Suggestion Party Size Increase

[c12095]

As the title states, I think there should be an increase to the cap party size which is currently 10. There are no drawbacks to having this happen, EXP would continue to split as the party increases. This would help accommodate parties from server event groups, to raiding parties.

If not an increase to normal party size, then perhaps a separate party system that allows more players and gives no EXP to the group.

 

[victim130]

.-. seems like this would greatly help out large player groups *Cough* *Cough* I don't think I've ever had party size problems aside from determining which is going to join one of the two groups for DoD. Personally, as a solo runner, I don't see a large reason for this to come into play, but I will say there are drawbacks. Just to point out one, I think groups of 10 are rare enough to say only one or two groups (If that) would benefit from it. Though with their benefit, it oppresses players who hardly manage 5 member parties. 5v10 is impossible under equal power, but 5v15 is going to be worse.

This is mostly my opinion on the matter, take it how you will.

 

[MajorasMask]

.-. seems like this would greatly help out large player groups *Cough* *Cough* I don't think I've ever had party size problems aside from determining which is going to join one of the two groups for DoD. Personally, as a solo runner, I don't see a large reason for this to come into play, but I will say there are drawbacks. Just to point out one, I think groups of 10 are rare enough to say only one or two groups (If that) would benefit from it. Though with their benefit, it oppresses players who hardly manage 5 member parties. 5v10 is impossible under equal power, but 5v15 is going to be worse.

This is mostly my opinion on the matter, take it how you will.

''This would help accommodate parties from server event groups''

Like you said yourself, when ever would people go raiding in a 10-man party? That rarely happens. People need to join up in larger parties for events, such as a DoD, for instance.

 

[leftovers5]

Can't believe no one thought outside the box and suggested this before. This needs to happen.

 

[Kainzo]

There's a reason why we hard cap parties at 10 players. Most skills are balanced around 10 players, not unlimited.

While I think joining groups together would be neat in a raid, the spells would only hit those in your immediate party.

 

[EvilThor]

Maybe the possibility to link two parties together?
Skills would only work inside parties, but no pvp would apply for the linked parties..

 

[awsumguy75321]

Maybe the possibility to link two parties together?
Skills would only work inside parties, but no pvp would apply for the linked parties..

But only linking two parties. We don't want everyone on the server all against one random noob without having to worry about hitting each other.

 

[MrPapodopolus]

As the title states, I think there should be an increase to the cap party size which is currently 10. There are no drawbacks to having this happen, EXP would continue to split as the party increases. This would help accommodate parties from server event groups, to raiding parties.

If not an increase to normal party size, then perhaps a separate party system that allows more players and gives no EXP to the group.

i totally agree, this would make the battles that occur a lot more epic, even a cap increase to 15 or 20 from the current 10 would be a huge improvement.

 

[Favith]

I'm going to agree with Victim here, even though I play a group support class and a larger party limit should be something a bard would support.

I don't support it because, as rare as it would be, an 11+ man raiding party is not something I ever want to see. If you have more than 10 people raiding you should definitely have to coordinate your attacks so that you don't plaster your allied group with AOEs. You should have to split your healers evenly. You should have to think about group composition. If you can throw 15 people in one group there's no strategy there--just go zerg it up.

There are what, 3 or 4 groups on the server who could field an 11+ man raiding party? Does ANYONE want to see that (not counting people from those groups, of course)? I know I don't. I'm just thinking of single guilds/groups or kingdoms--this isn't even counting the raiding parties that could be formed by alliances.

I can see the advantages of larger groups in DoDs and such, but honestly those events are so rare lately that the risk of larger raid groups just isn't worth it, IMO.

 

[Keffalump]

This needs to happen.

 

[Kwong050]

I'm going to agree with Victim here, even though I play a group support class and a larger party limit should be something a bard would support.

I don't support it because, as rare as it would be, an 11+ man raiding party is not something I ever want to see. If you have more than 10 people raiding you should definitely have to coordinate your attacks so that you don't plaster your allied group with AOEs. You should have to split your healers evenly. You should have to think about group composition. If you can throw 15 people in one group there's no strategy there--just go zerg it up.

There are what, 3 or 4 groups on the server who could field an 11+ man raiding party? Does ANYONE want to see that (not counting people from those groups, of course)? I know I don't. I'm just thinking of single guilds/groups or kingdoms--this isn't even counting the raiding parties that could be formed by alliances.

I can see the advantages of larger groups in DoDs and such, but honestly those events are so rare lately that the risk of larger raid groups just isn't worth it, IMO.

It is extremely hard to coordinate 10+ people when some are in a different party.

 

[victim130]

It is extremely hard to coordinate 10+ people when some are in a different party.

.-. you totally missed his point...

 

[Nightroado]

There's a reason why we hard cap parties at 10 players. Most skills are balanced around 10 players, not unlimited.

While I think joining groups together would be neat in a raid, the spells would only hit those in your immediate party.

It sounds like people are asking for a raid system from MMOs.

In a game I use to play extensively, Everquest 2, you could have four groups of six, for a total of twenty-four players. You could have party chat to talk to the immediate group and then raid chat to communicate to all four parties, which was typically used by the raid leader(s).

As for Kainzo's concern of group buffs, in EQ 2 most buffs and group heals were party only. So their buffs had zero impact for the other three groups. There were also minor buffs that could indeed affect the entire raid, but I doubt Kainzo wants to get into that.

Anyways, in EQ2, to form a raid, you had to invite a party leader it your group. That linked the two groups together in the raid window for splitting exp and provided the raid chat channel. If something similar could be made, you would have your raid chat and exp split without tipping the scales of balanced play.