Is there any info on what is the max party size in ARR ?
Edited, Feb 26th 2013 2:40pm by Maldavian
·English·Theme
- Forums
- Final Fantasy XIV
- General Discussion
- Party members
Party membersFollow
I don't think they've announced any changes from 1.0 in regards to party sizes yet. Still 8 as far as we know.
Eight seems like a really big party to me... hell, two more people and it's the size of a raid in most games.
I wonder what party size content will be balanced against.. for instance does a dungeon through the LFG system require 8 people? That might make for some very serious queue times.
I wonder what party size content will be balanced against.. for instance does a dungeon through the LFG system require 8 people? That might make for some very serious queue times.
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
Scholar
18 posts
Naoki Yoshida said that party in ARR are 8 man and raids are for 3 parties = 24 man raids :)
Edited, Feb 26th 2013 3:02pm by Waiwan
Edited, Feb 26th 2013 3:02pm by Waiwan
I'm curious what kind of stat bonus you get with 8. I really wish I had paid attention to what the bonus was with 4 during my hands on.
Quote:
Q: Will there be any changes to 8-man parties in A Realm Reborn? Will there be content for solo players or smaller parties?
A: We’ll continue to add content like Skirmish that can be played in parties of four, and those that can be enjoyed without worrying about numbers.
We are preparing content known as a “Full Active Time Event.†It borrows the words “active time†from the FINAL FANTASY series. I think this will be appearing very often in our PR activities from here on out.
It will be difficult to explain the system without a video. For example, an NM pops. A notification of this is sent to all players in the zone, who then converge on the NM. Parties are automatically formed, and a battle begins. The NM is defeated, rewards are doled out, and the players go their separate ways.
Things like Hamlet Defense and Caravan Security will be considered Full Active Time Events. With this system, many different things will take place in many different places. That’s how I’d like you to think of it for now.
Players will be able to experience it in the Beta Test.
A: We’ll continue to add content like Skirmish that can be played in parties of four, and those that can be enjoyed without worrying about numbers.
We are preparing content known as a “Full Active Time Event.†It borrows the words “active time†from the FINAL FANTASY series. I think this will be appearing very often in our PR activities from here on out.
It will be difficult to explain the system without a video. For example, an NM pops. A notification of this is sent to all players in the zone, who then converge on the NM. Parties are automatically formed, and a battle begins. The NM is defeated, rewards are doled out, and the players go their separate ways.
Things like Hamlet Defense and Caravan Security will be considered Full Active Time Events. With this system, many different things will take place in many different places. That’s how I’d like you to think of it for now.
Players will be able to experience it in the Beta Test.
They didn't really answer. That was taken from the live letter back in November.
Adding source. http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/threads/58180-Letter-from-the-Producer-LIVE-Part-IV-Q-A-Summary
Edited, Feb 26th 2013 2:56pm by Geffe
I believe nothing has change as far as the max 8 party members for most of the endgame content, but you can see on the ARR dungeon video that they have 4. So I imagen that there will be 4 and 8 members dungeon content and Yoshi-P said that raids will be 24 members. That is why alot of endgame LS are recruiting to get the 24 members number for raids.
Since eight is quite a lot for an instance I have a small hope that the chocobo companions are good enough to use as a "stupid" party member for instances as well. When I played SWTOR with one of my brothers and a friend we always used a companion as the last party member. Partly because it was more convinient, but also because it was quite fun to have an additional thing to consider and use.
Personally I prefer a more intimate 4-5 man party. Easier to build, easier to converse, easier to arrange with friends. The bigger the party, the harder everything is. I'm also reminded of all the full-alliance raids in FFXI where no one was -allowed- to talk because managing that many people was just a huge headache for the leader.
Kachi wrote:
Personally I prefer a more intimate 4-5 man party. Easier to build, easier to converse, easier to arrange with friends. The bigger the party, the harder everything is. I'm also reminded of all the full-alliance raids in FFXI where no one was -allowed- to talk because managing that many people was just a huge headache for the leader.
I would agree actually. Eight is quite a lot and while it doesn't have to go as low as four, I would be happy with less than eight for sure.
