In the past, big future plans didn’t change the amount of content released, so this is weird to me. ZOS used to release one big patch after another.

I also can’t see this being good for the population issue. I can’t even imagine how low it’s going to get after this.

spartaxoxo wrote: »

shadoza wrote: »

My concerns regarding the layering of overland is that it will not resolve the issues with highly-powered players interfering with new and low-powered player activities.

It does though, at least for some people. You're arguing against something that helps resolve your issue.

I like to quest and want to be able to enjoy the quests in this game. When I quest, I have no meaningful choice but to quickly kill everything around me. I don't want to kill mobs that quickly. And you have communicated that you don't want me to kill mobs that quickly. Allowing me to take more damage from mobs and deal less damage to mobs will stop me from killing mobs so quickly. I want a system that lets me go from a high powered player to a player that is being challenged. That way I can enjoy the same exact experience as the lower power player.

Not wanting to encourage vet players to use such a system is arguing against allowing vet players to lower their power level.

I am not arguing that part of the layer. What I don't want is for that layer to be on a toggle where those that do kill everything because the can will return to the base level to do just that in order to get resources whether is is a simple rune or leads. I think if a player chooses more challenging overland, they should stay there for a period rather than shift back and forth in second or even minutes. I have trouble understanding why they would want more challenging overland and want to return to base for easy farming too.

Put it on a cool down. Make it account wide and have options like the delete options. Require tokens which can be earned or purchased for gold or crown.

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

We have specific questions that we will be asking in the surveys. And we also want to get the most recent feedback from folks. There is definitely feedback to look for here on the forums and other mediums. And the team has looked at those as well. But it’s always good to do a current gut check with folks. We don’t think anyone wants us to spend time on only making changes based on feedback given 2+ years ago. We want to give another opportunity with specific questions to get the most up to date info as the team continues to work.

This is great news. I'm continually finding things I want to bring up as QOL improvements, but don't really have a way to do that unless I post a complaint type thread here, and those tend to devolve quickly.

My spouse was in software QA for decades so I get it. I know things take time to hear from users > bring to the team(s) > assign to specific teams/leads > develop > test 9340 times on 7234 different scenarios > roll out to the PTS > fix bugs > roll out to the PTS again > fix bugs > wash rinse repeat until the launch deadline = pencils down, this is going live tomorrow, bugs or not, we'll hotfix those as we roll.

I'm really really grateful for the previous surveys of pain points and wish lists. I hope this can be a regular thing.

On the topic of "the end of the year is flat," other than the endeavors and pursuits... the whole yearly calendar is kinda flat. I've mostly run out of things to do other than endeavors, farming, and pursuits. The event quests are extremely repetitive and the same every year. Shouldn't be too hard to come up with some new event daily quests and better rewards for completing them?

And the September daily rewards... what the heck. A lot of people are saying they're meant to be for new players only, but... why? I've also heard that the better rewards calendar was only for the 10th anniversary year. Again... why? This is such an easy lift for you guys. Even just ONE really nice item in the middle of the month costs you absolutely nothing, and buys you a lot of player good will. A cool furnishing, a pet, a mount, a costume, an emote... all of these are something everybody can appreciate, and helps us feel appreciated as your entire source of income.

Did someone over there forget that we're paying actual cash monies to play this game...? Don't be so stingy, folks... they're our purse strings, maybe open them up a bit wider...?

Thanks again for listening.

Light on combat changes sounds good to me. I've learned from experience to absolutely dread significant combat changes in the name of 'balancing'.

All I even hear is that they are working on "more" but that "more" will be later. One may think that they are working on every single possible thing that players ever requested and they listen to players feedback but whenever they are supposed to deliver they claim that they looked at the stats and that's not it. When I've heard on the stream that they will do survey to get players feedback.... I mean, forums for the past few years were not enough?

A lot of people have been asking since Vengeance 1 for it to be a permanent Campaign. I’m sure that’s the end goal.

What I don’t see is evidence that it will replace Grey Host. I could easily see them replacing something like Blackreach or Ravenwatch, so you end up with Vengeance as the more casual Cyrodiil version, and Grey Host as the main one.

So with the 9/11/25 livestream we got insight that they will now have a perk system which aims to replicate having passive skills and stat set bonus choices. There is also a loadout system which are just premade setups for new players to quickly pick perks without hand choosing. At first I was worried the loadout system was not going to let us choose perks by ourselves, but it seems that is not the case and you can individually choose 4 loadouts which are basically your passives, 3 perks(5 piece bonuses), and then your active skills as you normally would.

One thing to praise is that they actually made some sort of introduction to setup players instead of just dropping players in with no idea. Horizontal mmos tend to fail this aspect because of how much there is to explain. On live something similar would be nice to help get players into pvp by explaining the common gear choices and perhaps remake the base areas to have pvp gear vendors and crafting stations upfront and center for newer players.

I see why they did this simple loadout and perk system, its basically a quick toggle system that gives players the choices they would make anyways through mundus, food, sets, etc. Without having to spend months remaking all those systems and balancing them over the course of another 6+ vengeance tests. It atleast satisfies the ask for stat choices, just through a simple standalone system. Now they could just start dropping in these other systems as they work through them. Or move on to more rule change tests like AoE, hots/dots, effect stacking, crosshealing, smarthealing, etc

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Soarora wrote: »

He also said that the same test you're talking about will happen alongside Grey Host. The vibe I got from that is that the end result would be a completed Vengeance mode alongside Grey Host if possible.

