Honestly, I don't think group finder is bad.
I think PARTY finder is bad.
Let me explain the difference: In WoW, before WotL, there WAS a group finder tool (/lfg), but it DIDN'T make parties for you. You would put up your class and spec and say what content (dungeons, quests, etc) you were looking for. This way, other people would see who was also trying to do the same content and form groups manually. From there, they would then do this crazy thing - they would WALK to the dungeons (because mounts didn't come until level 40 and lots of people couldn't afford them right then anyway). Originally, all 5 members of the party had to do this, unless you had a Warlock to summon, which required 3. Later, dungeons were given summon stones, but this still required either 2 or 3 party members to travel to the location to summon the rest. THEN you would run the dungeon or other content.
...because people also used this tool to find other people doing 5+ man quests, some of the harder class quests, and so on.
VR has talked about wanting tools to help players find each other. It's actually even listed in the road to alpha list (important enough to have in-game by alpha)
"LFG Tool: To Do
What it is: Develop a UI and supporting infrastructure to allow players to list themselves as looking for a group, or looking for additional members, using specified criteria in order to find other players to pursue shared gameplay goals."
I'm looking forward to seeing how this gets implemented, as part of the definition of a true MMO for me is meeting new people and making new friends. I'm tired of MMOs just being single player games in a shared space, where other players are just avatars that might wave at you as they run past looking for more enemies or loot.
So if you see a Goofy show up in your LFG tool, make sure you swipe right :-)
I think a tool that will auto-party is a great thing, BUT it should do that only. I want to hit LFG and have the tool kick me into a party flagged for the same dungeon and we hit the road. No teleports, no instances, just auto-invite people so we can get moving to whatever dungeon we were going to do. I love when games do this. I don't need to be shuttled off to a dungeon, but just add me to literally any group that needs a DPS or tank or whatever role I am playing.
I prefer an older style tool. One where the party leader is told you are interested but you are not automatically added - and then booted if the leader decides you are the wrong class or level for the intended content or he or she remembers you unfavorably from some past meeting.
Dungeon finder was one of the best feature in WOTLK and should be in every MMO.
It doesnt need to teleport you to the dungeon, but who has time to stand around forming groups when that stops you exploring the world and playing.
(assuming chat will work similiar to wow were you can reach more people while in a city)
I tried in vain to get dungeon finder into wow classic, i tried to explain that spamming...
"LF tank" only to eventually here "im tank" wasnt a conversation and didnt add anything to the social aspect of the game.
But sadly, stupider heads prevailed.
I'm personally indifferent to the type of party finder they include, as long as there is something other than spamming my chat. Nothing will kill an MMO faster for me than uncontrolled spammers... and secondly is having to go onto forums or use 3rd party applications just to expedite the LFG process because the LFG channel is full of borderline trolls or people trying to be funny but are just annoying.
As someone mentioned, there is absolutely ZERO social growth in spamming a chat channel with:
"LF Tank"
"We are LF tank too"
"I'm a wizard but I can tank for 1 hit"
"I'm a tank, but don't want to group with you unless you have CC and healer already"
"CC LF Healer and Tank"
"What level?"
"What level for what?"
"Level 9.5 for you mom"
etc, etc, etc, useless **** spamming the LFG chat channel...
The main overlooked things a simple tool has over a blind queue is to see if the people can speak (not on a mic but in general) I don't want tools that facilitate no communication as a form of game play, nor do I want to auto invite people 20 mins away and watch them go back home to vendor, get lost, mine rare nodes, etc.
Some players will blindly invite people who are flagged LFG and those lazy few deserve what they get. I am in the camp of talk to the person and get a response. Tools to help players be adventurers are what I hope VR aims for.
Location, time to play, and group goals are the three things I really hope we see beyond the class and level requirements of a LFG tool.
Join a 3 man group to instantly start killing the mobs in the local area with two wizards vs full proper group delving into a dungeon for 2 hours of camping vs a group seeking to explore around for keeper updates.
Jobeson said:Location, time to play, and group goals are the three things I really hope we see beyond the class and level requirements of a LFG tool.
I would actually want to only see the "role" the player can (and prefers to) fill instead of the "class". Once we start down the rabbit hole of cherry-picking classes, that is when we will start to get ostracization and players quitting. I know it will be inevitable, but having one less way to discriminate would be helpful (this was one of the very few benefits of a "blind" group finder). I get that people will ask for specific classes eventually, but not announcing the class will at least force the players to communicate more, and if the recruiter wants to make their discrimination apparent, they will at least need to ask discriminatory questions of the person LFG instead of hiding their bias.
It's much easier to discriminate when nobody knows you're doing it (i.e. ignoring all players of a specific race/class combo based on a potentially unfounded perception/bias). Having to ask "what class are you" at least shows their intent.
Jobeson said:Some players will blindly invite people who are flagged LFG and those lazy few deserve what they get. I am in the camp of talk to the person and get a response. Tools to help players be adventurers are what I hope VR aims for.
I think I suggested this already in an older thread: A good addition to the LFG window would be a text field where I can enter a "greeting" text. When inviting someone via the LFG window, this text could then be sent as a tell automatically along the invite. That would speed up the process a bit, instead of me having to type x variants of "Hi, do you want to join us at blah blah blah" manually.
Those who don't set the greeting text nor send a manual tell before inviting don't need to wonder why their invites always get declined..
Sarim said:I think I suggested this already in an older thread: A good addition to the LFG window would be a text field where I can enter a "greeting" text. When inviting someone via the LFG window, this text could then be sent as a tell automatically along the invite. That would speed up the process a bit, instead of me having to type x variants of "Hi, do you want to join us at blah blah blah" manually.
