games should NOT limit the ammount of players you want to bring to a raid, but with that said games should have a diverse group of raids to choose from, wich should be designed for certain ammout of raiders, some for ~20, some for ~50, and some for 100+ or even more,,,
diversity and no restrictions, thats how i like it
[edit] P.S.
and pls let it NOT be instanced, and while we're at it, no rezzing possible, you're dead you're out
Games previously played: AO, AoC, Aion, AoW, Eve, SWTor, WaR, STO, TSW, DCUO, FE, BP, ProjectEntropia, FootballSuperstars!
Depends entirely on game mechanics and party dynamics.
Same as asking "How many players should be in a sports team?" -It depends on the sport.
Choose the raid size for your game first and then design around it.
The question here is implied but obvious to most - what is the ideal size for a raid based on the usual issues - at what level of participation do you get a raids challenges and 'feeling' balanced ideally against the increasing logistical demands of geting large groups together, running dkp tables etc. etc.
I voted 16 for the sweet spot in this case.
Of course - far better is a scaling system - either in predefined and instance entrance choosable groups - 12, 16, 20 or more finely scaling such as GW2... but with raid-style difficulty, not res-zerg mechanics like openworld GW2 bosses...
About 100-150 per side and it has to be for real estate. And don't forget the lamentation of your women. Because you're all just mobs to me.
I miss Shadowbane............
While 100+ raiders taking on a boss would be a truely epic feeling the odds of all the raiders being able to sustain that amount of people at one time on their computers is highly unlikely. I had a custom rig when I played wrath and wintergrasp when lots of players were in 1 area would slow me down to a crawl on fps. The game engine would have to accommodate for such a huge raid and all raiders would have to own a high end gaming system to play it.
There is NO raid size needed....period.There is nothing yo ucannot do with a 6 player group that needs a raid.Tehre is a reason 6 has been proven a good normal grouping size,it is because it works for every aspect.
You can have the choice of a Tank or 2,a couple DPS,a healer or 2,then some kind of buffer/debuffer variable class.Among the 6 a very stringent boss might need a specific class and with the 6 m,an groupo ,there is still room to operate with 2 of them,no more should be needed.
IMO Raiding has totally ruined Boss fights and people do not even understand why,which si sad.
It ruins it because by having TOO "many of" they would ruin the complexity of a fight.Example if a Boss was susceptible to STUNS,you could simply add 10 stuns into a Raid and make the fight super easy.So what has happened is devs have completely removed all FUN abilites from major boss fights.So now every ability or spell you got that is cool the Boss is immune to it,and that is NOT good gaming or design.
Now Bosses are immune to sleep,immune to stuns,immune to certain powerful attacks,immune to slow,immune to paralyze,immune to gravity,immune to many things.It has got even worse,players would line up behind a boss to avoid damage and allow ONLY a tank to take it,but devs have even removed that by creating massive AOE attacks.It all ends up with Raid fights being TOO simplistic in nature,ONE idea works and players try unti lthey find that oen formula,then everyone copies it.
With only 6 man groups you can make more immersive fights and allow for more versatility in a fight,instead of searching for that one formula that works.
I also do not like the idea of having 5+ tanks as back up and 5+ healers to ensure tons of easy mode healing,in essencee hate is easily shared.Possibly 5 crowd control classes or more,it all gets too ridiculous with Raid size groups.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
I voted 15 (3 groups of 5), mainly because back when I played WoW (very casual raiding), 10 people usually meant we had to leave some people out, but when we did try to go to 25 people it was a logistics nightmare, we spent more time trying to get everyone invited, sorted in the right groups, summoned, and buffed (including giving them food for some extra buffs) than actually trying to do the raid.
Originally posted by L0C0Man I voted 15 (3 groups of 5), mainly because back when I played WoW (very casual raiding), 10 people usually meant we had to leave some people out, but when we did try to go to 25 people it was a logistics nightmare, we spent more time trying to get everyone invited, sorted in the right groups, summoned, and buffed (including giving them food for some extra buffs) than actually trying to do the raid.
reason why it was a logicstics nightmare (which I agree they were) is because those raids were exclusive raids.. This mean syou have to have certain roles and make up to raid.. This is why I prefer just having open end raids.. As long as you have a meat shield, healers and dps.. I'ts all good..