8 was too many. It took too long to form the party, communication wasn't tight, and it felt like an alliance. and content was all meant to be done with a full 8 player party. I'm not sure what they were thinking with some of the things in this game...
they probably wont change the party member count sadly, I personally think about 5-player content is fun , or 4
seems like a lot of ARR content will further stray away from this though with giant cluster f-ck activities that require no tactics or communication
Edited, Feb 27th 2013 7:24am by Poubelle
they probably wont change the party member count sadly, I personally think about 5-player content is fun , or 4
seems like a lot of ARR content will further stray away from this though with giant cluster f-ck activities that require no tactics or communication
Edited, Feb 27th 2013 7:24am by Poubelle
Kachi wrote:
Personally I prefer a more intimate 4-5 man party. Easier to build, easier to converse, easier to arrange with friends. The bigger the party, the harder everything is. I'm also reminded of all the full-alliance raids in FFXI where no one was -allowed- to talk because managing that many people was just a huge headache for the leader.
I totally agree. FFFXI's full party of six was just fine, but I actually enjoyed smaller ones. It's probably going to be eight men in again. Not sure what the reason is. Just to be different from FFXI perhaps?
Good thing about the instanced dungeons is that you don't need a full party, and you can go in at higher levels than recommended, like we did with our 4 level 35's for Toto-Rak.
So let me get this straight:
Overleveled for FATE? You get NOTHING! You LOSE! Good DAY, Sir!
Overleveled for dungeon? NO PROBLEM!
Seems a bit backwards to me. The one that actually requires a bit of planning you could just faceroll, while the one you might stumble upon completely by accident acts like it doesn't even want you there.
Overleveled for FATE? You get NOTHING! You LOSE! Good DAY, Sir!
Overleveled for dungeon? NO PROBLEM!
Seems a bit backwards to me. The one that actually requires a bit of planning you could just faceroll, while the one you might stumble upon completely by accident acts like it doesn't even want you there.
well, in pretty much every game if you're overleveled for a dungeon you won't need a full party of course...
and Kachi, he didn't say that their party benefited at all from the dungeon. they probably didnt
I mean doing a low level dungeon if you're over levelled usually means if anything getting low level gear that isnt useful to you anymore, and probably no EXP
Edited, Feb 27th 2013 8:38am by Poubelle
and Kachi, he didn't say that their party benefited at all from the dungeon. they probably didnt
I mean doing a low level dungeon if you're over levelled usually means if anything getting low level gear that isnt useful to you anymore, and probably no EXP
Edited, Feb 27th 2013 8:38am by Poubelle
FATE's awards are probably different than a dungeons?
The one FATE I did I was too high to get any reward from, but perhaps FATEs are more about XP than items whereas dungeons are more about items than XP? Just a thought.
The one FATE I did I was too high to get any reward from, but perhaps FATEs are more about XP than items whereas dungeons are more about items than XP? Just a thought.
If that were the case, why bring up the fact that you "can" do it? That's like saying I can work as a game designer for SE. They won't pay me or acknowledge my work, but I can still do it!
Because if you want some item that drops from a dungeon you can get a higher level group to do it just for the loot instead of the XP.
Wint wrote:
FATE's awards are probably different than a dungeons?
The one FATE I did I was too high to get any reward from, but perhaps FATEs are more about XP than items whereas dungeons are more about items than XP? Just a thought.
The one FATE I did I was too high to get any reward from, but perhaps FATEs are more about XP than items whereas dungeons are more about items than XP? Just a thought.
Wint wrote:
FATE's awards are probably different than a dungeons?
The one FATE I did I was too high to get any reward from, but perhaps FATEs are more about XP than items whereas dungeons are more about items than XP? Just a thought.
The one FATE I did I was too high to get any reward from, but perhaps FATEs are more about XP than items whereas dungeons are more about items than XP? Just a thought.
I guess that'd be fine, though it seems like something of a shame to restrict the rewards as such. Either the FATEs become leveling tools that get boring quickly through repetition, or they become rarities that one can't expect to experience with any consistency.
Wint wrote:
Because if you want some item that drops from a dungeon you can get a higher level group to do it just for the loot instead of the XP.
Wint wrote:
Because if you want some item that drops from a dungeon you can get a higher level group to do it just for the loot instead of the XP.
