Overland Content Feedback Thread

spartaxoxo

CP5 wrote: »

Issue is we haven't been given any indication that this thread has any meaning, since at two different points when ZOS commented on this, once before this thread's creation and one several months later, an identical response was given.

Yeah. Although that end of the year letter does sound like maybe they changed their mind and will finally give us some kind of difficulty option.

Elsonso

CP5 wrote: »

They, use them in every single dungeon. Creating multiple versions of an instance is as standard a technique as making a new map. It i simply a tool they have. And each zone only has a handful of enemy types, with many shared between zones. Modify the standard gray wolf and you just updated 1/5th of the wildlife in pretty much every base game zone for example. Then most humanoid enemies are based off of classes and have a basic toolkit from those, and considering ZOS updated every single vet boss and elite mob in an update pass for pts, doing such wide scale changes aren't unheard of.

Also, in case it seems outlandish to suggest large scale changes that are applied only to a particular instance (which again is what ZOS does in every trial and dungeon):

Dungeons. Keep in mind that all of those instances are copies of a master instance, and there is a master instance for every dungeon, delve, and trial. Normal and veteran. The only exception seems to be "hard mode" that is selected within the dungeon, and there they use 'trickery' to replace a small number of monsters. Scale matters.

So if they did the veteran overland instance thing, each veteran overland instance would probably have a master veteran instance that stands separately and is scaled differently than the base instance that they use today. When a veteran overland zone was required for a player, a copy of the master veteran instance would be used. At least, with today's known (by us players) technology used by ZOS. This doubles the size of overland Tamriel, two zones for every one that exists today.

Using the 'hard mode' mob swap out would be swapping out thousands of mobs, which still doubles the number of overland mobs in Tamriel.

Having veteran instances the resources needed by the servers. They use fancy Dwemer technology on the megaserver and do magical things, from our perspective, but they cannot pull server resources out of nothing. The added veteran instances will require server capacity above what they are using now, to maintain the same player levels. Threads and processes take CPU, and this will need more of all three.

Suffice it to say that safe bets are on ZOS not doing that. Path of least resistance, and all that. However, if they do decide to go with veteran overland instances, there will be different technology that they will create and introduce to avoid having to maintain super sized Tamriel and use server hardware more efficiently.

I go back and forth on this, but... today... if ZOS does anything, my bet is on scaling the player down and taking the heat from end game players that may come of that. A very similar system is already in the game for bringing the character up to CP 160 and it will take less work to make the system bring players down to CP 160 than it will create, maintain, and host zone instances. Will they make it optional by setting? That is a coin toss, at this point, but my bet favors them doing it. If they go this route.

The above is based on what I have learned about the ESO megaservers and how they manage players over the years. Apparently, they don't use the term "instance" to refer to the copies of overland zones that we play in. They use the term "channels" and I am not completely sure what the significance of that word is in this context. I suspect that it means that there appear to be multiple "instances" of an overland zone, but that what is really happening is that many "channels" share the same "instance" and we just can't see each other. Not "phasing", as that is something else.

CP5 wrote: »

Issue is we haven't been given any indication that this thread has any meaning, since at two different points when ZOS commented on this, once before this thread's creation and one several months later, an identical response was given. That implied to me that nothing that was said here was looked at or understood, so we just wait until something happens.

I think the thread was monitored early on to collect "player sentiment" on the subject. They probably looked for pain points, and pain points related to suggestions people had on how they would do it. My gut says that collection has been done for a while, now. A long while. Someone other than a moderator may look at this, but there is little new information in here. If ZOS has any intention of making widespread changes to overland, it has probably already been decided how it will be done, and what form it will take.

Naturally, we won't know if they decide to do it, or how it will be done, until they tease it during some announcement stream. By that point, it is fully decided on how it will be done and it is locked and loaded into the plan. We just have to wait to see what they did when it gets closer to release. ZOS does not share with us, even though players share graciously with them.