Originally posted by L0C0Man I voted 15 (3 groups of 5), mainly because back when I played WoW (very casual raiding), 10 people usually meant we had to leave some people out, but when we did try to go to 25 people it was a logistics nightmare, we spent more time trying to get everyone invited, sorted in the right groups, summoned, and buffed (including giving them food for some extra buffs) than actually trying to do the raid.
reason why it was a logicstics nightmare (which I agree they were) is because those raids were exclusive raids.. This mean syou have to have certain roles and make up to raid.. This is why I prefer just having open end raids.. As long as you have a meat shield, healers and dps.. I'ts all good..
Well that's the nature of the beast so long as we have the trinity system. In fact I like clear defined roles so I'm on board with that system. However, I see where it would frustrate some gamers because of its restrictions.
I'm comfortable at around 6.022 * 10^23 players (give or take a few).
In all seriousness... I don't raid anymore. 40 man raids were a good size if your guild can deal with the logistics of it. I've been in fleets in Eve of upward of 100 players, that really feels epic.
There are certain queer times and occasions in this strange mixed affair we call life when a man takes this whole universe for a vast practical joke, though the wit thereof he but dimly discerns, and more than suspects that the joke is at nobody's expense but his own. -- Herman Melville
Originally posted by L0C0Man I voted 15 (3 groups of 5), mainly because back when I played WoW (very casual raiding), 10 people usually meant we had to leave some people out, but when we did try to go to 25 people it was a logistics nightmare, we spent more time trying to get everyone invited, sorted in the right groups, summoned, and buffed (including giving them food for some extra buffs) than actually trying to do the raid.
reason why it was a logicstics nightmare (which I agree they were) is because those raids were exclusive raids.. This mean syou have to have certain roles and make up to raid.. This is why I prefer just having open end raids.. As long as you have a meat shield, healers and dps.. I'ts all good..
LFR solves the logistic problem.
But still 25 man is not that fun when you have to coordinate 25 people on what to do. IT also does not feel heoric when 25 guys are beating up on a poor monster.
If you are going to have raids it is best to have them really really big. Have the division between group and raid content be as stark as possible in that manner. I think everquest 1 did it fine with their 72 person raids. Something like Coirnav or the earth raid were very different from each other and they both wanted full groups to succeed in their day. The other good thing about having really big raids is that the content doesnt have to completely go away. Nobody is going to do a 10 or 20 person raid of old content.
Originally posted by centkin If you are going to have raids it is best to have them really really big.
Besides, the bigger the raid is, the easier to disappear in the crowd and just autofire while waiting for your epix.
Plus, it's good for player distribution. We know the natural player distribution favors 2 tanks, 4 healers, and 96 DPS anyway.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
The reason why: Raiding begats elitism and elitism begats destroyed communities.
The last time I looked I never played an RPG of any type whether it be AD&D pen and paper to console RPG's like Kingdom Hearts or Shining in the Darkness (my all time favorite RPG BTW) Nor have I ever read a Fantasy book based on anything you would consider "raiding". From controlling a small group in a single player RPG, to reading Tolkien's masterpiece Lord of The Rings, all action is placed on either a small group or on 1 person. This is why I play "Role-Playing-Games" Not because I am part of a role, but because I am playing a Role in a setting. Large Scale Raiding just doesnt carry any immersive weight to being a good element to a game.
Any Raid element will and can carry over to a small group size more fluid and more imemrsive then just being part of a large gathering of un-interesting people. Don't even get me started on the organization required to "Raid". Anytime I have to devote a specific time and place to be online is not something I call entertaining. If you want to make "raiding" better, then you need to remove the organization required. I play video games based on my time not on the collective timne of "xx" other members of a "raid".
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
If Eve can have 500 players shooting a POS, another MMo can have 500 players shooting a dragon.
Yes because rendering a world filled with detailed animated characters and particle effects is no more difficult than open space with rigid spacecraft and some particle effects.