Yeah. They're testing both being live together and also said they've implemented some backend things to improve regular Cyrodiil performance and will continue to do so.

I think a version of Vengeance being released to replace the change of Ravenwatch being no proc makes sense, personally.

I would agree. With how wide the horizontal progression of eso is now most new players skip straight to cp hundreds which skips right past the u50 and nocp campaigns. Ontop of that these campaigns do not function because there simply isn't enough population to constantly maintain a balanced map.

At the same time these new players and casual players prefer vengeance and normally wouldnt be able to play in GH because it is a terrible environment unless you are a 1vXer, ball grouper, or in a zerg guild. So it satisfies what they want while fulfilling the eye candy that is massive faction warfare which brings new people into pvp.

Hugie wrote: »

I was shocked! [sarcasm] to hear the developer in charge of the Vengeance "test" mention that its U49 incarnation scheduled for early 2026 aims at balancing outgoing damage/healing caps for their simplified abilities.

If Vengeance were truly a performance test, there'd be no need to worry about its combat balance -- nor would there be a justification to invest considerable dev resources in new UIs, or new systems (perks), or new inventory tabs, or any of these enhancements being invested in this misguided game mode for lazy, casual players who are unwilling to engage with the depth of ESO's existing PvP.

Not sure why this would be a major reason why vengeance would be permanent. AoE is the main distribution method for calculations that can run rampant. Players hate caps because it is directly counter intuitive to the purpose of what an AoE is. They are testing to see here if higher damage AoE caps are preferred over healing. Chances are people notice their output more than their group and zerg healing. Keeping the healing caps lower also incentivizes smaller group combat or players to use both single target aimed and aoe heals instead of slotting 4-5 massive aoe hot effect skills like on live. In a way the actual build diversity is better from an active skill perspective.

If you look at the UI it is basically all copy and paste basic elements to toggle things on and off. Nothing solid enough that it makes sense to delete gear, setbonuses, or all the other game elements like class passives, etc. Again not to mention if we cant slot dlc gear in pvp why would a significant amount of players in eso ever pay for an eso+ membership or buy a chapter or season pass? This conspiracy is just full of nonsensical massive holes.

Also that loadout system is just a quick way to slot zos picked passives. Much like Call of Duty has the beginner preset loadouts that you can change and pick perks on your own.

shadoza wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

shadoza wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

shadoza wrote: »

How does this include 'me?'

Overland is already at a level of difficulty that you enjoy. This is including people who were previously excluded.

Wait a moment, please, you are telling me what I enjoy now?
By "people who were previously excluded" are you meaning people like myself that are excluded from Group activities because we don't group?

No. I just figured you liked solo stuff since you said you played it and didn't like group content. If you don't like questing either, my apologies. Maybe a post explaining why you don't like the current difficulty level would help you get what you want. Whatever they implement will have multiple difficulty levels, after all.

Story mode for dungeons is an upcoming feature, as I already stated, so no.

This is about offering more quest difficulty levels. They are already balanced for solo casual play.

I do nearly all of overland content. This includes WBs and Dark Anchors. There are some incursions I do not do because they take too long to complete.

My concerns regarding the layering of overland is that it will not resolve the issues with highly-powered players interfering with new and low-powered player activities. (Many here say it doesn't happen, but it does, and it is a problem that needs addressing.) I do not complete group dungeons because the mechanics make it impossible to do without a tank or a partner. I love PvP but avoid it because I think the balance is broken and those that frequent the PvP games are not pleasant to play with or against. So . . . my contest is not about me preferring solo content.

I have a friend who played group overland with me sometimes. He is playing another game right now. He said there was no point in going into dungeons or tying to do anchor when there was such a crowd that the mobs and bosses disappear before one gets to fight. (He was trying to complete Alik'r map.) It is a problem and it will not be resolve if those wanting a challenging overland can occupy both spaces with dual difficulties. I could likely get my friend to join me if I ask politely, but he is not likely to continue to pay for the sub to do that, so we will be confined to the base areas.

I just wanted to enjoy the game without having the boss kills, resources, quest mobs swept away from me, which leaves me waiting more than playing. Posters seem to believe that my wanting that takes away from them. They can have everything in overland at one level, why do they need everything at two levels? If they want questing and resources to be easy but bosses to be challenging, then it sounds very much like they do not want a more challenging overland at all.

And I want to enjoy the game by feeling challenged when soloing and exploring quests. As I’ve said previously, I want to feel the stakes, fail and die, and fail again until I win!

I’m a relatively high leveled player of 1900 CP who sometimes farm in low level areas. Now, am I doing it on purpose to get someone to quit??? No. It’s not personal and I don’t even know you. Don’t blame me that ZOS puts Mythic leads in certain beginner zones!

This goes both ways. Just like your friend, there have been many people who quit due to Overland being too easy and ultimately unfulfilling. I personally know a few friends who tried ESO but quit because everything just feels flat.

This option won’t please everyone 100% because at the end of the day, it’s an MMO and it’s physically impossible to make everyone happy. There’s always gonna be give and takes, compromises. Having an optional Overland difficulty scaling adds more than takes away.