Greetings, glorious adventurers! If you're joining in our Alpha One spot testing, please follow the steps here to see all the latest test info on our forums and Discord!

What is your ideal party size in an MMO?

Hey guys. So recently in a blog post Steven talked about how AoC will have a group size of eight people. I've never played an mmo with such a large group size. Most modern mmos stick with four or five. With that being said though I really do look forward to seeing how 8 man dungeons will work. I feel like having 8 man content makes it feel more epic. It takes more people to down a boss it makes it feel like a greater threat. So I just want to see what the community thinks is the perfect groupo size in an mmo and why.
«1

Comments

  • It really doesn't matter to me as long as every class brings something unique and the content is difficult i.e requires teamwork, strategy, and personal skill.
  • I went with other mainly because it simply does not matter to me.  It could be any of those choices and I'd be perfectly content.  The only thing that matters to me is that the party size feels relevant to the content that requires the party in the first place.
  • prefer a smaller group that still allows for some room of roleadjustments. As i would prefer in most games, 5 will be my choice 
  • I think it should depend on the difficulty of the content. 4 player easier dungeons, 8 player  hard dungeons, 12 player easier raids, 20 player  hard raids.
  • I probably should have voted other.
    Really should be just bring however many you want and complete the tasks you're able to complete - leave the rest for others - or come back and try again, perhaps with more folks.
  • Five is manageable with enough slots to cover all the needs.
  • I work with what the game allows, not partial to a specific number.
  • It really does depend upon the task at hand, and what classifies as a group.. there is some things that I'd rather have only a few people and some where I'd want several small groups working in conjunction with each other
  • Yeah. @Ninja Shadow sez it for me best. We need to assess every group challenge and adapt our group size and group members' abilities according to that. Sometimes we may get it right first time. Others we'll maybe get pasted on first run, withdraw and discuss, and regroup differently or switch skills or whatever - eventually emerge victors because of teamwork and communication creating a better team strategy.
  • In some ways depending on how it's designed 8 with each class having a unique utility that is useful is fine; but then, again, I am a fan of non-traditional structured groups.
  • Depends on the content to be completed, if we're talking about dungeons specifically then the answer is whatever # they're designed for.
  • Ouuuhoouu It's just me, myself and I. Solo right untill I die. Cuz I got me for life
  • Personally, I think 5 is the ideal size.  It provides the ideal size for 1 Tank, 1 Healer, 2 DPS, 1 support/dps/other (second tank or healer in case something goes horribly wrong).
  • It depends, on what the roles are. If it's just tank/healer/dps I think five is pretty sweet.
    But if there are things like support, and dps is not just about damage, but about a form of environmental control (casting earthspikes around the place to function as lightning rods if applicable) Or in some way stopping the fireballs raining from the sky, etc. 
    Then I think more dps could be amazing.
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited August 2017
    The problem with group sizes is it makes the group the focus of all activity instead of the community. It puts the pack before the herd kind of thing. It also normally requires preset complementary builds if content is built around a specific size. So how different intrepids attempt at fixing build diversity pans out remains to be seen. I dont think sacrificing choice on the alter of balance to enforce diversity is the right way to do things. Granted its a difficult juggling act.

    I dont see anything other than an array of build penalties to go with an array of build bonuses as a viable balancing solution that enables variety. Build variety comes through a myriad of 'equally valid' choices. A dualistic sacrificial distribution system is the only way I see balance and diversity at the same time. Such a system enables any group size of any build because every build is internally balanced with itself, rather than externally balanced against others.

    That does not detract form the fact the game may well be well balanced using preset builds and enforce some variety through the number of presets. I just dont think its as good as it could be. So there is always the opportunity for something better to come along that could force Intrepid to change to survive. So it would be better to use the best available option at the outset IMHO.

    The biggest problem is the concept of themepark scripted dungeons. Such content is difficult to balance so you instinctively try to limit as many variables as possible. Group size being the primary one. The alternative is you say UPTO X players and scale the content and reward to suit. But you are still left with a difficulty issue. How do you balance difficulty vs variable players with variable skill sets without destroying variety ?

    If you have preset dungeons there will always be optimal builds for known content destroying variety. If you have random dungeons, different group variety will have easy and hard content as luck determines. If you know how many people are entering an instance and you know every skill each build has, you can instead tune the difficulty to make a designer dungeon to suit the combined skillset instead. This last method means any build styles, of any group size can enter any dungeon and always have challenging content to match.

    Thus the pack vs herd conflict of finding that perfect team to match the perfect dungeon never arises. There is simply groups of people adventuring together, built in a style that expresses their own nature. All the barriers between who what where and when you play with other people are removed.
  • Number ain't matter.

    2 = Infinity
  • I like 10.. Well, 9, plus yourself.
    It's Massive Multiplayer, not groups of 4 multiplayer.
  • 6 is about the right amount I think. I am not sure if 8 is a crowed but I would not say it was to many
  • 7 of 9
  • 5 was always a good number when you have lots of classes but im super excited to see how 8 will play out!
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited August 2017
    8 will be interesting. I always thought that 6 would be good. Lots of room to specialize based on what you want to get done. 
  • Cazz said:
    Personally, I think 5 is the ideal size.  It provides the ideal size for 1 Tank, 1 Healer, 2 DPS, 1 support/dps/other (second tank or healer in case something goes horribly wrong).
    If that is your reasoning then why not 4? Why do there need to be more DPS necessarily instead of 1/1/1 + a wild card? Or why not 3 and just straight up 1/1/1?
  • I want to like this twice
  • i prefer 4 to 5 honestly but thats just me i like having a close nit group
  • I have a group of 5 friends that i play with so 5 has always been a great number :3
  • 3.14
  • 3.14
    I get a sudden craving for pie, I wonder why.
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited August 2017

    3.14

    3.1416
Sign In or Register to comment.