I am installing Sengled Zigbee Color Bulbs tied to an Inovelli Blue Series Zigbee Switch all in a Group with Zigbee Messaging enabled. If I control the group device itself, everything works as expected and device states are all in the right place. If I dim the lights directly from the switch, the bulbs all do what they are supposed to and their states update as well but the Group does not.
Example, I set the bulbs at 100% using the Group device, I then dim the lights to 50% using the physical switch. All devices, except the Group report 50%. The Group device still has level at 100%.
Is this expected? Or is there something I am missing? I tried various configurations of settings in the Group to no avail and tried enabling Binding Off-to-On Sync Level on the switch (param 125) and that didn't change anything either.
I think this is more or less as designed. Regardless of setup, groups don't update the level attribute in response to changes of "member" devices at all (nor is it clear what this would mean--most recent? average? highest or lowest?). Various options, some of which you may have tried, do affect what the switch attribute reports -- but that's all you'll get for any type of group.
There's a bit of a secondary issue here which is that the group device on Hubitat (or really the hub itself) won't listen for inbound Zigbee group broadcasts, so it won't/can't change its level in response to those, which it sounds like what you're doing if by "tied" you mean Zigbee binding. Group devices on Hubitat are really intended for using to send commands to a group from the hub, though what you're doing isn't a problem if the outcome is otherwise what you want (the Inovelli driver just lets you piggyback on this group ID for Zigbee binding setups if you choose).
If the level attribute is more important to you than Zigbee binding, you can do things the "old fashioned" way: create a Button Controller or other automation that responds to the button ("scene") events from the Inovelli device and send commands to the group device on Hubitat, which the bulbs will then respond to. This has the tradeoff of needing the hub to be involved for daily operation and not just setup, unlike Zigbee binding. I don't mind this (it's not notably slower IMHO, and my hub is reliable enough I'm not worried about the rare case it's off/rebooting/etc), but your preferences may vary.
Ok, thanks. I have ways around the limitation, I was just hoping I would not have to go that route 
A long time ago I brought up what I see as a weakness in the conceptual design of groups. Groups to me, are gangs of DISSIMILAR devices. What is missing is what I refer to as a Team.
EG; 3 identical CT bulbs live in a bathroom fixture - technically a group - but more than a group they are identical devices. A Team. They operate as one, and as a Team they report as one - if a level is changed, it changes all, if a CT is changed it affects all. etc. A group could be 3 different light fixtures in a room, or ... well you get the idea. Anyways, I got shot down so hard my butt still hurts. I still feel to this day there is a hole in groups in general. It's too late now anyways.
edit I had always intended to do a Parent/Child type device ala @kkossev style - but alas beyond my skills...
Everyone’s entitled to their opinion, yours simply wasn’t shared by others.
