Ok so I get that grouping allows up to 4 players per group and......that's about it. First off what difference does being in someone's group compare to being someone's friend? Second my friend doesn't have text chat. But when she's in my group she text chats to me and I cannot understand what it says (just "...") and I can't text chat her back! Can someone help me understand this whole grouping thing before my head blows up in frustration
Ok so I get that grouping allows up to 4 players per group and......that's about it. First off what difference does being in someone's group compare to being someone's friend? Second my friend doesn't have text chat. But when she's in my group she text chats to me and I cannot understand what it says (just "...") and I can't text chat her back! Can someone help me understand this whole grouping thing before my head blows up in frustration
Grouping does not affect chat at all. If the person does not have text chat enabled, they still cannot text chat, and must continue to use menu chat. The purpose of Grouping is to allow a group who quests together to fight together. If you get drawn into a a battle, the same number of battle positions as members in your group will be reserved for your group, thus preventing others from jumping into your fight before your own friend can get a slot.
Note, I can see where this might be a problem in certain areas like the Kraken where a Group can bogart the arena, keeping poor wizards from completing the Kraken quest. Otherwise - It's one of the few improvements that I actually like.
If they made it so your group could teleport to you even when you have teleporting turned off, or gave an option to do so, that would be even more ideal.
I still think one improvement needed to be made for grouping is group loot. It gets very annoying when my friend (Life wizard) and I (Balance Wizard) get dropped items from the same fight that the other could use (i.e. fighting a boss, she gets a great balance only robe, and I get a great Life only hat). Make it so everything that drops for the people who are grouped goes into a "loot pool", and you can decide amongst yourselves who gets what. Then, the person who gets it clicks the item, and it goes to their backpack. If none of the group really wants it, then after time the pool will auto drop it into a random backpack. If two or more in the group want it, set up a random lotting button, so the two lot against each other, and higher lot gets the item in their backpack. I understand the reason for not allowing item trades between players, but should still be able to get items if they drop from the fight you just fought. This is one feature I was hoping would come with grouping.
I still think one improvement needed to be made for grouping is group loot. It gets very annoying when my friend (Life wizard) and I (Balance Wizard) get dropped items from the same fight that the other could use (i.e. fighting a boss, she gets a great balance only robe, and I get a great Life only hat). Make it so everything that drops for the people who are grouped goes into a "loot pool", and you can decide amongst yourselves who gets what. Then, the person who gets it clicks the item, and it goes to their backpack. If none of the group really wants it, then after time the pool will auto drop it into a random backpack. If two or more in the group want it, set up a random lotting button, so the two lot against each other, and higher lot gets the item in their backpack.quote]
This is a great idea (might make the game a little slower post-battle but still, at least you have a better chance on not getting some other class robe or hat. This gives a definite advantage and reason to group play (and i usually fight solo).
Not necessarily. Assume loot drops follow an even distribution for each individual over time; sometimes you get nothing, sometimes you get three, but in the end, it balances with respect to each individual.
If you were to share your loot whilst grouped, the person who got three items actually forfeits two or more of those to his groupmates, lowering his distribution over time and raising theirs. That, actually, is not 'fair'.