There are pretty obvious reasons why 500 people cannot be rendered as easily as 500 spacecraft.
IMO.. the reasons why raid sizes have to be so small, is because of the graphics.. That has been the crux of all MMO's.. I feel with 90% certainty that if devs would stop making combat so "artisticly" seductive, combat could and should be much larger.. Devs have turned combat into the primary focus of eye candy, which only puts more stress on graphics cards.. Nerf the graphics please and make gameplay more enjoyable
I voted 16, although I like anything between 15 and 20 for my large group content. Open word PvE events are fine, but at best those are just button mashing because there's no way to coordinate random people you met a minute ago who might not even speak the same language. I feel that between 15-20 you get the sense that there is a big group needed to take down whatever, but it isn't crammed to the brim with players and either the raid is complicated and it's chaos (fun, but frusturating) or it's easy and the extra time spent grouping wasn't necessary.
Originally posted by Rydeson IMO.. the reasons why raid sizes have to be so small, is because of the graphics.. That has been the crux of all MMO's.. I feel with 90% certainty that if devs would stop making combat so "artisticly" seductive, combat could and should be much larger.. Devs have turned combat into the primary focus of eye candy, which only puts more stress on graphics cards.. Nerf the graphics please and make gameplay more enjoyable
Comments
games should NOT limit the ammount of players you want to bring to a raid, but with that said games should have a diverse group of raids to choose from, wich should be designed for certain ammout of raiders, some for ~20, some for ~50, and some for 100+ or even more,,,
diversity and no restrictions, thats how i like it
[edit] P.S.
and pls let it NOT be instanced, and while we're at it, no rezzing possible, you're dead you're out
Games previously played: AO, AoC, Aion, AoW, Eve, SWTor, WaR, STO, TSW, DCUO, FE, BP, ProjectEntropia, FootballSuperstars!
Choose the raid size for your game first and then design around it.
The question here is implied but obvious to most - what is the ideal size for a raid based on the usual issues - at what level of participation do you get a raids challenges and 'feeling' balanced ideally against the increasing logistical demands of geting large groups together, running dkp tables etc. etc.
I voted 16 for the sweet spot in this case.
Of course - far better is a scaling system - either in predefined and instance entrance choosable groups - 12, 16, 20 or more finely scaling such as GW2... but with raid-style difficulty, not res-zerg mechanics like openworld GW2 bosses...
My internet connection says it doesnt like raids above about 24 people.
But thats my internet connection, not me.
While 100+ raiders taking on a boss would be a truely epic feeling the odds of all the raiders being able to sustain that amount of people at one time on their computers is highly unlikely. I had a custom rig when I played wrath and wintergrasp when lots of players were in 1 area would slow me down to a crawl on fps. The game engine would have to accommodate for such a huge raid and all raiders would have to own a high end gaming system to play it.
Express your opinion
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/371172/Poll-Most-hated-MMORPG.html
100 is for big battles, not dungeon adventures. I will take 5-10.
It does not feel heroic, or whatever i do matter, if i am one of the 100 to fight a boss. i would much rather be the boss.
There is NO raid size needed....period.There is nothing yo ucannot do with a 6 player group that needs a raid.Tehre is a reason 6 has been proven a good normal grouping size,it is because it works for every aspect.
You can have the choice of a Tank or 2,a couple DPS,a healer or 2,then some kind of buffer/debuffer variable class.Among the 6 a very stringent boss might need a specific class and with the 6 m,an groupo ,there is still room to operate with 2 of them,no more should be needed.
IMO Raiding has totally ruined Boss fights and people do not even understand why,which si sad.
It ruins it because by having TOO "many of" they would ruin the complexity of a fight.Example if a Boss was susceptible to STUNS,you could simply add 10 stuns into a Raid and make the fight super easy.So what has happened is devs have completely removed all FUN abilites from major boss fights.So now every ability or spell you got that is cool the Boss is immune to it,and that is NOT good gaming or design.
