Dungeons for 2-6-8 ....even more than 12 players

mar1ano1987nrb18_ESO · July 2014

It would be very awesome if we had different options for group size in dungeons ...right now the options only are : group dungeons of 4 and trials for 12 people.
But what happen if you have 6 people, or if you have less than 12? there is no much to do except public dungeons, landscape content ..or pvp of course.
I would love to see this implemented in future updates, options are always welcome in my opinion.

what do you think ?

Welka · July 2014

It's already hard to gather 4 people for a random group dungeon, especially when you don't have an active and helpful guild. So 6, 8 or 12...

mar1ano1987nrb18_ESO · July 2014

Well, like you said ...that depends on the guild you are on. In my case: my guild rarely gets 12 vet 12 online at the same time (we have a lot of lower level people) so trials are off , The only pve option its to make 2 groups of 4 people and run 4 man dungeon, but there is always someone who is left behind (the number 5, the number 9 )
The other option is to go to Cyrodiil, but not all the people likes to pvp

UrQuan · July 2014

Welka wrote: »

It's already hard to gather 4 people for a random group dungeon, especially when you don't have an active and helpful guild. So 6, 8 or 12...

Yes, this.

Now, in an ideal world you could have dungeons that scale in difficulty to the number of people in the group, but I think that would be a lot of work to implement and properly balance.

Welka · July 2014

I think this was brought up at quakecon and I believe they plan on implementing some sort of difficulty scaling dynamically

Evergnar · July 2014

mar1ano1987nrb18_ESO wrote: »

It would be very awesome if we had different options for group size in dungeons ...right now the options only are : group dungeons of 4 and trials for 12 people.
But what happen if you have 6 people, or if you have less than 12? there is no much to do except public dungeons, landscape content ..or pvp of course.
I would love to see this implemented in future updates, options are always welcome in my opinion.

what do you think ?

I'd prefer zero restrictions. If you want to go die trying a 12 man dungeon have at it. I really don't see the point of player number restrictions in ESO.

SirAndy · July 2014

mar1ano1987nrb18_ESO wrote: »

what do you think ?

You forgot the group of 1 option ...
;-)

Lord_Hev · August 2014

A scaling feature would be great, and they touched upon this at Quakecon. They have plans to both scale to group leader + # of people in a group, Thus, it would seem group dungeons will become both solo/duoable + still a challenge for 4 man, because the statistics will balance and scale based on # of party members + Group leaders lvl.

I personally am eager for this to be added. I solo/duo 90% of the time. Would love to tackle these dungeons with my partner-in-crime.

We like to immersive ourselves in the dialogue and enviroment, and it can very overtly difficult to find 2 others to join us and play like this. So, ya. This is a win-win for everyone.

GFBStarWars · August 2014

could have a dungeon that need 2 4-players group to complete, each group will do a part and will meet at the end for boss fight.
still not more than that, finding good player in the vr content using the group finder is hard

Audigy · August 2014

mar1ano1987nrb18_ESO wrote: »

It would be very awesome if we had different options for group size in dungeons ...right now the options only are : group dungeons of 4 and trials for 12 people.
But what happen if you have 6 people, or if you have less than 12? there is no much to do except public dungeons, landscape content ..or pvp of course.
I would love to see this implemented in future updates, options are always welcome in my opinion.

what do you think ?

Well, Blizzard tried this with WOTLK and honestly, it didn't work out and they are trying to fix this with their new addon now.

A lot of smaller guilds died with WOTLK as their members ran away to the larger guilds where the top loot dropped. Players "abused" their small guilds as a springboard to be able to join the big ones.

You need to consider, if you have a 20 men raid then you will need about 30 players in your roster.

Smaller guilds will not have the members for this and they will need to rotate a lot at the smaller raids to gear up players. This however will make many people angry, as they don't like to be benched.

At the same time, the requirements for those 20 men trials will be the 12 men trials and for those the 4 mens ... Its a never-ending cycle and guilds will run into huge problems as we can witness at WOW since a few years.

Besides the problems for the guilds, ZO has to put resources into niche content - resources that will be missing from key features such as housing, new NPC guilds etc.

I think sticking to one size is the better option, it will give the Devs more time to design those while other content updates wont be held back for niche content either.

A possible solution to your request is a scaling feature, unfortunately have I not yet seen an MMO where this actually works. Blizzard tried this, but it failed.

