I love DCUO so can you add a party-size option already?

Discussion in 'Gotham City (General Gameplay)' started by The Con, Nov 30, 2022.

  1. the solowing Steadfast Player

    Heres how i look at it.

    You get your AQS.

    Immedately endgame players will sub-section themselves off into sub groups running in as few player groups as possible.

    Queues increase due to the subsections of players youve taken out of the general queue to allow them to run in smaller sub-groups themselves.

    If i can AQS and 4 man queue sub construct, why wouldn't i?

    If i can AQS 4 man Nexus, why wouldnt i?

    If i could 4 man AQS queue and down 8 man content content, why wouldnt i 4 man it?
    • Like x 1
  2. Tiffany6223 Loyal Player

    General question: Wouldn’t theses players already be sub-sectioned off from the general gaming populace? It seems to be the assumption these players do not desire to game with the rest of us. If so, then aren’t they already absent from the player pool for the queue to draw from?

    Personally, I want a super raid of 16 players. :)
    • Like x 2
  3. Raven Nocturnal Loyal Player

    I would rather not resort to having to. Thus the reminder.
    • Like x 1
  4. Grim931 Committed Player

    Careful now, don't go making sense. They hate it when you make sense.

    LFG isn't a thing. Ignore everything going on in that chat. Everyone is using Omnibus as intended, and this would completely destroy the game. This would be the one thing to completely turn away new players... not all that other stuff that requires credit cards and other nonsense.

    /sarcasm.
    • Like x 3
  5. Reinheld Devil's Advocate

    As there will be SOOOOOO many of these players standing around being 'shut out', guess with AQS they could form a 5 or 6 man group and just queue in and beat the content themselves. Win-win I say.

    I'll be revving up some low level bank toon and hit you up tonight so you can include me in some runs....since you are so worried about not leaving people out. Mighty generous of you. What...no? You want to be selective on who can run in a run with you? BUT THINK ABOUT THE CHILDREN!!!:eek:

    BTW...this is yet another patented Proxy flip flop on a subject. I'd have to go back and find exactly what you said (and I have neither the time or interest in doing that), but when last we talked about it you said you didn't have issues with AQS in and of itself (meaning its not part of some 'unclamped' option). I'll also expect to see you in LFG shooting down anyone who dares ask for 'need 1 to queue and leave' cause guess what....that's AQS and its done every day by a ton of people. You can cover hero side and Solowing can get the villains....hall monitors to the rescue!
    • Like x 4
  6. Reinheld Devil's Advocate

    Because if you don't need a feat, 4 more people will be faster. Besides...this is a walk in point...you can already 4 man it, YET, we see it in omni queues today. Myth busted!

    Because if you don't need a feat, 4 more people will be faster. Besides...this is a walk in point...you can already 4 man it, YET, we see it in omni queues today. Myth busted!

    I was hoping you'd keep your list going with FOS2, FOS3 and Khandaq or the other batcaves so I could just keep copy/pasting that reply....shoot. Good pick on those 2 examples though....ooooh, what about gates and prime? What about if someone wanted to go in on those 4 man.....oh wait...they can. Myth busted!

    Because unless those +4 people literally just stand around, or drop out immediately (you aren't admitting that happens...are you?), having 4 more bodies will always make things faster, if even a tiny bit....as long as you are not trying for a feat, or at least feats that take any kind of control.

    If you are saying those queues would never pop because 4 more people would never queue the content or accept an omni for it, yeah....that's exactly why we need an option to go in 'as is'.
    • Like x 2
  7. The Con Dedicated Player

    Well.... Until you get back from travelling from the future... or show your receipt for that foolproof crystal ball... "How you see it" has as much meaning how any other player sees it... where they don't see this happening.
    • Like x 1
  8. Cyclonic Dedicated Player

    You'd think that by now... people would stop taking me so seriously and responding to me like we're in some kind of professional environment. Life is short. Have a food fight once in awhile.

    Again... the reasoning is simple. Right now... we require 8 people to enter an instance.

    What do you think happens when we no longer need 8 people? Less people are going to get into instances that they need.

    Why allow a pug into our raid? We only need the 5 of us anyway. They might screw up our feat. Now, there's 3 solo queuers that are having a more obnoxious time trying to get into a group for older content. People don't need them to fill the group any more and they haven't accumulated the experience or statistical prowess to be worth the risk of error.

    The primary purpose of the clamp is to make older content more enjoyable for new players. If they are going to follow that trend... and they decided in favor of this option... there would need to be measures in place to keep the little guy from being consistently discluded.
    • Like x 1
  9. The Con Dedicated Player

    And here's how I'll say I think you go wrong:


    A lot of end game players don't really play old content... hence, the empty and/or long queues...
    Endgamers going into old content mostly do so for feats... and they'll use LFG to get like-minded players and to avoid getting players not up to par, thus already "sub-sectioning" themselves off

    Personally, I don't really need this for my end-game characters.. I need this for my low-level alts that I'm trying to bring up to speed.
    • Like x 1
  10. the solowing Steadfast Player

    But i can section myself even further off and avoid even getting the full 8 group. Thus a small sub-group.

