12 person group limit? Whaaaaaat?

nuvak

hashsnob wrote: »

Anyone else find it hilarious this is the thread with the most pts feedback? Break the game, change everything, turn end game upside down, that's perfectly acceptable. But mess with the role players party's sizes, there's gonna be hell to pay!

MMOs don't succeed with flawless game mechanics, they succeed with a good and thriving community. And this is bad for social interactions like RP but also many others.

Charon_on_Vacation

it was a very important decision.
ZOS wanted to introduce a new genre of game.
MDRPGs!
Massively Downsized Role Playing Games!

ajkb78

anadandy wrote: »

ajkb78 wrote: »

BlueRaven wrote: »

This is an awful change. We have very active guild WB runs that are almost always full.

This is a bad change.

Edit: Oh! I almost forgot about my housing guilds house tours! This will be a problem for them as well!

This does seem like a totally unnecessary change, but you've still got X channels of guild voice chat as well as guild text chat. Can always have multiple groups and use the guild channels for voice comms, guild text for descriptive text walls for RP. I'm guessing there are few RP guilds that are so busy they have multiple large-scale (>12 player) RP events running simultaneously. Still, hopefully they hear you and reverse it.

PC doesn't have native voice chat. There can be 500 people in a guild, a group of 12 "spamming" guild chat to everyone is a major pain point.

Ew, yuck. No voice chat on a system that doesn't even have its own system-wide chat system like PSN party chat? Why on earth would this be omitted? Isn't there even a plugin to integrate Discord voice chat or something?

I'm actually feeling sorry for you PC players now.

Sephyr

skyrimfantasy wrote: »

Cyro spilling over into pve again, disappointing but not a surprise

I know that it's frustrating, however PvP isn't the problem with this. It's another symptom to the overall problem and that's these performance sweeps seem more like shots in the dark than actual working solutions. I'd much rather shine a spotlight on that than blaming this mode or that mode when it's not the users fault for a faulty product or changes due to the negligence of performance.

Sandman929

I don't see this as a change due to PvP, because the 12 person group cap in PvP no longer makes any sense either. When healing/buffing was limited to group members, reducing the group cap made sense (assuming then that the cap would help performance).
ZOS reverted the healing/buffing group members only change, but for some reason left the group cap. If we can zerg heal/buff, what difference doesn't the group number make? None. Grouped or not, we get heals from everyone.

VaranisArano

ajkb78 wrote: »

anadandy wrote: »

ajkb78 wrote: »

BlueRaven wrote: »

This is an awful change. We have very active guild WB runs that are almost always full.

This is a bad change.

Edit: Oh! I almost forgot about my housing guilds house tours! This will be a problem for them as well!

This does seem like a totally unnecessary change, but you've still got X channels of guild voice chat as well as guild text chat. Can always have multiple groups and use the guild channels for voice comms, guild text for descriptive text walls for RP. I'm guessing there are few RP guilds that are so busy they have multiple large-scale (>12 player) RP events running simultaneously. Still, hopefully they hear you and reverse it.

PC doesn't have native voice chat. There can be 500 people in a guild, a group of 12 "spamming" guild chat to everyone is a major pain point.

Ew, yuck. No voice chat on a system that doesn't even have its own system-wide chat system like PSN party chat? Why on earth would this be omitted? Isn't there even a plugin to integrate Discord voice chat or something?

I'm actually feeling sorry for you PC players now.

I think ZOS didn't bother to make their own voice chat when there are a number of free programs that do the same thing available on PC.

Goregrinder

MasterWarrior wrote: »

I don't like this change.

Goregrinder wrote: »

master_vanargand wrote: »

I agree with group size to 12.
12 is just the right size for a squad.

Having played tons of Planetside, I agree. 12 is a nice round number and has enough players to coordinate with each other to performance whatever task is at hand.

