You may have already meant all this, but just for clarity, it’s important to note that If they all follow each other all the time, it’s really hard to put a device into two different groups.
Say I have a hallway light. It’s at the base of some stairs. I want to put it into two different groups.
First, it’s in the downstairs group which includes the entry area and two of four lights in the living room. This is the " entry" group.
Then I have a pathway of lights that I call “bedtime.” It includes the hallway light at the bottom of the stairs, the hallway light at the top of the stairs, and a Bedroom light.
And then I have yet a third group called “living room” that has all four of the living room lights in it but does not have the hallway light.
Three groups. Each can be independently scheduled, and independently triggered. I could have a Contact sensor on the front door turn on the Entry group.
I can have a motion sensor in the living room turn on the living room group.
I could have voice activation turn on the bedtime group.
What I don’t want is to have turning on the hallway light automatically turn on the two living room lights and the upstairs bedroom light.
Based on tons of work done by Apple, and practical if less comprehensive work done by most other home automation companies, humans tend to think of device groups in terms of what Apple now calls “service groups”–Devices which are grouped together for a specific purpose, but which may be in a different group for a different purpose.
This is why most home automation systems now distinguish between “rooms” (based on the physical location of a device) and other types of groups, which could be based on device class (“all lights”) or on A specific use case (“Good night.”)
Of course if you’re changing the settings of a specific device through physical manipulation at the switch, then you’re probably stuck with one group for that purpose, which is probably what you meant in your description.
But once you allow for Settings which are changed in other ways, even just by voice, then a device can be in multiple groups, so it’s better to have a virtual master concept even if that’s just presented in the UI as changing the characteristics of the group (in that case The group name is standing in for a virtual master).
So again, that’s probably exactly what you meant, which is you were referring to groups where The settings are physically changed at the switch. But of course there are many use cases where that’s not necessarily true. 
I still believe one can easily do away with VS and that actually VS add unnecessary points of possible failure more so than a physical device…
)
