Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Ideal group size

13»

Comments

  • AlBQuirkyAlBQuirky Member EpicPosts: 7,432


    Originally posted by FrodoFragins
    For dungeons it's 6 man with one tank, one healer and 4 dps.  5 mans make the queue times too long due to too few tank/healers.
    I am not sure, so I am asking :)

    Don't 5 and 6 man groups both have Tanks and Healers?

    Or is it more about the extra DPS getting in that makes it go faster?

    - Al

    Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.
    - FARGIN_WAR


  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    Originally posted by CalmOceans
    Originally posted by Quirhid

    Trinity combat is not teamwork. It is an algorithm. If everyone does their job i.e. tanks hold aggro, DPS overcomes enemy regeneration/heals and heal keeps your tanks up, you will win the encounter.

    There's hardly any cooperation between tank and DPS or DPS and heals for example.

     

    You've never played EQ I guess.

     

    -Clerics communicate with the tank to keep Divine intervention up

    -Healers communicate with the puller to know when it's safe to heal to avoid social aggro.

    -Druids  communicate with tanks to keep the temporary HP boosts like wild growth up

    -Bards communicate with DPS to launch Quicktime

    -Shamans communicate with DPS to launch epic

    -Rangers communicate with DPS to launch auspice

    -Rogues communicate to keep a pinpoint chain going

    -SK communicate with warriors when they need aggro multipliers

     

    You know nothing about trinity combat, you like action combat, so stick with that.

     

    And all that doesnt have anything to do with trinity

    You should take your own advice lol

  • RVallantRVallant Member UncommonPosts: 66

    I'm going to go against the grain here and say...

     

    4.

     

    1 - Tank

    2 - DPS / Support (Melee)

    3 - DPS / Support (Range)

    4 - Heal / Support 

     

    4 is small enough that you won't be needing to LFG all day long and is focused enough that co-ordination and planning can be done in a short amount of time. 

    Downside? It will be reliant on the Tank/Healer to be mildly competent. 

    If we're going to big dungeons and raid content - 6 would be the magic number for me;

    1 - Tank

    2 - Off Tank / DPS

    3 - DPS / Support (Melee)

    4 - DPS / Support (range)

    5 - Heals / Support

    6 - Support / Heals (Any really)

     

    Six is enough to split into two teams and enough variety of mission objectives can be accomplished here to make life interesting.

    More than 6 players is a waste of time and effort. I honestly think the best raid/dungeon content should revolve around the 'six' using mechanics that cause a challenge as opposed to being super-ridiculous HP bars and smack-a-doodies. 

    Course, I'm biased AGAINST bigger groups, I think smaller, tighter groups reward interesting mechanics and dynamics.

  • AldersAlders Member RarePosts: 2,207

    6 is the perfect size.

    This allows for a support class or CC class if the game mechanics are built for such a thing.

    Even if they are not, having an extra DPS per tank/healer should help wait times.

  • KiyorisKiyoris Member RarePosts: 2,130
    Originally posted by Malabooga
    Originally posted by CalmOceans
    Originally posted by Quirhid

    Trinity combat is not teamwork. It is an algorithm. If everyone does their job i.e. tanks hold aggro, DPS overcomes enemy regeneration/heals and heal keeps your tanks up, you will win the encounter.

    There's hardly any cooperation between tank and DPS or DPS and heals for example.

     

    You've never played EQ I guess.

     

    -Clerics communicate with the tank to keep Divine intervention up

    -Healers communicate with the puller to know when it's safe to heal to avoid social aggro.

    -Druids  communicate with tanks to keep the temporary HP boosts like wild growth up

    -Bards communicate with DPS to launch Quicktime

    -Shamans communicate with DPS to launch epic

    -Rangers communicate with DPS to launch auspice

    -Rogues communicate to keep a pinpoint chain going

    -SK communicate with warriors when they need aggro multipliers

     

    You know nothing about trinity combat, you like action combat, so stick with that.

