If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the Forum Rules. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Welcome to RPGamer's new forums running under Vanilla Forums! If you're run into any odd or strange issues after our software migration please see this thread for details

Poll: Combat Number

JuMeSynJuMeSyn Code: KirinAdministrators
edited March 2013 in Latest Updates
What's the perfect party size for combat in RPGs?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7 or higher
It's not what he's eating, but what's eating him that makes it ... sort of interesting.
«1

Comments

  • DarkRPGMasterDarkRPGMaster A Witness to Destruction Moderators
    edited February 2013
    5. While that sounds odd, 3 is too little IMO, 4 is traditional, but sometimes you want a team of 5.
    User Database Check
    Pages cleared: 98
    Users cleared: 2940
    Current Year: 2010
    Spammer-Banning Battle Theme: You Will Know Our Names
    Number of Spammers banned: At least 2000 at this point.
  • ScarScar Member Full Members
    edited February 2013
    5 or 6. Or an entire army. That's cool too.
  • ironmageironmage chaotic neutral observer SaskatoonFull Members
    edited February 2013
    Five for regular turn-based RPGs (the final party in FF4 was fun to play). Possibly three or four for action RPGs, otherwise things might get too messy. For tactical RPGs, six or so.
    Only the livin' have the privilege of sayin' they'll fight ta the last breath.
    And words like conviction and resolve don't mean much to a dead man...
    --Raven (Tales of Vesperia)
  • riulynriulyn Member Full Members
    edited February 2013
    I'll vote for 6, since I'm a Suikoden fan :) I like bigger parties in general because you get to use more people, but at some point having too many party members makes it a bit tedious to input commands for all of them. Of course what really matters is that the party size works with the battle system. So for an action RPG I'd probably go with 3 and for a tactical RPG I would go for 7+, since what's the point of having all those classes if you can't use units of all of those types on the battlefield?
  • Strawberry EggsStrawberry Eggs The Bemused Administrators
    edited February 2013
    Call me boring, but 4 is just fine, 5 will do, but 4 just seems to have the right amount of variety in each battle without fights taking too long.
    Reincarnation, realization
  • ghaleon80ghaleon80 Member Full Members
    edited February 2013
    I like 4. Call me old fashioned but I like the healer, fighter, magic, hybrid combo a lot of turn based RPG's used
  • ClixClix Never Google Image Search Full Members
    edited February 2013
    I always liked having 5 in the few games that popped up in. It allowed me to focus on developing more characters and allowed for more intense fights sometime since I had more strategies available. I definitely think 3 is too few.
  • DarkRPGMasterDarkRPGMaster A Witness to Destruction Moderators
    edited February 2013
    ghaleon80 said:
    I like 4. Call me old fashioned but I like the healer, fighter, magic, hybrid combo a lot of turn based RPG's used
    You dare speak of that when you have a Ghaleon avatar, and used 5 party members during the final battles of both games!? BLASPHEMY! /joke

    To be honest, while I like that setup, I've always preferred the 5 man band because the leader of the party is almost always the best all-around character. The other 4, in MMO terms, are usually the tank, the glass cannon, the healer, and the DPS.
    User Database Check
    Pages cleared: 98
    Users cleared: 2940
    Current Year: 2010
    Spammer-Banning Battle Theme: You Will Know Our Names
    Number of Spammers banned: At least 2000 at this point.
  • TG BarighmTG Barighm Member Full Members
    edited February 2013
    I like 5. As someone said above, 4 is the traditional thing, but tradition gets boring. You always want to slip something a little unique into the group, but you don't want to upset established roles. That's what the 5 slot is for: that one weird class, an extra healer, or whatever else you want to experiment with.

