Maintenance for the week of June 27:
• [COMPLETE] PC/Mac: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – June 27, 4:00AM EDT (8:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EDT (13:00 UTC)
• [COMPLETE] Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – June 27, 4:00AM EDT (8:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EDT (13:00 UTC)
• [COMPLETE] PlayStation®: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – June 27, 4:00AM EDT (8:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EDT (13:00 UTC)

12 person group limit? Whaaaaaat?

  • ajkb78
    ajkb78
    ✭✭✭✭
    It's clear that some people, for legitimate reasons, have found groups larger than 12 useful.

    We'll have to take ZoS's word for it that groups of larger than 12 somehow impact performance because of calculations done between each member of the group.

    OK. So what compromise might suit everyone?

    On console each guild has a number of voice chat channels. (Voice chat is a core game feature on console; I realise that's not the case on PC.)
    But why couldn't each guild have a number of text chat channels too, which you could join or leave in the same way as you join or leave the existing console voice chat channels? That way RP events (which I'm gathering from the discussion are typically the kind that require lots of text-channel group discussion) could just grab guild chat 2 or guild chat 3 or whatever and carry on with no limit (or a really high limit, at any rate) to channel size, so GMs would be happy. It doesn't even seem like it would require much new functionality in the game, text chat is already there as a feature. It wouldn't require heavy computation among channel members as they wouldn't actually be grouped, so ZoS would be happy.

  • Varana
    Varana
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭
    Oh, having an alternative with multi-group text channels or things like that would alleviate many of the problems with this decision, and may well lead to an even better system in the future when functionality gets added.

    The problem is that this won't happen in this patch. We're in the last cycle of the PTS, the new update has been feature-complete for weeks or even months now. So whatever might happen in the future, they're taking large groups away now, without adding an alternative solution.

    So thinking about for an alternative is certainly a good thing but doesn't change the fact that we'll lose the functionality for the foreseeable future.
  • Thrudra_Magia
    Thrudra_Magia
    ✭✭✭
    Sadly, it will affect guild events, at least for my guilds.
    Edited by Thrudra_Magia on May 17, 2021 3:29PM
  • Savina
    Savina
    ✭✭✭
    While having a few extra chat channels would help, it doesn't address the problem of where the event/group lead is on the map for the additional crowns needed when you break into multiple groups. Our guild already runs multiple groups for several of our events, and we deal with the challenges regularly. We need a way for the addition groups crowns to see the actual event lead on the map.

    The logistics of running more than one group multiplies with each additional group you run. You need people willing to try and follow a lead they can NOT see on the map. You need people willing to keep track of where their 11 people are on the map, and direct them through whispers or chat while not interfering with the direction and coordination coming from the actual event lead. There will need to be players willing to switch groups to share quest. The fact is that with each addition groups the problems and inconveniences multiply. If you don't have people willing and capable, you end up with chaos and attendees of the event don't have a lot of fun.

    This change is going to make a lot of things more difficult and some groups/guilds will make it work and be just fine. Others such as the RP guilds and smaller social guilds could face a great deal of problems that will kill their event attendance and the leaderships desire to even run events. The social aspect of all types of groups are going to suffer from this change.

    This is a bad decision on ZoS's part. Anything that puts these kind of road blocks on social activities in a MMO is just a bad idea.
  • dvonpm
    dvonpm
    ✭✭✭✭
    I haven't even noticed lag in overland content. Cyrodiil and trials yes, a bit at Alik'r dolmens, but this seems like serious overkill. Plus we already know it didn't much improve performance and they had already said something about mysterious behavioral changes.

    I'm not saying overland lag doesn't exist, but this sounds like the cure is worse than the problem. I wouldn't make that trade.

    Though I mostly pvp and even with a high end comp it's really, really bad so my bar for what intolerable lag is may be way off lol.

    Group chats where group crowns enter the channel for the group would really help. As would some kind of squad lead marker.
  • Jaraal
    Jaraal
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    lillybit wrote: »
    I don't remember anyone ever complaining about performance in overland to the extent that it needs this "improvement." I wonder if the real issue is that the game can't handle more than 6 companions in a group so they're making sure it can never happen.

    It's the Elder Scrolls' version of Skynet. Think about it........ at some point, Companions will be the only ones left.



    "Performance improvements" will only become complete when there is no one left to complain about it.
    RIP Bosmer Nation. 4/4/14 - 2/25/19.
  • JoeCapricorn
    JoeCapricorn
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    code65536 wrote: »
    Hi everyone,

    First, we wanted to thank you all for providing so much valuable feedback on the change to group sizes in this update. We understand there are situations where having a larger group size is desired and makes some activities more enjoyable.

    As some of you have guessed, this change ultimately comes down to performance. We’ve been continually looking at ways to improve performance and stability across the game and we found reducing the group size was an effective way to ensure there would be fewer situations where you hit critical memory. Additionally, there’s a fair amount of data that has to be exchanged on the backend for every person in your group. By limiting the group size to 12, we’re introducing additional performance gains.

    Thanks again for taking the time to share your thoughts with us on this topic. We appreciate it, and we hope this helps provide additional context for the change.

    @ZOS_GinaBruno When people complain about performance, they're generally complaining about performance in Cyrodiil or in trials: two places where group sizes are already limited to 12.

    This change extends that limit to places like Deshaan. When was the last time someone complained about performance in Deshaan? I can't recall any cases of this; can you?

    The only time I had a serious performance hit, that I can remember, was when there was an event where an absolutely HUGE number of players were all gathered in one spot.

    I did the Alik'r Dolmen Grind shortly after the start of Jester's Festival on my baby Warden, and there were so many people at each dolmen that the frame-rate would go down to around 15. I very much doubt it was because there were several full 24-player groups going around, because a lot of people just ran between dolmens. I only grouped up initially to get the wayshrines easily! Once I knew the order of dolmens I just went.

    It was still playable though. I didn't lag out or crash. It wasn't unstable like it would have been in Cyrodiil.

    In the past, the only other zone that I encountered zone-wide lag was Craglorn. But even then that was during peak hours, and it was one or two years ago. I've been in zones with a similarly large number of players that haven't suffered from lag, so the issue going on in Craglorn at the time must have been fixed in the meantime. And they didn't need to reduce group sizes to do so!

    @ZOS_GinaBruno So I implore you, please do not implement this change. This will not just make some activities difficult to do, but nearly impossible. It will hurt many many guilds. It will impact players with disabilities. I know you are a community manager and not necessarily someone who makes the decisions, but this is something that must not go live! It is so important that in this instance our feedback is more than just taken into consideration, but a driving force behind the decision.

    I simp for vampire lords and Glemyos Wildhorn
  • gariondavey
    gariondavey
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Jaraal wrote: »
    lillybit wrote: »
    I don't remember anyone ever complaining about performance in overland to the extent that it needs this "improvement." I wonder if the real issue is that the game can't handle more than 6 companions in a group so they're making sure it can never happen.

    It's the Elder Scrolls' version of Skynet. Think about it........ at some point, Companions will be the only ones left.



    "Performance improvements" will only become complete when there is no one left to complain about it.

    They are adding companions so when we all get sucked into the game log horizon style, we have more npcs to befriend
  • TheAlphaRaider
    TheAlphaRaider
    ✭✭✭
    Hi everyone,

    First, we wanted to thank you all for providing so much valuable feedback on the change to group sizes in this update. We understand there are situations where having a larger group size is desired and makes some activities more enjoyable.

    As some of you have guessed, this change ultimately comes down to performance. We’ve been continually looking at ways to improve performance and stability across the game and we found reducing the group size was an effective way to ensure there would be fewer situations where you hit critical memory. Additionally, there’s a fair amount of data that has to be exchanged on the backend for every person in your group. By limiting the group size to 12, we’re introducing additional performance gains.

    Thanks again for taking the time to share your thoughts with us on this topic. We appreciate it, and we hope this helps provide additional context for the change.

