Tired of the 6-man limit

[Ohio9]

Anyone else getting sick of the absurdly low party limit? Not only does it limit battle size, but it regulates several of your followers to basically being stuck on camp duty for the vast majority of the game.

If there is one thing I hate in RPGs, it's ones that have too many potential party members for your actual party size. When someone joins my team, I want to have them doing something productive, not just gaurding the camp, chilling on the airship, or hanging out in whatever other structure serves as my base.

I really hope they fix this in the next Expeditions game.

[Nova]

Because the game is turn based, having every fight with every party member would drag the game down to a crawl, as you then also have to have an equal amount of enemies. That's a lot of waiting for it to be your turn again. Limiting most fights to 6, means you keep the game moving fairly steadily.

[Ohio9]

I didn't say everyone on the team had to be able to be in the party, but couldn't it be more then 6? How about 9 or 10? That would put about 70-90% of the team into battle, while still leaving a few "backups" in the event one your "starters" is injured and you still need to fight before your next camp.

Putting 70-80% into the party would be better. It would ensure that with some small rotations, everyone on the team gets to have at least some combat experience, rather then regulating a large portion of it to mere camp duty. As for longer fights, I would have no problem with that. Longer fights are more preferable to inactive fighters.

[jeffy]

Originally posted by Nova:

Because the game is turn based, having every fight with every party member would drag the game down to a crawl, as you then also have to have an equal amount of enemies. That's a lot of waiting for it to be your turn again. Limiting most fights to 6, means you keep the game moving fairly steadily.

i disagree with you..........................

because the fights in this game are always small..................it gets booring...........i want a battle with like having more vikings and fighting a big amount of enemies............

but in this game mostly its just small tiny fights that are too easy to win.............

[Ohio9]

Originally posted by Kallisti:

you might enjoy the total war series

I do

[Iso Koala]

Maps would feel way too cramped with 8-10 members. Even now there is plenty of battles, where you are fighting most of the fight with 2-3 members, while the rest is just back supporting them. Heck, my main char berserker could probably win most fights alone (on hard difficulty) if the rest of the team was just buffing him up all the time. I think my record was 4 killed enemies in one turn with him, but with more support even more would be doable.

[Ohio9]

Well if it's really impractical to include more, then don't give me so many damn people on my team. The goal should be to make it so that every character has a job to do other then camping.

[ukny63]

Just think of it this way - As a leader who wants to be successful -you have to learn to get the best out of your followers . You have followers that are good at combat ,you hvae followers that are good at buffing ,you have followers that are good at camp stuff . A good leader figures out who is good an what and assigns them to those tasks . Realistically your characters father was not so good at that and perished because of it and plunged your village into chaos.
I would much rather have a number of people that are good at certain skills -creating a overlap ,than be deficient .

Plus - having more people in the battle would get very boring very fast - almost all the battles are easy .

[Iso Koala]

Originally posted by Ohio9:

Well if it's really impractical to include more, then don't give me so many damn people on my team. The goal should be to make it so that every character has a job to do other then camping.

In Conquistador (the first game) I actually had my members wounded quite often, so that I had to rely on B members time to time. Vikings is easier, so this didnt happen to me here though.

[Mintpenguin]

Try Battle Brothers. Or XCOM Long War mod.
Edit: Or get a ds and try Fire Emblem games. Wasteland 2 has a party size of 7, still a lot of extra characters, but hey, 7.

[Iso Koala]

Wasteland 2 is pretty easy though. Pretty sure that you are just fine even with like 3 characters after the beginning.

[bewest169]

I have my favorite 5 the others are just support in camp like healing,witchcraft,hunting, seems like a waste,

[maethlin]

I'm more than okay with 6 people. 4 is usually too small for my tastes. Yes, it's intersting/fun sometimes to have a bigger group, and I wish there were a few more quests where ALL your hird gets challenged (aside from the couple that are already included), but I really LIKE that you are forced to think about who you want to take and develop most.

It adds more decision making and tradeoffs to the game. I tended to swap between a few members all the time, depending on circumstance.

[Ohio9]

Originally posted by maethlin:

I'm more than okay with 6 people. 4 is usually too small for my tastes. Yes, it's intersting/fun sometimes to have a bigger group, and I wish there were a few more quests where ALL your hird gets challenged (aside from the couple that are already included), but I really LIKE that you are forced to think about who you want to take and develop most.

It adds more decision making and tradeoffs to the game. I tended to swap between a few members all the time, depending on circumstance.

I just don't like having dead weight on the team. I want everyone to be doing something productive. Just having them do camp tasks makes them feel not needed.

[acslacker]

Originally posted by Ohio9:

If there is one thing I hate in RPGs, it's ones that have too many potential party members for your actual party size.

I totally get this. FF Tactics was ridiculously bad, giving the player character after character but only allowing the player to field 4-5.

I think that's one of the reasons I enjoyed Tactics Ogre so much. Fielding 10 at a time was amazing. It didn't make the field too crowded, and I had to be very careful to avoid deaths. It does drive up the time spent in battle, though. Nothing wrong with that IMO, but a lot of younger gamers these days have shorter attention spans I guess.

Haven't played Viking but working on Conquistador. 6 characters fielded for most battles isn't a bad decision. It's a hell of a lot better than if they allowed for only 3 or 4 at a time, and far too many indy tactical games allow for only 3-4 characters. Still, I'd have liked to see at least one massive battle, fielding 10-12 per side. Would've been awesome.

[Darc]

Dead weight members are also a pet peeve of mine. Especially when games include a 'joke' one too with no purpose but literal dead weight. I can forgive a game like Fire Emblem where permadeath happens and new units are always available as time goes on. Plus is allows you to field 9-13 members with rotations happening depending on the situation.

As for limit, it'd certainly be nicer if there was more variety to battles such as Small with 4 members(like the feast) members. Medium with 6 (Like the spar in britain.) and Large with 8 or more.(Invasions, Defense, and Conquering). This would add more variance to who you'd field with you in each of these cases if you were only gonna be in meetings or are planning the defense of your home. Large battles in general are a kind of missed opportunity. The prologue one being split up was kind of nice but at the same time would've been more fun if there was a large one with all your village with you.

Other people mentioning Battle Brothers I can agree with you there. However BB doesn't have any narrative and is a sandbox title compared to Vikings. There's also not much depth to the Brothers themselves and the game is designed that you'd occasionally lose a brother or two every once in a while.

Originally posted by jeffy:

i disagree with you..........................

because the fights in this game are always small..................it gets booring...........i want a battle with like having more vikings and fighting a big amount of enemies............

but in this game mostly its just small tiny fights that are too easy to win.............

I...like..................to............................................type.............................like.....................this......................too............................