    I hate 3 man parties unless it's done the way FF10 did it where you can quickly swap out characters. 1 man groups only work for atmospheric RPGs.
  • scorpio_7scorpio_7 Tactic's Ogre I choose u! Full Members
    edited February 2013
    I prefer 6 but in terms of rpg's in general 4 is optimal. If it's less than 4 it feels like something is missing...
  • lolwhoopslolwhoops Member HalifaxRPGamer Staff
    edited February 2013
    5 has my vote. The only time more is really worth it is if it's an SRPG that wants to sell the army vs army thing. Unless they want a "Woah, you got an army? Better choose 5 guys from it to determine the whole battle!" thing. But in Etrian Odyssey 5 is nice. In FF4, 5 is nice. I just thing it lets you use more cool characters at once. I'm not fond of 2 or 3 person parties in RPGs because that's just too few, but 1 person works for action RPGs.
    lolwhoops: a Gamer's Blog
    ^^is my blog! Updates whenever I feel like it! :D which happens a lot more often now!
    this is my twitter! come twit with me
  • omegabyteomegabyte He's just this guy, you know? RPGamer Staff
    edited February 2013
    4 is almost always perfect in most games I play. 3 is usually too few and forces you to make really irritating decisions, and with 5, sometimes you end up with overlapping abilities, or characters that are so focused on one thing that they're useless in other departments (for example, healers that are incapable of performing any kind of decent offensive action in less strenuous encounters)
    "It's okay to fail as long as you learn that you failed!" - Neptune, Hyperdimension Neptunia Victory
    Follow me on Twitter
    Read my serialized, comedy-fantasy web novel, The Almanac of All Things - http://www.thealmanac.ca - Read All of Part One Now!
  • watcherwatcher Veteran RPGamer Full Members
    edited February 2013
    I prefer 5, but 4 is good too. 3 usually locks characters into certain rolls or it's the main character and their backup singer(s). 6 and up starts to get messy, though is okay in TRPGs/SRPGs.
  • xocolatlxocolatl Member Full Members
    edited February 2013
    I'll go with 6 or more, since it allows for you to set up formations and such. More is also fine for me. Any less, and it starts to kill off that sense of strategy.

    One of these days, I hope there will also be units that occupy 2 spaces..kinda like the Fubar/Hugo combo in Suikoden3. I thought that was ingenius.
  • Rya_ReisenderRya_Reisender Solipsist Snowflake Full Members
    edited February 2013
    5 or 6 is perfect for me. When I think about it Final Fantasy IV and Suikoden I&II were pretty cool with their 5-man and 6-man combat, much better than smaller parties. 4 is still fine. 3 and less always ruins the battle system a little because the variety is missing. More than 6 makes you lose overview, though. So yeah 5 and 6 is perfect.
  • NimNim _ Full Members
    edited February 2013
    Everything from 4-6. Some games that only have 3 active party members can still do it in the right way. Look at FFX. It was great that it allowed you to switch members mid-combat.
  • JormungandJormungand Member Full Members
    edited February 2013
    Nim said:
    Everything from 4-6.
    Agreed! Anything below that is quite dull.
  • TwinBahamutTwinBahamut Staff Healer RPGamer Staff
    edited February 2013
    This isn't easy to answer. It's far too specific for the individual quirks of a game.

    3 party members works great for games with fast pacing and a large amount of team synergy, where the team is more than the sum of its parts. Chrono Trigger and Xenoblade in particular. I don't like it for a lot of other games, though... I certainly don't want to go above 3 in an high-paced action game. I think Tales and Star Ocean games get worse when you get a full party of four, actually. In fact, even just two characters can work well for a game like that.

    4 works (I can't complain about FFV or VI, after all), but I somewhat prefer 5 for any game that involves controlling a moderately-sized party in a turn-based system with a variety of characters to choose from. 4 seems like a pretty good number for Monster Hunter and its clones, though, and it is probably the better number if you can switch out party members mid-battle.

    Suikoden games work great with six members. Tactical RPGs feel like they don't even take off until you get at least that many units or more.
  • TG BarighmTG Barighm Member Full Members
    edited February 2013
    It's also an interesting question for MMORPGs because it's not just a matter of party quality in those games. Number of players and speed of grouping is a major factor. I feel MMORPGs should feature parties of four, not 5. You don't really see 5th wheel "jack of all trades" classes anymore, so the extra DPS slot feels a bit redundant, plus it will be a lot quicker to get 4 players instead of 5. That said, 5 players allows for more players to take part in group quests. By having larger parties, it helps give more people a chance to take part in stuff (well, in games with fewer people anyway; in WoW you rarely see big guilds asking random people to fill that last spot they're having trouble finding someone for).