13 players is the optimum setup for a raid atm. bosses are easiest and loot is best, that's why they bring back the 20 men HC raids with WOTD.

chimneyswift_ESO · August 2014

I think it'd be great to see Dungeons for 1-2 players at minimum...probably 12 players max. But yes, I agree that having dungeons sized at 2, 4, 6, 8, 12 would be really fun!

Anvos · August 2014

2 is really hard to do as other than relying on stuff like needing two people levers and such its hard to balance something between being doable by 1 or 2 people.

elphaba_thropp · August 2014

Its much more fun working in a duo or group, so developers should encourage this more by blocking some quests/dungeons off unless you are in a group. This might encourage people to get in the habit of using group finder more regularly. ATM I am playing 95% solo which is not why I rolled a healer but its too much hassle trying to setup a group.

Sotha_Sil · August 2014

12 is fine. More would mean gathering more and more "staff" users with the current skill unbalance and it would emphasize the current weaknesses of the game. Until the stamina builds are fixed, I wouldn't ask for something else.

Anvos · August 2014

elphaba_thropp wrote: »

Its much more fun working in a duo or group, so developers should encourage this more by blocking some quests/dungeons off unless you are in a group. This might encourage people to get in the habit of using group finder more regularly. ATM I am playing 95% solo which is not why I rolled a healer but its too much hassle trying to setup a group.

Your argument is flawed since it seems to forget that with the nerfing of vet zones barely anything that isn't a group dungeon, trial, or craglorn is difficult enough to need others.

Seriously dolmens in vet are soloable unless you get certain stronger drops like multiple harvestors or storm atronachs. Vet Public dungeons have become a joke were you can solo the group challenges. Also challenges in vet only require a group if their are multiple enemies or it has elite immunities.

Cozzaa89 · August 2015

Looking for a team on the EU server in ebonheart pact for 12man

Draxys · August 2015

Evergnar wrote: »

mar1ano1987nrb18_ESO wrote: »

It would be very awesome if we had different options for group size in dungeons ...right now the options only are : group dungeons of 4 and trials for 12 people.
But what happen if you have 6 people, or if you have less than 12? there is no much to do except public dungeons, landscape content ..or pvp of course.
I would love to see this implemented in future updates, options are always welcome in my opinion.

what do you think ?

I'd prefer zero restrictions. If you want to go die trying a 12 man dungeon have at it. I really don't see the point of player number restrictions in ESO.

Unless they changed it at some point, you can already do this. I know for sure you can go into a vet dungeon with less than 4. Me and 2 guildmates 3 manned the pledges a couple weeks ago. And there are well known videos of DKs and NBs soloing aetherian archive from when craglorn first came out. I'm assuming that hasn't changed.

Eshelmen · August 2015

IC DLC!
24 man groups in a public dungeon!

Kuroinu · August 2015

I don't think you'd necessarily need to scale the difficulty of the content for the number of players, that would be adjusted solely by the number of players. To be honest, that's part of the fun of why people like soloing and duoing Group Dungeons; because it makes them more of a challenge compared to having a full group. Aside from being slightly more convenient to just quickly group-and-go.

There may be group "checks" in certain Trials/Dungeons that may have to be slightly adjusted for a smaller group. But this might not be a massive undertaking like some would believe. However, I'm no expert on the behind the scenes of making a Trial/Dungeon and its rules.

Scyantific · August 2015

I would be in support of either 6-man or 8-man dungeons because our guild is starting to get more people hitting the Vet Ranks.

Hell, we did a Craglorn run a while back with some fresh VRs and ended up having to split off our 4 V14s to help the others get through the 4-man delves.

Most of them aren't hardcore enough to push for v14-v16 and immediately start doing trials, but they're not against doing group dungeons.

NewBlacksmurf · August 2015

Personally I don't think the dungeons can handle more ppl in a party.
When you think of the Vet versions it's really based on 4 ppl. If there were more party members those easy dungeons would become like the level 1-50 content OR it would require a lot of development which aid rather see put into the future DLC.

Maybe they'll add more 10 man encounters for us all

RizaHawkeye · August 2015

UrQuan wrote: »

Welka wrote: »

It's already hard to gather 4 people for a random group dungeon, especially when you don't have an active and helpful guild. So 6, 8 or 12...

Yes, this.

Now, in an ideal world you could have dungeons that scale in difficulty to the number of people in the group, but I think that would be a lot of work to implement and properly balance.

Yes, but what a perfect world it would be ...

Think of the problems it would solve.