CP5

My point was there were plenty of pain points for them to see, and yet their "we tried it in the past, and it didn't work" sentiment was shared with I think the exact same lines both times. As for instances, it isn't an issue of 'so many copies.' You can have hundreds of instances created for a dungeon, both normal and vet, it is when an instance is created the rules used to set it up vary, but the maintenance of the instance is probably the same regardless.

Just see before one tamriel where they had 3 separate rule sets for each zone designating them bronze/silver/gold. When created, the instance would modify enemy levels to match the level range the players in that faction would face, but as we see in dungeons they can also swap abilities for mobs as well as their base stats. Doing exactly what they did before one tamriel tech wise, which worked, but reducing the rulesets from 3 to 2 would make that situation easier than before if anything, and with enemies spawned off templates all you need to do is update those.

MrLachance

spartaxoxo wrote: »

MrLachance wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

MrLachance wrote: »

Many but not even close to the majority. And if you look at the numerous posts about the topic over the years until this one got created, always the same people you can count on two hands argueing against an army of disappointed people, its pretty clear that the frightening majority wants harder overland difficulty.

The devs have explicitly stated that it isn't the majority that wants it, and the majority of players avoid difficult content. This also aligns with the trophy data on psn, the harder the trophy the less people have it. The majority of people in the threads are always gonna be people have that a complaint.

CP5 wrote: »

They, use them in every single dungeon. Creating multiple versions of an instance is as standard a technique as making a new map. It i simply a tool they have.

The devs have stated outright that creating separate settings is a detriment and also that it would be a ton of work.

The may have already done it anyway just because they think it would be best for the playerbase though. But, they have talked in the past about how a separate instance is not simple.

It was explicitly related to Cadwells Silver+Gold. Not about the Own Faction Overland and Rich also explicitly stated that everyone loved it and a ton of people played it.

It was about both.

"So, we had that, Jeulen, at launch. It was called Cadwell's Silver and Cadwell's Gold. Nobody did it and everybody hated it, so we took it out and we put the challenge into world bosses and into solo arenas and into dungeons and trials. People just did not like the extra difficulty in the story stuff." <----past tense, about the old stuff.

I get that there’s a lot of people that do like the harder difficulty, but a HUGE portion of our player base just wants to do story, and they don’t want to have to struggle with difficult things.” <---- Transitions to talking about how things are, including the use of the present tense. This is about the current state of the game.

The majority didn't do it then and they don't do it now. They explicitly cited this as a concern because it was a concern.

It wasnt about both. The whole arguments of him were about cadwells silver + gold. That what he meant with that ''extra difficulty''. It was an extra difficulty added to the own faction overland difficulty in form of the questlines of the other 2 factions, called cadwells silver and gold. There was nowhere any complains about own faction overland. Or not a Ton of people would play it and start crying about that already like about cadwells silver + gold. The quote were he says this comes in the following quote soon.

And that ''extra'' difficulty of silver + gold he stated not only in your quote. He did it also in that one:

People didn't do it because they had to go through their own alliance first? That's not actually true. A ton of people completed their own alliance storylines to get to silver and gold. A ton of people did. People just did not like the extra difficulty in the story stuff.

the only complaints were about some minor quests like sancre tor and bugged ones.

spartaxoxo

MrLachance wrote: »

It wasnt about both.

Yes. It was. He made a clear transition into present day and present tense speech. He was saying that they tried it once before and the majority didn't like it back then, and they still avoid harder areas to this very day. He was not only talking about the past, he was dismissing the idea that they will change things now.

Later on he states...

“I totally hear you on the difficulty thing. I like things to be more difficult. But the data doesn’t lie. And we have never been more successful than where we are today. And a lot of that has to do with just how much freedom players have to go an experience story.”

“And yes, go look at Craglorn. There’s not a lot of people in Craglorn and that’s not super difficult but it’s more hard than the regular overland.”

He was speaking about both. The majority didn't do it back then and he doesn't believe it wouldn't be different now, because the majority does not engage in difficult content. He's basically like they aren't doing difficult stuff. They aren't even doing Craglorn. Data doesn't lie, the majority isn't in to it.