    I agree with it. Do what you need to do to fix the servers? Idk how this limits anyone severly or more than an inconvenience.
  • gariondavey
    gariondavey
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Around 300 replies, over 10k views
  • tyran404_ESO
    tyran404_ESO
    ✭✭✭
    By the unfortunate looks of things i'll be feed backing this on live soon enough too, every day. I'm already scrambling to try and figure out how to save my guild events now with this terrible change. Bleh.
    ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ஜ۩۞۩ஜ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
    DAMN THIS COMMENT IS FANCY!
    ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ஜ۩۞۩ஜ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
  • VaranisArano
    VaranisArano
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Varana wrote: »
    I'm not in favor. To me, this seems like ZOS is cannibalizing core aspects of gameplay to chase minor gains in performance.

    Except this is, as you assumed, actually about Companions, and a group of 12 players + 12 companions would eat more resources than 24 players, for some internal reason, so they feel like they need to prevent that from happening.

    Okay, this is veering into the territory of wild speculation, but what can you do when ZOS refuses to communicate with honesty. :(

    For sure, I do think that Companions play into this. They are the new factor in the equation, and since we know from PVP that there wasn't a tangible performance improvement from dropping groups, I'm kinda skeptical that overland PVE is going to see many gains from this.

    But leaving that aside, I wanted to address why, if ZOS is doing this for the stated reasons, they do cut down on intra group data exchange moving from one 24 person group to two 12-person groups. And unfortunately, they cut even more communication with the hassle of trying to coordinate two groups of 12 players mean that guilds quit trying and only run one group. (That's not to say that there aren't other causes of data exchange involved, but rather that ZOS seems to be targeting intra-group data exchanges.)

    Ultimately, ESO will keep on trucking because most players will carry on.
  • RedMuse
    RedMuse
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ajkb78 wrote: »
    It's clear that some people, for legitimate reasons, have found groups larger than 12 useful.

    We'll have to take ZoS's word for it that groups of larger than 12 somehow impact performance because of calculations done between each member of the group.

    OK. So what compromise might suit everyone?

    On console each guild has a number of voice chat channels. (Voice chat is a core game feature on console; I realise that's not the case on PC.)
    But why couldn't each guild have a number of text chat channels too, which you could join or leave in the same way as you join or leave the existing console voice chat channels? That way RP events (which I'm gathering from the discussion are typically the kind that require lots of text-channel group discussion) could just grab guild chat 2 or guild chat 3 or whatever and carry on with no limit (or a really high limit, at any rate) to channel size, so GMs would be happy. It doesn't even seem like it would require much new functionality in the game, text chat is already there as a feature. It wouldn't require heavy computation among channel members as they wouldn't actually be grouped, so ZoS would be happy.

    The problem is that none of this solves non-guild or cross guild events, no matter their nature. How do I communicate with 20 other people only five of which I share a guild with? In the current way of things I can make a group, post change I simply can't. Which means far fewer interactions on the whole and am going to hurt any social activity that happens outside or cross guilds immensely and RP most of all. Which in turn will hurt guilds because a cutdown to social activities on the whole will mean less overall activity in the game, which in turn means less guild activities.

    What I would like to know is how much improvement does ZOS keep as benchmark for keeping this change? Like how high, or low, does it need to be before they're willing to scrap it and reverse it. If they're not willing to do that which steps are they going to take to alleviate the harm this will do on the overall health of the community and make it easier for us to make social activities in the game that takes place out-of-guilds or cross-guilds? Or in-guild for that matter as that's going to be a major pita with this too? How will ZOS make life easier for guilds that aren't about hard core PvP or PvE?
  • Extinct_Solo_Player
    Extinct_Solo_Player
    ✭✭✭✭
    don't know why you care about group caps when you should actually be asking for zos to fix the damn horrible performance with the huge delay in casting skills and such lol.
    Edited by Extinct_Solo_Player on May 18, 2021 1:30PM
  • RedMuse
    RedMuse
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    don't know why you care about group caps when you should actually be asking for zos to fix the damn horrible performance with the huge delay in casting skills and such lol.

    Out of curiosity, where in overland PVE are you experiencing a huge delay in casting skills and such horrible performance?

    Only place I can think of that happening is Alik'r dolmen runs, Southern Elsweyr dragons and Harrowstorms. Two of these three activities do not usually have groups, certainly not large groups, running them. You see the performance impact regardless of group, or lack of it, because there's a lot of people there fighting simultaneously. It has Jack all to do with groups.
Sign In or Register to comment.