    3 man parties would only work in MMORPGs if the DPS slot is fairly equally balanced with the other classes, but that would mean a healing system that allows healers to DPS as much as they heal; otherwise, the DPS classes could become overpowering.
  • DarkRPGMasterDarkRPGMaster A Witness to Destruction Moderators
    edited February 2013
    5 people works in MMOs because having an extra of any type (other than tank) helps out significantly. Double healers equals more survivability. Double DPS means things die a hell of a lot faster.
    User Database Check
    Pages cleared: 98
    Users cleared: 2940
    Current Year: 2010
    Spammer-Banning Battle Theme: You Will Know Our Names
    Number of Spammers banned: At least 2000 at this point.
  • TG BarighmTG Barighm Member Full Members
    edited February 2013
    You can have double healers/DPS in a 4 man group, plus I found the biggest difficulty in grouping was never whether to bring an extra healer or not, but creating a full group in the first place. Thankfully, some games have already explored the idea of combining/removing roles.
  • FrozenbabylonFrozenbabylon POW! Full Members
    edited February 2013
    I'd have to say 3. All of my favorite RPGs have either 3 party members... Chrono Trigger, Final Fantasy X and XII, The KotOR games, Mass Effect series. Or one character... Fallout 3 and New Vegas, Alpha Protocol and the like.
  • Rya_ReisenderRya_Reisender Solipsist Snowflake Full Members
    edited February 2013
    TG Barighm said:
    You can have double healers/DPS in a 4 man group, plus I found the biggest difficulty in grouping was never whether to bring an extra healer or not, but creating a full group in the first place. Thankfully, some games have already explored the idea of combining/removing roles.
    Again my opinion is total opposite here.

    In MMORPGs party size should be 12 or even larger. There shouldn't even be a limit to it in the first place. All my friends should be able to join if they want to join but at the same time I should be able to play it with only one friend too. Combining/removing roles makes MMORPGs boring. It's much better if any class is just good in one thing and very bad in everything else because that means people HAVE to work together. It's great if for example healers can only heal and not deal damage at all and there is no other class that can heal. That means healers are needed in groups so as a healer it's easy to find one and at the same time healers can't just go solo play because they can't deal damage. Forces people to party up and in the end makes it easier to find a group.


    ----------

    I can agree to Chrono Trigger working fine with 3 players only, but the other games? Even if you like them, that doesn't mean that they wouldn't have been better if they allowed you to take all party members into the group at the same time. Thinking for example about FFX and FFXII, I think both of them would be awesome if they just allowed you to have the whole party in the combat. Especially in FFX where the switching gets really annoying after a while. And in FFXII it would simply be cool to have like 6 or more people fighting automatically.
  • QuinQuin ne cede malis RPGamer Staff
    edited February 2013
    3-4 for single player RPGs
    4-6 for small scale MMORPG content, ~20-25 for larger scale stuff.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    befriend (v.): to use mecha-class beam weaponry to inflict grievous bodily harm on a target in the process of proving the validity of your belief system.
  • TG BarighmTG Barighm Member Full Members
    edited February 2013
    In MMORPGs party size should be 12 or even larger. There shouldn't even be a limit to it in the first place. All my friends should be able to join if they want to join but at the same time I should be able to play it with only one friend too. Combining/removing roles makes MMORPGs boring. It's much better if any class is just good in one thing and very bad in everything else because that means people HAVE to work together. It's great if for example healers can only heal and not deal damage at all and there is no other class that can heal. That means healers are needed in groups so as a healer it's easy to find one and at the same time healers can't just go solo play because they can't deal damage. Forces people to party up and in the end makes it easier to find a group.
    It's not that I disagree with the theory of having roles, but I know what you described doesn't work. I've actually leveled a healer built for healing. It's no fun. Killing stuff takes way longer, and you often have to do what other groups want to do. You can find people doing the same quests you are, but not necessarily in the order you need to do them, and you never know when the other guy will run off to town. Sometimes you find a guy that will stick with you for a while, and that's great, but ultimately I'm waiting for someone else to hold my hand and that's not an empowering feeling. I never found anyone that organized and completed quests the way I could anyway, so it was still a lot faster for me to be on my own.
    And I've see so many groups die waiting for healers and tanks to join, I can never condone the idea of one-note classes. Dual-specializing was such a great idea for that. The simple fact of the matter is most people don't like playing tanks and healers.
  • ZeraseZerase Member Full Members
    edited February 2013
    riulyn said:
    I'll vote for 6, since I'm a Suikoden fan :) I like bigger parties in general because you get to use more people, but at some point having too many party members makes it a bit tedious to input commands for all of them. Of course what really matters is that the party size works with the battle system. So for an action RPG I'd probably go with 3 and for a tactical RPG I would go for 7+, since what's the point of having all those classes if you can't use units of all of those types on the battlefield?
    This is what I was going to say. I loved Suikoden parties being 6. Especially in II when you had characters where each two could do a unite attack.
    Zerase ^_^