But this isn't Planetside though. ESO should have max party size of 24. In fact I would like that to be increased to 30 or 40, would make ESO a lot more fun and can organize activities for larger groups.

Nope it is not, however Cyrodiil is essentially the Sword and Stone version of a planetside map (RvRvR battle for control of the map by connecting nodes or bases to other ones). Planetside has squads of 12 players, with 4 squad making up a single platoon. effectively the platoon functions as a giant group...IF they all listen to the platoon lead, and if they can coordinate with each other. Squads are often broken up and sent to different bases, so 24 players don't need to be near each other in order to achieve a goal there. Platoon leads can talk to other platoon leads over comms and coordinate whatever objective they feel needs to be addressed.

While this is not Planetside, the point here is that 24 players being in a group vs 12 players being in a group is arbitrary if players can communicate and work as a team. Something similar can be achieved in ESO even without platoons or platoon chat etc. Really, you can have four12 man groups coordinating with each other, with each group lead coordinating via comms over which bases to hit or defend, with each group following what their group lead is telling them to do. That's large scale combat at it's best really. Coordination is the key, those who can coordinate the best usually come out on top.

Goregrinder

ajkb78 wrote: »

anadandy wrote: »

ajkb78 wrote: »

BlueRaven wrote: »

This is an awful change. We have very active guild WB runs that are almost always full.

This is a bad change.

Edit: Oh! I almost forgot about my housing guilds house tours! This will be a problem for them as well!

This does seem like a totally unnecessary change, but you've still got X channels of guild voice chat as well as guild text chat. Can always have multiple groups and use the guild channels for voice comms, guild text for descriptive text walls for RP. I'm guessing there are few RP guilds that are so busy they have multiple large-scale (>12 player) RP events running simultaneously. Still, hopefully they hear you and reverse it.

PC doesn't have native voice chat. There can be 500 people in a guild, a group of 12 "spamming" guild chat to everyone is a major pain point.

Ew, yuck. No voice chat on a system that doesn't even have its own system-wide chat system like PSN party chat? Why on earth would this be omitted? Isn't there even a plugin to integrate Discord voice chat or something?

I'm actually feeling sorry for you PC players now.

Integration is not really needed. VOIP apps just run in the background and work on top of whatever game you're playing. Discord even has their own overlay which is visible in game.

LuxanQualta

Reducing group size maximums to 12 is damaging to community support of the game and a slap in the face of guilds that engage in casual activities with large groups. Regardless of the rationale and logic of the change, it works to cause harm to guilds supporting casual players, which seem to be the vast majority of players.

I would think that guilds would be appreciated and valued as keeping and retaining the customer base by fostering an environment that leads to engaged customers who want to stay in the game due to friends. Chopping this off at the knees just can't be a good thing for business or game longevity.

BlueRaven

Goregrinder wrote: »

MasterWarrior wrote: »

I don't like this change.

Goregrinder wrote: »

master_vanargand wrote: »

I agree with group size to 12.
12 is just the right size for a squad.

Having played tons of Planetside, I agree. 12 is a nice round number and has enough players to coordinate with each other to performance whatever task is at hand.

But this isn't Planetside though. ESO should have max party size of 24. In fact I would like that to be increased to 30 or 40, would make ESO a lot more fun and can organize activities for larger groups.

Nope it is not, however Cyrodiil is essentially the Sword and Stone version of a planetside map (RvRvR battle for control of the map by connecting nodes or bases to other ones). Planetside has squads of 12 players, with 4 squad making up a single platoon. effectively the platoon functions as a giant group...IF they all listen to the platoon lead, and if they can coordinate with each other. Squads are often broken up and sent to different bases, so 24 players don't need to be near each other in order to achieve a goal there. Platoon leads can talk to other platoon leads over comms and coordinate whatever objective they feel needs to be addressed.