    If i can 5 man 8 man endgame content? Why wouldnt i?
    • Like x 1
  11. The Con Dedicated Player

    You mean like using LFG and "kicking" that both already exist?



    Yes..

    We already have the clamp....
    You can only do so many things that break the will of actual players for this concept of this lone, scared new player who possibly couldn't play the game without every concession thrown at them.

    How many people in this thread have already said "YES!! THIS IS A GREAT IDEA!!" as opposed to the same 3 naysayers, yet again, trying to tear apart an idea that seems that most are actually for?
    • Like x 1
  12. The Con Dedicated Player

    Just because you want to be a jerk to others players... Doesn't mean that everybody else would.



    Also..
    Yet again... THIS IS CONTENT THAT NOBODY ELSE IS ACTUALLY QUEUING FOR... NO ONE IS BEING LEFT BEHIND.

    Why would you choose to do endgame content with less than 8 players? Just for the challenge?? For feats that you'd excuse other for anyways??

    If you are trying to que tier 4 raids... and no one else is queuing for it.. Why shouldn't you be able to do the raid with less if you can??
    • Like x 1
  13. Reinheld Devil's Advocate

    [IMG]
    Why couldn't those 3 people just select the run they want and queue up...or queue omni and land where they land? Or are you saying that at any given time, there are only 8 people in game? While the population might be low, I doubt its 8.

    Also, this theory is a crock. It's predicated on a couple of assumptions. 1) that everyone who COULD run short would run short a majority of the time, and 2) that any 'short' groups are going to be closed to new people.

    We know the first one is not true, because we see runs in 'walk in' able locations a lot. Plenty of the duos that popped when I would run duo omnis are the 3 bottle duos or Trigon duos, all with walk in points, and as mentioned to Solowing, FOS's, Batcaves, Gates and Prime all pop pretty regularly, as does Trigon for alerts. ALL of these have walk in points, and have had at least 1 open spot every time it's popped in Omni, either those runs are made of up to 8 solo queuers, one of which needed the run we landed in, or some middle size group that could have walked in, but chose to queue for expediency. If a majority of groups that could 3, 4 or 5 man these runs wanted to....they could today, and we'd see less of them in Omni queues.

    Add to that, that in almost any run where a few bodies leave.....do most groups vote 'no' to re-open...unless you are in a mechanic heavy point, like the cards of DM, where 'gasp' more random players will actually make it take longer? NO....most groups will re-open most runs, save for critical role replacements....and in omni, not even that. Why would people re open a run...oh, yeah, because for straight runs, more people generally means faster out....which is all that matters in MOST runs.

    The 2nd is also not 100% true as we see plenty of shouts for groups in LFG to do feat runs and, except for elite runs, most just want 'bodies' and yep...new players are indeed 'bodies'. And while the shouts for 'need 1 to queue and leave' might drop a bunch, the guy just starting a group for a feat run will need bodies and will likely be less than selective (I'd guess less selective than you or Proxy in most cases). Now, if they run in a packed league like 'Loot' or something, well...I doubt those groups were going to have a spot for the random new player anyway, so the point is moot.

    AQS would mainly be for runs that won't pop, or won't get accepted in omni....which means those new people you are worried about so much AREN'T queuing at that moment, so they aren't losing out either....or would be for feat runs where accuracy is required. You should worry more about instructing these new players on how to set up and use LFG tab in chat, so they don't miss out on the feat runs, vs perpetually wishing for things to pop out of the sky via queue.

    And believe me...no one takes you all that seriously.:p Especially since you've had your religious epiphany.:confused:
    • Like x 2
  14. Cyclonic Dedicated Player

    For those of us that actually have a soul... exploiting someone for a free queue and kicking them is much more difficult than simply never recruiting them on the first place, but I can understand why you wouldn't see a difference there.
  15. the solowing Steadfast Player

    Youre mistaken if you put that much faith in people's altruism to expect it not to be exploited like FoS3 was...
    • Like x 1
  16. The Con Dedicated Player

    Because the difference is negotiable.

    You guys are the ones assuming that everybody is evil and will use this to exclude others.... when the very same ways of exclusion already exist and they aren't exploited in the way that you predict that this would be.
    • Like x 1
  17. The Con Dedicated Player

    And once again... You put too little...
    This is a game for people who aspire to be heroes.... I'll give the players the benefit of the doubt.
    Also...
    Once again... again... again... Ways to exclude other players already exist and.... they aren't being exploited in any meaningful way.


    FoS3?.... Blame that clamp of yours for that one.
    Too many people were looking for fast marks in spam groups... and why bother with any player that would slow you down... (which was much more highlighted because of the clamp)... when soooooo many other people were looking for the same thing?


    Older instances that nobody else is queuing for need not apply for this same feeding frenzy mentality.
    • Like x 1
  18. Raven Nocturnal Loyal Player

    Well, little guy is going to be discluded/excluded/outcasted/straight up kicked/whatever from my groups no matter what, where, when. Ain't nobody got time fo dat.

    No difference from my end if a method was added in some way shape or form.
    • Like x 1
  19. Grim931 Committed Player

    See Reinheld's post above.

    You really aren't making the case you think you're making.
    • Like x 2
  20. The Con Dedicated Player

    AMEN!!
    • Like x 1