     

    And all that doesnt have anything to do with trinity

    You should take your own advice lol

    that's exactly what trinity is

  • KiyorisKiyoris Member RarePosts: 2,130
    5 or 6 for me, too large is unmanageable, too small is not helping community building
  • KiyorisKiyoris Member RarePosts: 2,130
    Originally posted by Alders

    6 is the perfect size.

    This allows for a support class or CC class if the game mechanics are built for such a thing.

    So true, I am changing my opinon to 6 because of your CC comment.

  • DzoneDzone Member UncommonPosts: 371
    Originally posted by Orious
    for an MMORPG I think 10+. For just an MMO they probably half that. I've seen MMORPG group sizes shrink every year and it's somewhat of an annoyance. 

    I know what you mean. SE (Square-unex) Whent from 6 full party (final fantasy 11) down to 4 (Final fantasy XIV ARR)

     

    To me 6 people worked out much better then what we have now. More spots for dps, and even room for a support class, aka bard (ffxi).

     

    Er ff 14 4 is light party - 8 is full party actually, but you don't see 8 man stuff until you get to end game.

  • Ender4Ender4 Member UncommonPosts: 2,247


    Originally posted by Malabooga

    Originally posted by Quirhid

    Originally posted by CalmOceans

    Originally posted by rojoArcueid Now, apply that same list to a different playstyle where tanking is not necessarily required to hold aggro then yeah, it would make the fight more active, dynamic, teamwork based, and just more fun.
    All the MMO where you take away the tank have far less teamwork. Games like Vindictus and all upcoming Korean action MMO like Black Desert without traditional trinity roles have no teamwork. What you're arguing is different from reality, action MMO without aggro have far less teamwork, not more. The group size is irrelevant in those MMO, since everyone is a DPS class dodging, bunny jumping and spamming attacks.
    Trinity combat is not teamwork. It is an algorithm. If everyone does their job i.e. tanks hold aggro, DPS overcomes enemy regeneration/heals and heal keeps your tanks up, you will win the encounter. There's hardly any cooperation between tank and DPS or DPS and heals for example.   No. rojoArcueid is quite right in what he said. You are wrong.
    Woot, someone who gets it right.

    Ironic thing is that GW2 combat requires actual teamwork and cooperation, but they hate it lol

    trinity "works" BECAUSE it doesnt require teamwork and cooperation

    you can say that ESO and WS have limited requirement for teamwork and cooperation. "old school" ? lol no

    Group size? Group size should be limitless. Theres no reason why you should limit group size.

    Ideal group size? As many friends i WANT TO play with that are online.

    Its should be CONTENT that adapts to our group size, not the other way around, one more thing "old school" mmos did very badly


    GW2 probably has the worst group combat of any game I've played, it most certainly does not have it right. Trinity is a misnomer to begin with, EQ never had a trinity. EQ had pullers, DPS, debuffers, crowd control, tanks and healers. It had 6 roles not 3. WoW had DPS, crowd control, tank and healer to start. The standard tanking doesn't need to be just hold aggro if you don't want it to be, the standard healer doesn't need to just be spam heals either. GW2 is just about everything that can be wrong from grouping pretty much, just an awful game from a design standpoint.

  • KiyorisKiyoris Member RarePosts: 2,130
    Originally posted by Malabooga

    GW2 combat requires actual teamwork and cooperation

    lmao

  • zaberfangxzaberfangx Member UncommonPosts: 1,796

    Rift had good idea, not sure games had same idea be for people can point that out if they want. But tank,2 dps 1 support then a healer. But don't work if the people in the game want get it down fast so support get thrown out as dps better to fast kill a boss then out lasting it.

     

    But people have little time for small reward then a dungeon gets old not only in rift other games too and make game just feel less reward. GW2 dungeon was good people ended up going to harder dungeons as reward was not worth the time put in it, and with out having a tank class watching dps getting 1 shot happen, there not tons skilled people out there so the idea was good just not working the way they wanted it too.