While this is not Planetside, the point here is that 24 players being in a group vs 12 players being in a group is arbitrary if players can communicate and work as a team. Something similar can be achieved in ESO even without platoons or platoon chat etc. Really, you can have four12 man groups coordinating with each other, with each group lead coordinating via comms over which bases to hit or defend, with each group following what their group lead is telling them to do. That's large scale combat at it's best really. Coordination is the key, those who can coordinate the best usually come out on top.

I am not sure what your point is.

This is about overland PvE content, not Cyrodiil. And this is about casual social groups, not regimented platoons taking strategic locations.The 24 person limit is important for guild wb groups (and the like), mainly because there is a LACK of coordination.

Goregrinder

BlueRaven wrote: »

Goregrinder wrote: »

MasterWarrior wrote: »

I don't like this change.

Goregrinder wrote: »

master_vanargand wrote: »

I agree with group size to 12.
12 is just the right size for a squad.

Having played tons of Planetside, I agree. 12 is a nice round number and has enough players to coordinate with each other to performance whatever task is at hand.

But this isn't Planetside though. ESO should have max party size of 24. In fact I would like that to be increased to 30 or 40, would make ESO a lot more fun and can organize activities for larger groups.

Nope it is not, however Cyrodiil is essentially the Sword and Stone version of a planetside map (RvRvR battle for control of the map by connecting nodes or bases to other ones). Planetside has squads of 12 players, with 4 squad making up a single platoon. effectively the platoon functions as a giant group...IF they all listen to the platoon lead, and if they can coordinate with each other. Squads are often broken up and sent to different bases, so 24 players don't need to be near each other in order to achieve a goal there. Platoon leads can talk to other platoon leads over comms and coordinate whatever objective they feel needs to be addressed.

While this is not Planetside, the point here is that 24 players being in a group vs 12 players being in a group is arbitrary if players can communicate and work as a team. Something similar can be achieved in ESO even without platoons or platoon chat etc. Really, you can have four12 man groups coordinating with each other, with each group lead coordinating via comms over which bases to hit or defend, with each group following what their group lead is telling them to do. That's large scale combat at it's best really. Coordination is the key, those who can coordinate the best usually come out on top.

I am not sure what your point is.

This is about overland PvE content, not Cyrodiil. And this is about casual social groups, not regimented platoons taking strategic locations.The 24 person limit is important for guild wb groups (and the like), mainly because there is a LACK of coordination.

The same functionality can be carried over to groups outside of Cyrodiil. People constantly communicate with their fellow guild members all the time even when they aren't grouped with them. They also tend to help random other players kill random NPC's without being grouped with them. Being grouped with other players isn't really preventing anyone from doing anything.
So only being able to group up with 11 other people isn't going to prevent you from communicating or coordinating with anyone beyond those 11 you're grouped with.

BlueRaven

Goregrinder wrote: »

BlueRaven wrote: »

Goregrinder wrote: »

MasterWarrior wrote: »

I don't like this change.

Goregrinder wrote: »

master_vanargand wrote: »

I agree with group size to 12.
12 is just the right size for a squad.

Having played tons of Planetside, I agree. 12 is a nice round number and has enough players to coordinate with each other to performance whatever task is at hand.

But this isn't Planetside though. ESO should have max party size of 24. In fact I would like that to be increased to 30 or 40, would make ESO a lot more fun and can organize activities for larger groups.

Nope it is not, however Cyrodiil is essentially the Sword and Stone version of a planetside map (RvRvR battle for control of the map by connecting nodes or bases to other ones). Planetside has squads of 12 players, with 4 squad making up a single platoon. effectively the platoon functions as a giant group...IF they all listen to the platoon lead, and if they can coordinate with each other. Squads are often broken up and sent to different bases, so 24 players don't need to be near each other in order to achieve a goal there. Platoon leads can talk to other platoon leads over comms and coordinate whatever objective they feel needs to be addressed.

While this is not Planetside, the point here is that 24 players being in a group vs 12 players being in a group is arbitrary if players can communicate and work as a team. Something similar can be achieved in ESO even without platoons or platoon chat etc. Really, you can have four12 man groups coordinating with each other, with each group lead coordinating via comms over which bases to hit or defend, with each group following what their group lead is telling them to do. That's large scale combat at it's best really. Coordination is the key, those who can coordinate the best usually come out on top.

I am not sure what your point is.

This is about overland PvE content, not Cyrodiil. And this is about casual social groups, not regimented platoons taking strategic locations.The 24 person limit is important for guild wb groups (and the like), mainly because there is a LACK of coordination.

The same functionality can be carried over to groups outside of Cyrodiil. People constantly communicate with their fellow guild members all the time even when they aren't grouped with them. They also tend to help random other players kill random NPC's without being grouped with them. Being grouped with other players isn't really preventing anyone from doing anything.
So only being able to group up with 11 other people isn't going to prevent you from communicating or coordinating with anyone beyond those 11 you're grouped with.

Our wb run actually involves 3 sister guilds, so guild chat is out. Not to mention guild chat is often filled with people who are just chatting. Sharing that space would be too chaotic.

And not everyone has discord, so voice command is out.

People also get dc’d, have to pause for phones or kids, and people simply get lost. They also have different speed mounts. Being able to open up a map and track where everyone is, is a huge deal.

Also we share quests, many times impromptu’ “Oh! I think I have a quest for this boss, let me share!”

Not to mention it helps everyone be in the correct shard.

Having large group wb runs have been really successful for so many years now, and they are fun! This will seriously cripple those runs.

RedMuse

Voice chat isn't a substitute for group text chat. Deaf people, HoH people and people with audio processing issues play this game and an in-game text channel through which things can be communicated and through which you can socialize is essential. The lack of custom chat channels is bad enough as it is, but with this change people who aren't 100% abled is even more alienated than they already are.

I could accept it if it was for a good reason. Or heck ANY reason. So far they've said nothing about why and there's no logical reason to this change at all so we're left puzzled and angry.

@ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_JessicaFolsom Just one question. Why? Why is this necessary. If there is some deep necessity to this change then okay, it is what it is. Doesn't mean it doesn't suck but sometimes changes that sucks are needed for one reason or another. But here there's no earthly logical reason to it, so could you please explain the necessity of it?

Aluna

RedMuse wrote: »

Voice chat isn't a substitute for group text chat. Deaf people, HoH people and people with audio processing issues play this game and an in-game text channel through which things can be communicated and through which you can socialize is essential. The lack of custom chat channels is bad enough as it is, but with this change people who aren't 100% abled is even more alienated than they already are.

Thank you for pointing that out! People tend to forget that disabled people exist. We have a deaf, a mute and a HoH person actively participating in our guild who obviously rely on text chats.

Kriskras99

[snip]

This seems like a terrible idea

[edited to remove image that bypassed profanity filter]

Zypheran

Now that we have have had an opportunity to test this on PTS, can I encourage any guild leader who's guild is affected by this change to ask their members to give feedback here on the forums. Be constructive, explain why it is an issue, but most importantly, if we want this decision to be reversed, we need strong player feedback.

Goregrinder

BlueRaven wrote: »

Goregrinder wrote: »

BlueRaven wrote: »

Goregrinder wrote: »

MasterWarrior wrote: »

I don't like this change.

Goregrinder wrote: »

master_vanargand wrote: »

I agree with group size to 12.
12 is just the right size for a squad.

Having played tons of Planetside, I agree. 12 is a nice round number and has enough players to coordinate with each other to performance whatever task is at hand.

But this isn't Planetside though. ESO should have max party size of 24. In fact I would like that to be increased to 30 or 40, would make ESO a lot more fun and can organize activities for larger groups.

Nope it is not, however Cyrodiil is essentially the Sword and Stone version of a planetside map (RvRvR battle for control of the map by connecting nodes or bases to other ones). Planetside has squads of 12 players, with 4 squad making up a single platoon. effectively the platoon functions as a giant group...IF they all listen to the platoon lead, and if they can coordinate with each other. Squads are often broken up and sent to different bases, so 24 players don't need to be near each other in order to achieve a goal there. Platoon leads can talk to other platoon leads over comms and coordinate whatever objective they feel needs to be addressed.

While this is not Planetside, the point here is that 24 players being in a group vs 12 players being in a group is arbitrary if players can communicate and work as a team. Something similar can be achieved in ESO even without platoons or platoon chat etc. Really, you can have four12 man groups coordinating with each other, with each group lead coordinating via comms over which bases to hit or defend, with each group following what their group lead is telling them to do. That's large scale combat at it's best really. Coordination is the key, those who can coordinate the best usually come out on top.

I am not sure what your point is.

This is about overland PvE content, not Cyrodiil. And this is about casual social groups, not regimented platoons taking strategic locations.The 24 person limit is important for guild wb groups (and the like), mainly because there is a LACK of coordination.

The same functionality can be carried over to groups outside of Cyrodiil. People constantly communicate with their fellow guild members all the time even when they aren't grouped with them. They also tend to help random other players kill random NPC's without being grouped with them. Being grouped with other players isn't really preventing anyone from doing anything.
So only being able to group up with 11 other people isn't going to prevent you from communicating or coordinating with anyone beyond those 11 you're grouped with.

Our wb run actually involves 3 sister guilds, so guild chat is out. Not to mention guild chat is often filled with people who are just chatting. Sharing that space would be too chaotic.

And not everyone has discord, so voice command is out.

People also get dc’d, have to pause for phones or kids, and people simply get lost. They also have different speed mounts. Being able to open up a map and track where everyone is, is a huge deal.

Also we share quests, many times impromptu’ “Oh! I think I have a quest for this boss, let me share!”

Not to mention it helps everyone be in the correct shard.

Having large group wb runs have been really successful for so many years now, and they are fun! This will seriously cripple those runs.

So it sounds like the need for a chat other than Zone chat people can utilize to communicate with other groups working towards the same goal. It would be like Raid Chat but persists outside of groups. I know ZOS probably feels like Zone chat currently fills that role, but hopefully they will add new chat channels that can be utilized by groups similar to yours for things like World Bosses, Harrowstorms, Dark Anchor grinds, etc.

SantieClaws

Or if you could link a number of separate groups somehow just for the purposes of chat?

So you don't share xp but you do share a common communication channel yes?

Yours with paws
Santie Claws

BlueRaven

SantieClaws wrote: »

Or if you could link a number of separate groups somehow just for the purposes of chat?

So you don't share xp but you do share a common communication channel yes?

Yours with paws
Santie Claws

That may work, if we could still track everyone and all the groups could share a channel.

But just keeping groups at 24 seems a much easier solution.

DocFrost72

One of the big reasons this worries me is that I like to see rp done in the world. I won't get side tracked on a tangent about the proclivity of trolls to show up and be idiots, but what I will suggest is that while housing was a fantastic and welcome addition, it had an unintended and sever impact on roleplay in the open world.

Before housing, there were dozens of roleplay locations all over each base game faction. I remember the 2014/15 scene at the Dregs. And later Wind Keep, Fell's run, even the Wolf's head (I was DC). Once housing was implemented, there was a sharp decrease in local groups. The rift has dried up, as has Fell's for the most part. I know of only one regularly inhabited RP spot now.

One of the big things I grappled with was that housing offered something even if it took other things away. Yes, finding spontaneous roleplay is harder now, but we can also curate our experience if trolls become too much. We can host gatherings large and small, from 2 members to 25, in our own custom areas that let us express ourselves.

I don't see anything roleplayers get for this group size reduction to offset the harm it will do. Pointedly and perhaps a little bit too blunt, I don't see a benefit at all.

That is my main frustration with this change; a very palpable decline in the roleplay experience without any sort of compensation to at least sweeten the deal.

Vaeshti

hashsnob wrote: »

Anyone else find it hilarious this is the thread with the most pts feedback? Break the game, change everything, turn end game upside down, that's perfectly acceptable. But mess with the role players party's sizes, there's gonna be hell to pay!

Large communities of active players are what keeps games alive.
RPers, social guilds, things of that ilk are a huge proponent of that.They are ecosystems that propel the in-game economy, and are often more likely to indulge in crown store spending. (Cosmetics, housing, etc.)

So yeah. It's real dumb to put forth a pointless change that only curtails that.

JoeCapricorn

It's because this change does not do anything to benefit the game, only hurt it. Simple as that.

There does not seem to be any logic to it.

It must not go live!

Sanctum74

I don’t even group and I was still hoping they would revert it in cyrodill since it caused so many long term and new players to leave the game since they can’t get groups anymore. Instead they decided to ruin pve too.

JoeCapricorn

I am also in favor of 24 player groups returning to Cyrodiil. I think that has been one of the biggest things that turned me off from PVP, because I am so used to running raids with my guild when doing so.

FLambda

I have nothing further to add other than my agreement that this is a terrible idea. The reasons have already been gone into in great detail by previous posters.

peacenote

I understand that in order to stay a good game that technically nothing should be off the table for consideration for enhancement. However there really are some things just core to what makes ESO... well, ESO, and should not be changed without a massively compelling reason.

This is one of those things. We have had 24 person groups for as far back as I can remember, and many many little in game traditions are built around this. Should NOT be changed unless it literally eradicated all disconnects, lag, crashes, and bad ping for all players everywhere with 100% consistency of improvement.

IrishLassy

Really bad idea for multiple reasons already mentioned. Please don't implement this change.

JoeCapricorn

peacenote wrote: »

I understand that in order to stay a good game that technically nothing should be off the table for consideration for enhancement. However there really are some things just core to what makes ESO... well, ESO, and should not be changed without a massively compelling reason.

This is one of those things. We have had 24 person groups for as far back as I can remember, and many many little in game traditions are built around this. Should NOT be changed unless it literally eradicated all disconnects, lag, crashes, and bad ping for all players everywhere with 100% consistency of improvement.

I am not sure, but I think groups were once maxed at 20 people and that was increased to 24. But that was so long ago as well...

I don't think there is a performance reason behind limiting groups. Doing so in Cyrodiil did not reduce zergs, nor did it help with performance.

It can't be because of Companions, can it? Sorcerers could summon two combat pets and theoretically a group of 24 sorcerers would be up to 72 combat actors.

Froil

So my thinking on why they're going to limit PvE group sizes is because of companions. If it were to remain 24, you'd have a full trial group and each of them'd bring out their companions to add a bit more damage. ZoS doesn't want that.

BlueRaven

Froil wrote: »

So my thinking on why they're going to limit PvE group sizes is because of companions. If it were to remain 24, you'd have a full trial group and each of them'd bring out their companions to add a bit more damage. ZoS doesn't want that.

Well first off, you can't bring companions into PvP areas, so that won't be an issue.

Secondly in trials/dungeons, companions cannot be used if the trial or dungeon is already full of players. They cannot exceed their maximum population allowance for the area. Meaning in a trial that only has ten actual players, only two people are allowed to use companions to fill out the group.

If overloading the outdoor PvE area is a problem, (But would it? Pretend the twenty four people were all strangers playing solo and they decided to attack WB at the same time with their companions. Wouldn't that just be the same as a twenty four person group all with companions? Anyway...) they can set a limitation similar to the trial/dungeon limitation and make it so the twenty four person group limit could be made up of players and companions combined.
So for example, twenty players in a group, only four could use companions.