    Recently Finished: Suikoden II
    Currently Playing: Animal Crossing, Fire Emblem Awakening, The Legend of Zelda: Oracle of Seasons, Final Fantasy V

  • PimpaliciousPimpalicious Member Full Members
    edited February 2013
    3-6 for turn based
    1-4 for action (usually 1-3 works best but 4 worked out fine for Dragon Age II)
    7 and higher for SRPG

    I don't play MMOs.
  • cajuntechiecajuntechie Member Full Members
    edited February 2013
    3 with the same switching system as FF X ! Or 4 .. :D
  • Rya_ReisenderRya_Reisender Solipsist Snowflake Full Members
    edited February 2013
    TG Barighm said:
    It's not that I disagree with the theory of having roles, but I know what you described doesn't work. I've actually leveled a healer built for healing. It's no fun. Killing stuff takes way longer, and you often have to do what other groups want to do. You can find people doing the same quests you are, but not necessarily in the order you need to do them, and you never know when the other guy will run off to town. Sometimes you find a guy that will stick with you for a while, and that's great, but ultimately I'm waiting for someone else to hold my hand and that's not an empowering feeling. I never found anyone that organized and completed quests the way I could anyway, so it was still a lot faster for me to be on my own.
    And I've see so many groups die waiting for healers and tanks to join, I can never condone the idea of one-note classes. Dual-specializing was such a great idea for that. The simple fact of the matter is most people don't like playing tanks and healers.
    But not being able to solo is the point. The problem is that other MMORPGs do allows healers and tanks to solo, that's why it's hard to get them into a group.

    In Ragnarok Online I've always been playing Priest, and in RO jobs are very specific. As Priest you can deal damage to undead but not to anything else. Now you could go and hunt undead only and teleport away when a non-undead monster approaches, but generally you will want to explore other regions too so you look for a party. So my common day would be that I design a plan for the day (where to go) and then I go the towns and gather people telling them where I want to go and if they want to join. Them all knowing that partying up with me will mean they won't waste hundreds of Zeny to buy healing potions so most of them will be happy about it (not to mention that harder regions are more rewarding, at least they were pre-renewal). After I had 4-12 people in my party (number kinda depends on how hard the region is I want to go to), we went there and tried to explore and clear the region. It worked very well and was a lot of fun. Honestly I wouldn't even leave town without a party usually.
  • TG BarighmTG Barighm Member Full Members
    edited February 2013
    The problem is that other MMORPGs do allows healers and tanks to solo, that's why it's hard to get them into a group.
    No, they have no problems finding groups, but most people don't like playing them. Those who don't play the demand classes sit around waiting for the key party members. Pre LFG, it wasn't much fun. What's worse, in games where building groups is necessary, key classes can command a premium. Sure, it's uncommon, but it's a factor and a big enough one to slow things down. No, I don't always want to sit around town waiting for people to join my group (even in WoW it could take a while if you weren't max level and going after the latest content), and I know a lot of other people agreed. They wouldn't have created Raid Finder otherwise.

    But my original point was MMORPG's should design around smaller parties, but no smaller than 4, because the smaller you can manage it, the quicker you can build the optimal party and get into the field. Whether or not the MMORPG requires parties is moot. The need to get a party together quickly is pretty universal.
Sign In or Register to comment.