Now Bosses are immune to sleep,immune to stuns,immune to certain powerful attacks,immune to slow,immune to paralyze,immune to gravity,immune to many things.It has got even worse,players would line up behind a boss to avoid damage and allow ONLY a tank to take it,but devs have even removed that by creating massive AOE attacks.It all ends up with Raid fights being TOO simplistic in nature,ONE idea works and players try unti lthey find that oen formula,then everyone copies it.
With only 6 man groups you can make more immersive fights and allow for more versatility in a fight,instead of searching for that one formula that works.
I also do not like the idea of having 5+ tanks as back up and 5+ healers to ensure tons of easy mode healing,in essencee hate is easily shared.Possibly 5 crowd control classes or more,it all gets too ridiculous with Raid size groups.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
What can men do against such reckless hate?
reason why it was a logicstics nightmare (which I agree they were) is because those raids were exclusive raids.. This mean syou have to have certain roles and make up to raid.. This is why I prefer just having open end raids.. As long as you have a meat shield, healers and dps.. I'ts all good..
Well that's the nature of the beast so long as we have the trinity system. In fact I like clear defined roles so I'm on board with that system. However, I see where it would frustrate some gamers because of its restrictions.
Express your opinion
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/371172/Poll-Most-hated-MMORPG.html
I'm comfortable at around 6.022 * 10^23 players (give or take a few).
In all seriousness... I don't raid anymore. 40 man raids were a good size if your guild can deal with the logistics of it. I've been in fleets in Eve of upward of 100 players, that really feels epic.
There are certain queer times and occasions in this strange mixed affair we call life when a man takes this whole universe for a vast practical joke, though the wit thereof he but dimly discerns, and more than suspects that the joke is at nobody's expense but his own.
-- Herman Melville
LFR solves the logistic problem.
But still 25 man is not that fun when you have to coordinate 25 people on what to do. IT also does not feel heoric when 25 guys are beating up on a poor monster.
something like 5 is more manageable.
You make me like charity
"can" != "should".
Is 500 players shooting at a dragon more fun than 5? I play a much more crucial and heroic role if there are 5, instead of 500.
Eve has 500 ships with no real animation to them, and no real animation to the environment... which is just a pretty backdrop.
You make me like charity
Besides, the bigger the raid is, the easier to disappear in the crowd and just autofire while waiting for your epix.
Plus, it's good for player distribution. We know the natural player distribution favors 2 tanks, 4 healers, and 96 DPS anyway.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
5
The reason why: Raiding begats elitism and elitism begats destroyed communities.
The last time I looked I never played an RPG of any type whether it be AD&D pen and paper to console RPG's like Kingdom Hearts or Shining in the Darkness (my all time favorite RPG BTW) Nor have I ever read a Fantasy book based on anything you would consider "raiding". From controlling a small group in a single player RPG, to reading Tolkien's masterpiece Lord of The Rings, all action is placed on either a small group or on 1 person. This is why I play "Role-Playing-Games" Not because I am part of a role, but because I am playing a Role in a setting. Large Scale Raiding just doesnt carry any immersive weight to being a good element to a game.
Any Raid element will and can carry over to a small group size more fluid and more imemrsive then just being part of a large gathering of un-interesting people. Don't even get me started on the organization required to "Raid". Anytime I have to devote a specific time and place to be online is not something I call entertaining. If you want to make "raiding" better, then you need to remove the organization required. I play video games based on my time not on the collective timne of "xx" other members of a "raid".
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
Yes because rendering a world filled with detailed animated characters and particle effects is no more difficult than open space with rigid spacecraft and some particle effects.
There are pretty obvious reasons why 500 people cannot be rendered as easily as 500 spacecraft.
Oh come on Ice - it's 92 dps - get your facts right...!
I voted 16, although I like anything between 15 and 20 for my large group content. Open word PvE events are fine, but at best those are just button mashing because there's no way to coordinate random people you met a minute ago who might not even speak the same language. I feel that between 15-20 you get the sense that there is a big group needed to take down whatever, but it isn't crammed to the brim with players and either the raid is complicated and it's chaos (fun, but frusturating) or it's easy and the extra time spent grouping wasn't necessary.
More people != more enjoyable gameplay.