This aligns with the trophy data and their decision to keep saying no. If they thought the majority would use it and it would bring in money, it would've happened a long time ago.

Parasaurolophus

spartaxoxo wrote: »

CP5 wrote: »

How would it be bad for the normal one if people aren't even participating in the normal one?

Because splitting a population in half that's already barely sustainable will have negative impact on the people who ARE in that zone's ability to complete content.

Dead zone doesn't mean there's literally nobody there.

The last thing I want is the return of VR oneshot mudcrabs (or any oneshot overland mobs for that matter) when I just wanna do my surveys and go back to what I enjoy which is being sweaty in endgame.[/quote]

MrLachance wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

MrLachance wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

MrLachance wrote: »

Many but not even close to the majority. And if you look at the numerous posts about the topic over the years until this one got created, always the same people you can count on two hands argueing against an army of disappointed people, its pretty clear that the frightening majority wants harder overland difficulty.

The devs have explicitly stated that it isn't the majority that wants it, and the majority of players avoid difficult content. This also aligns with the trophy data on psn, the harder the trophy the less people have it. The majority of people in the threads are always gonna be people have that a complaint.

CP5 wrote: »

They, use them in every single dungeon. Creating multiple versions of an instance is as standard a technique as making a new map. It i simply a tool they have.

The devs have stated outright that creating separate settings is a detriment and also that it would be a ton of work.

The may have already done it anyway just because they think it would be best for the playerbase though. But, they have talked in the past about how a separate instance is not simple.

It was explicitly related to Cadwells Silver+Gold. Not about the Own Faction Overland and Rich also explicitly stated that everyone loved it and a ton of people played it.

It was about both.

"So, we had that, Jeulen, at launch. It was called Cadwell's Silver and Cadwell's Gold. Nobody did it and everybody hated it, so we took it out and we put the challenge into world bosses and into solo arenas and into dungeons and trials. People just did not like the extra difficulty in the story stuff." <----past tense, about the old stuff.

I get that there’s a lot of people that do like the harder difficulty, but a HUGE portion of our player base just wants to do story, and they don’t want to have to struggle with difficult things.” <---- Transitions to talking about how things are, including the use of the present tense. This is about the current state of the game.

The majority didn't do it then and they don't do it now. They explicitly cited this as a concern because it was a concern.

It wasnt about both. The whole arguments of him were about cadwells silver + gold. That what he meant with that ''extra difficulty''. It was an extra difficulty added to the own faction overland difficulty in form of the questlines of the other 2 factions, called cadwells silver and gold. There was nowhere any complains about own faction overland. Or not a Ton of people would play it and start crying about that already like about cadwells silver + gold. The quote were he says this comes in the following quote soon.

And that ''extra'' difficulty of silver + gold he stated not only in your quote. He did it also in that one:

People didn't do it because they had to go through their own alliance first? That's not actually true. A ton of people completed their own alliance storylines to get to silver and gold. A ton of people did. People just did not like the extra difficulty in the story stuff.

the only complaints were about some minor quests like sancre tor and bugged ones.

The fact that silver and gold were more difficult than the starting alliance is a serious mistake. This is not true. If the mobs matched your character level, then the difficulty was the same everywhere. Nothing has changed. You just had to have the appropriate level.
For some reason, everyone also forgot that there was a progression of mob levels even inside the location. If you started in Auridon, then you could not freely explore the location, because the level of the mobs gradually progressed as you progressed. You could no longer freely walk around Skywatch, because the mobs were too strong.
This is me to the fact that there were a lot of reasons for making the whole world scalable.

Ek1

There are 146 pages worth of messages when I jump in, I have to admit that I have skimmed most of the thread.

ESOs strongest 'welcome new players' feature is that stuff scales to the player's level and we got rid of the level-based areas. There is simply snowball's chance in hell that I would introduce any game to a friend if I find myself saying 'Oh yeah you are in the starter zone, we can play after you get to level X. See you in two weeks'. It is 2023 and games have developed a lot since level-restricted areas. Let us not regress to the dark ages.