Those who don't set the greeting text nor send a manual tell before inviting don't need to wonder why their invites always get declined..
We could have two customizable text fields in the menu:
In each field, I could save a custom message. The message would allow for variables, like [class], [level], [preferred role], etc. For example, my LFG message could be "[level] [preferred role] looking for casual /RP group". I type /wlfg and the person is sent "27 healer looking for casual /RP group."
This allows for a fast, easily modified message that I can use many times if needed. It's not fully automated, but it saves me from having to retype or copy +paste the same thing over and over. It will improve communication because we will tend to provide more info if we don't have to write it ad hoc.
The name is not the thing. A party finder is just as good or just as bad as a LFG tool. Since neither has a firm definition.
What matters is whether the tool automatically forms parties or instead gives information to persons forming parties or wanting to join parties and lets them decide whom to invite and what invitations to accept. I believe we have a strong majority against automatic party formation.
Whether there is a way to fast-travel to the dungeon or quest area is a totally different issue that should not define the debate about the party formation tool. Three possibilities are (1) no way. (2) unrestricted transfer to the grouping area. (3) Once one party member gets there they can summon the others by class teleport option, summoning mechanism at a dungeon entrance or otherwise. I choose not to comment on this to encourage foucus on the party-forming mechanism itself.
Jobeson said: Darch given what we have learned about the game so far, I don't see role being different than the class outside of pulls and CC. A DPS warrior sounds like a warrior that will be picked last. With that said I support knowing who to pick last I guess. Sarim, a precanned message with no feedback is still a blind invite. They don't need to be sober enough to read english to click accept.
I think you may be surprised... If I were a warrior in a group, I would gladly welcome another warrior (who may not know the content well enough or be geared well enough to tank) but could increase the group's haste and share incoming damage with me with shield wall while also being able to pick up adds if things got out of control (over say, a ranger or additional healer because the content requires more mitigation than damage). In my "personal" experience, the attentiveness of a player willing to play a tank class compared to that of the "average" DPS class player is much higher... in my personal experience. A tank willing to DPS is likely a tank trying to learn the content (especially in a game where content isn't readily available to view elsewhere) or simply improve their gear. They may not be "as high DPS" as a rogue or ranger, but the support they bring would likely make up for it - remember too, that in some content a dedicated tank will not always be needed, in which case, tanks will be more akin to DPS that can hold threat.
I only mention this because you said that you would pick a warrior last to fill a DPS spot, but there will be 3 available spots after having a main healer, tank and CC. I would (personally) fill the last spot(s) with a class that could supplement the lowest level/worst geared member's role, with the understanding that they were DPS unless the other person needed assistance... to include having 2 clerics or 2 CC over having 3 DPS.... I bet a group with 2 tanks, 2 healers, 2 CC and 0 DPS could outperform a group with 1 tank/healer/CC and 3 DPS because the latter group would likely have 1, if not 2 DPS just sitting around waiting for pulls or not being sure when to engage or otherwise not paying attention. From what I've experienced in other MMOs, people that 'intentionally' play roles other than DPS are far more attentative on average.
Darch said:A tank willing to DPS is likely a tank trying to learn the content (especially in a game where content isn't readily available to view elsewhere) or simply improve their gear. They may not be "as high DPS" as a rogue or ranger, but the support they bring would likely make up for it - remember too, that in some content a dedicated tank will not always be needed, in which case, tanks will be more akin to DPS that can hold threat.
See you are thinking its a tank willing to DPS and not a tank trying to be a DPS. That is two very different things. I would gladly grab a warrior willing to off tank before I grab a warrior proclaiming themselves DPS. In my experience they refuse to tank.
Group mechanics are hard to say until the game is out though, but VR is really big on pushing the class identity and roles. I don't see how they can call it a DPS role if the DPS is not drastically higher. If DPS is only 10% higher then never invite a DPS class unless you simply need their utility for CC/pulls. If everyone is a cannon then arcane casters are made of glass for no reason.
No matter what VR decides for balancing though having the information there is important on the LFG tool to have a good idea of who you are inviting.
GoofyWarriorGuy said:I'm looking forward to seeing how this gets implemented, as part of the definition of a true MMO for me is meeting new people and making new friends. I'm tired of MMOs just being single player games in a shared space, where other players are just avatars that might wave at you as they run past looking for more enemies or loot.
So if you see a Goofy show up in your LFG tool, make sure you swipe right :-)
I'll swipe right, stop and wave, give you my iron rations and more. o7 <3
Jobeson said:See you are thinking its a tank willing to DPS and not a tank trying to be a DPS. That is two very different things. I would gladly grab a warrior willing to off tank before I grab a warrior proclaiming themselves DPS. In my experience they refuse to tank.
Group mechanics are hard to say until the game is out though, but VR is really big on pushing the class identity and roles. I don't see how they can call it a DPS role if the DPS is not drastically higher. If DPS is only 10% higher then never invite a DPS class unless you simply need their utility for CC/pulls. If everyone is a cannon then arcane casters are made of glass for no reason.
No matter what VR decides for balancing though having the information there is important on the LFG tool to have a good idea of who you are inviting.
Very good point on the differentiation between a tank trying to DPS and one not willing to tank. I am, however, expecting to see a lot of Dire Lord DPS LFG (as well as Paladins obviously crushing undead content). I expect a lot of players are viewing the Dire Lord similar to the Berserker of EQ.
