good coming to our game if you want to make pants. It's only worth coming to our game if you want to burn things to the ground."
-Paul Barnett, WAR is coming
E^