  • AlBQuirkyAlBQuirky Member EpicPosts: 7,432


    Originally posted by Ender4

    Originally posted by Malabooga

    Originally posted by Quirhid

    Originally posted by CalmOceans

    Originally posted by rojoArcueid
    Now, apply that same list to a different playstyle where tanking is not necessarily required to hold aggro then yeah, it would make the fight more active, dynamic, teamwork based, and just more fun.
    All the MMO where you take away the tank have far less teamwork. Games like Vindictus and all upcoming Korean action MMO like Black Desert without traditional trinity roles have no teamwork.What you're arguing is different from reality, action MMO without aggro have far less teamwork, not more.The group size is irrelevant in those MMO, since everyone is a DPS class dodging, bunny jumping and spamming attacks.
    Trinity combat is not teamwork. It is an algorithm. If everyone does their job i.e. tanks hold aggro, DPS overcomes enemy regeneration/heals and heal keeps your tanks up, you will win the encounter. There's hardly any cooperation between tank and DPS or DPS and heals for example.No. rojoArcueid is quite right in what he said. You are wrong.
    Woot, someone who gets it right.Ironic thing is that GW2 combat requires actual teamwork and cooperation, but they hate it loltrinity "works" BECAUSE it doesnt require teamwork and cooperationyou can say that ESO and WS have limited requirement for teamwork and cooperation. "old school" ? lol noGroup size? Group size should be limitless. Theres no reason why you should limit group size.Ideal group size? As many friends i WANT TO play with that are online.Its should be CONTENT that adapts to our group size, not the other way around, one more thing "old school" mmos did very badly
    GW2 probably has the worst group combat of any game I've played, it most certainly does not have it right. Trinity is a misnomer to begin with, EQ never had a trinity. EQ had pullers, DPS, debuffers, crowd control, tanks and healers. It had 6 roles not 3. WoW had DPS, crowd control, tank and healer to start. The standard tanking doesn't need to be just hold aggro if you don't want it to be, the standard healer doesn't need to just be spam heals either. GW2 is just about everything that can be wrong from grouping pretty much, just an awful game from a design standpoint.

    Yes, GW2 has the worst I have encountered yet.

    As to Malabooga and Quirhid, my experience, though limited, is quite the opposite of your own. A healer in trinity combat does not ONLY "stare" at the tank's health. If the DPS goes down, you've lost because you can not counter the other sides heals. If the healer does not watch their OWN health, the group dies. If the Tank loses aggro to the DPS or healer (which happens often in this kind of combat), he has to notice that and make adjustments. None of this is as if "nobody else exists" within the group, as you imply.

    Combat in GW2 was spam attacks as soon they cooled off, AoE's being the best. I (and others in groups I was in) had very little care what others were doing. Now, this NOT from dungeons, which I heard takes more cooperation, but regular grouping in the open world, like the (not so) Dynamic Events. Any action combat game I have played in groups has boiled down to zerg fests (max DPS), not "strategy."

    Your experience may differ. I just wanted to say that my own is quite the opposite of your own.

    - Al

    Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.
    - FARGIN_WAR


  • DibdabsDibdabs Member RarePosts: 3,203
    I'll stick to a group of one, thanks.  The idea of playing with people to help them/me is a waste of time.  Nobody needs help in today's mmorpgs.
  • fivorothfivoroth Member UncommonPosts: 3,916

    Group of 12 to level up would be insane. You would never get anything done unless you have more than 2-3 hours at a bare minimum.

    5 would be the maximum limit I can put up with because otherwise I simply won't be able to play the game. ANd that's even too many. Unless finding people is super easy. If I have 1-2 hours to play, I am not going to spend 80% of that organising a group.

    What the hell would you need a support class for? Can't you just give CC to some DPS classes and buffs/debuffs to DPS. It's not like DPS classes take too much skill to play anyway as it is. DPS is like facerolling your keyboard. Dedicating one class to only buffing for example would be seriously boring.

    And I don't agree that tanking should be taken out as someone suggested. Tanking is quite an involved process and it's quite fun. I think most complaints about healers and tanks come from DPS players cause they know no group cares if they left cause there is like a billion of them.

    Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.

Sign In or Register to comment.