This is all starting to smack of a poorly constructed incentive system.
I'm just guessing here, you know my experience with FATE was limited in my hands on, and I didn't even bother to check the treasure when we finished Toto-Rak because I wanted to get on to another scenario they had outlined.
I figured as much, but I'm feeling chatty and didn't want to kill the conversation.
Though in fairness to them, I'm also very, very tired. I don't even trust myself to do any work because of my impaired judgment.
Though in fairness to them, I'm also very, very tired. I don't even trust myself to do any work because of my impaired judgment.
First of all, be happy that the party sizes is 8. At release of 1.0 the max party size was 10, it was crazy trying to get 10 people together but it was fun for leveling in guildleves. Fate is open world attacks, probably SE don't want for a level 50 come and mess around level 20 fate and try to take the rewards from the players that needs them.
Dungeons will have a level sincronization and are intance so other than your group, you cannot mess with anybody else. Other than the achivement; dungeon gear is usually untradedable so you cannot take any advance by trying to sell it and the gear will be so low if you are a level 35 on a lv15 dungeon that it will be really useless for you.
I think that is the main reason for allowing higher levels to hit the dungeons while fate not, it was aggrevating when a lv50 player will come to a lv10 behest and grab all of the mobs just to mess with the players doing the behest in 1.0.
Dungeons will have a level sincronization and are intance so other than your group, you cannot mess with anybody else. Other than the achivement; dungeon gear is usually untradedable so you cannot take any advance by trying to sell it and the gear will be so low if you are a level 35 on a lv15 dungeon that it will be really useless for you.
I think that is the main reason for allowing higher levels to hit the dungeons while fate not, it was aggrevating when a lv50 player will come to a lv10 behest and grab all of the mobs just to mess with the players doing the behest in 1.0.
Yeah, I should be grateful and appreciative that it's better than 1.0!
seems like that's the defense for everything ARR related. It doesn't matter if it's content seen in dozens of other games that isn't particularly exciting/engaging. its waaaaay better than 1.0.
it needs to be more than just "better than 1.0" for people to pay for it. I'm talking non-fanboys.
Edited, Feb 27th 2013 9:54am by Poubelle
seems like that's the defense for everything ARR related. It doesn't matter if it's content seen in dozens of other games that isn't particularly exciting/engaging. its waaaaay better than 1.0.
it needs to be more than just "better than 1.0" for people to pay for it. I'm talking non-fanboys.
Edited, Feb 27th 2013 9:54am by Poubelle
FedeMax wrote:
I think that is the main reason for allowing higher levels to hit the dungeons while fate not, it was aggrevating when a lv50 player will come to a lv10 behest and grab all of the mobs just to mess with the players doing the behest in 1.0.
I figured that was a bit obvious. I don't see what the complaint is with encouraging higher levels refrain from lower level F.A.T.E.s. I mean if fate was about killing mobs etc for exp/loot, It really wouldn't be fun for that over lvled *** to be there when he should just go do a F.A.T.E. for his level. It was always annoying seeing that level 30 at the level 20 behest killing the exp for everyone. Didn't matter if you didn't invite him, he'd just run around killing the mobs anyway, defeating the whole purpose.
Edited, Feb 27th 2013 11:31am by GDLYL
But that's kind of the problem. If these FATEs are really so fun, people WILL do them whether you give them a reward or not. And if they're not, then that's obviously not good either.
This is where you can see an incentive system starting to show signs of weakness: when you have content that people want to do, but you don't reward them for doing it. As important as anything else, successful games align player goals with enjoyable tasks. Narrow windows for completing content (especially in a game that will probably suffer from a lack of content, at least a little bit) suggest that the content is being managed poorly as a finite resource.
This is where you can see an incentive system starting to show signs of weakness: when you have content that people want to do, but you don't reward them for doing it. As important as anything else, successful games align player goals with enjoyable tasks. Narrow windows for completing content (especially in a game that will probably suffer from a lack of content, at least a little bit) suggest that the content is being managed poorly as a finite resource.
Recent Visitors: 256
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (256)
- Forums
- Final Fantasy XIV
- General Discussion
- Party members
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC