Suggestion: Bring back 24 man groups for Overland content

xSurge

Having to split guild events up into two groups is a nightmare. I haven't done much PvP so I can't argue from the AW point of view. But I just feel like guild activities could really use the 24 man option when they're doing Lorebook and Skyshard runs and stuff. Maybe I just don't understand why it was lowered in the first place, but would be nice to be able to see all our guildies that are in the run on the map.

JoeCapricorn

They changed it for performance reasons. You'll be getting 0.01 more frames per second.

However, I do not notice any change in performance, and I feel that changing group maximum sizes is far worse than any potential "performance impact" 24-person groups has.

Unfortunately, the people most affected by this are guild leaders and not the everyday player so it's unlikely ZOS will ever listen to feedback. I'd like to be wrong though.

If the issue were the number of back-end messages being sent between each player, maybe a group that exceeds 12 could have a window pop up saying it is a "Social Group" conversion. What happens then is instead of so much combat related data being transmitted, it's really just position, group chat and such.

This may be simplifying it, but let's say there are 20 data points sent between each player in a group.

In a 12 person group this would result in 2,880 messages being passed through in total. But in a 24 person group, it's 11,520.

I feel that a better solution would be to reduce the data points (maybe it is more than 20, or less than 20. I have no idea, except there are a lot of hidden things that aren't readily apparent such as what loot a player grabs.)

If they implement a social group option and reduce the data points (position, online/offline, group chat, etc) to say, 5, then group sizes larger than 24 would be feasible. Just like when you add a 5th person to a group, there would be a notification saying you would be exceeding the limit for combat groups.

This way, most social events, especially RPing events that use groups for the group chat, would still be able to be done with groups. It might even be the case that they have something like this in the pipeline, but it probably won't be implemented until August or October.

xSurge

JoeCapricorn wrote: »

They changed it for performance reasons. You'll be getting 0.01 more frames per second.

However, I do not notice any change in performance, and I feel that changing group maximum sizes is far worse than any potential "performance impact" 24-person groups has.

Unfortunately, the people most affected by this are guild leaders and not the everyday player so it's unlikely ZOS will ever listen to feedback. I'd like to be wrong though.

If the issue were the number of back-end messages being sent between each player, maybe a group that exceeds 12 could have a window pop up saying it is a "Social Group" conversion. What happens then is instead of so much combat related data being transmitted, it's really just position, group chat and such.

This may be simplifying it, but let's say there are 20 data points sent between each player in a group.

In a 12 person group this would result in 2,880 messages being passed through in total. But in a 24 person group, it's 11,520.

I feel that a better solution would be to reduce the data points (maybe it is more than 20, or less than 20. I have no idea, except there are a lot of hidden things that aren't readily apparent such as what loot a player grabs.)

If they implement a social group option and reduce the data points (position, online/offline, group chat, etc) to say, 5, then group sizes larger than 24 would be feasible. Just like when you add a 5th person to a group, there would be a notification saying you would be exceeding the limit for combat groups.

This way, most social events, especially RPing events that use groups for the group chat, would still be able to be done with groups. It might even be the case that they have something like this in the pipeline, but it probably won't be implemented until August or October.

Yeah that makes sense. It'd be nice to see them attempt to address it in some manner in the future.It would be nice to plan future large guild events without the headache of trying to manage multiple groups for things as simple as Book and skyshard runs.

zharkovian

I guessed they dropped it to 12 because of the companion system.

Arunei

zharkovian wrote: »

I guessed they dropped it to 12 because of the companion system.

No, Gina posted several weeks after they announced the plan to decrease PvE groups to 12 for ALL content (aside from 4-man dungeons obviously) that it was for 'performance'. But everything they do seems to use 'performance' as the excuse, and yet...where are the performance increases from all this stuff? Apparently smaller groups send less data, but what I'd like to know is what's the difference between one group of 24 sending messages to the system compared to two groups of 12. Like...I admit all the time I know *** about coding, but it seems to me those two scenarios are likely going to result in at least roughly the same amount of data being transferred?

And even if the Companion system IS part of the reason for the change...why not just limit Companion use in groups, rather than affecting the entire playerbase (a lot of who probably won't ever really use the Companions) by reducing group size?

JoeCapricorn

Apparently it is for performance, which is hogwash since there hasn't been a noticeable performance increase.

ZOS needs to give us back 24 player groups!

ZOS_Lunar

Greetings!

As this topic already has an existing thread including a comment from Gina here, we are going to go ahead and close it. Please feel free to continue the discussion in the existing thread.

Thank you for your understanding, and please keep the Community Rules in mind when posting on the forums.