More simultaneous mechanics
To me, harder content would mean that the harder the boss would be, the more dance moves it needs from the whole group. If you plan to solo a legendary boss (three wings in HP bar) then you handle all the four mechanics that can come at one time. To make it easier get a group of four players that each need to handle one mechanic. Now it just seems that you need to roll or block at the right time and otherwise just pour damage. The new areas/chapters world bosses generally have more engagement compared to e.g. dragons that can do only one thing at a time. Wave tail, breath fire or wave one wing. Like, really? 20+ players hitting them and that's all they got to give? These are the creatures good folks of Tamriel are afraid of?!

Not participating in combat to also be flagged as out of combat
Could some quality-of-life fixing be done regarding overland? After Elsweyr being in a party with someone that is engaging a boss at another side of the map also marks you to be combat thus people no longer want to group up to do daily or bosses or anything as they are locked in combat. If a player is not hitting anything nor is aiding anyone in his support range then would it be too much asked to let them be out of combat?

Naming convention
This was bought up in beta forums already. It is confusing that there is content that is open to everyone, open to max four player only, open to twelve players only and soloable but there are more than four names for those. Public dungeons, group dungeons, delves, group delves, trials, arenas and solo arenas. Could someone wear big boy pants and streamline the names to correspond to the number of players there can be at any given time? Would then be another 'Yes but no but yes' conversation evaded with new players.

Quest progression consistency
Some quests advance when you have a player in support range, some advance when a person is in the same zone, and some don't share advancement at all. To me, it would be obvious that those in the support range get the advancement.

Once playable quest rewards
So the player saves the coast from the gimp dragon attacks and gets a ...dusty sword of a set that has no use? The queen of Yellow team thanks for figuring out the new mane by giving a green hat? It is not just an overland issue but there it is repeated numerous times that the rewards are quite junk. In case they would be a legendary or hefty sum of gold to even cower the armour repairs or maybe even fix the champion's gear for their hard work then yeaaah now we are talking about some gratitude and meaningful rewards. In the early DLCs and base game there were unique items that had their own voice lines, effects and names. Those were cool and they made at least me play those same quests again to get more of them.

Use of treasure items
Overland and game has tons of cool items that can be only sold. People would love to be able to use them as furniture.

Chest spawn and despawns
If there is a treasure chest or loot chest or such, some NPC should have an interest in protecting it. Also if there is no one protecting it anymore then leaving it to the wild should make it disappear as someone surely finds it and loots it. In other words, no more half-looted chests.

joergino

Ek1 wrote: »

Chest spawn and despawns
If there is a treasure chest or loot chest or such, some NPC should have an interest in protecting it. Also if there is no one protecting it anymore then leaving it to the wild should make it disappear as someone surely finds it and loots it. In other words, no more half-looted chests.

They already despawn, as has been mentioned here many times before.

TaSheen

joergino wrote: »

Ek1 wrote: »

Chest spawn and despawns
If there is a treasure chest or loot chest or such, some NPC should have an interest in protecting it. Also if there is no one protecting it anymore then leaving it to the wild should make it disappear as someone surely finds it and loots it. In other words, no more half-looted chests.

They already despawn, as has been mentioned here many times before.

Eh well.... he's wanting some mega overpowered NPC to stand guard over a chest so you're facing a major battle to just loot the damn thing.

*sigh*

BretonMage

TaSheen wrote: »

joergino wrote: »

Ek1 wrote: »

Chest spawn and despawns
If there is a treasure chest or loot chest or such, some NPC should have an interest in protecting it. Also if there is no one protecting it anymore then leaving it to the wild should make it disappear as someone surely finds it and loots it. In other words, no more half-looted chests.

They already despawn, as has been mentioned here many times before.

Eh well.... he's wanting some mega overpowered NPC to stand guard over a chest so you're facing a major battle to just loot the damn thing.

*sigh*

See, this is the thing which makes me wary of the clamour for vet overland. Everyone seems to have a different vision of it. What I want (simply, just harder bosses, instanced is fine) is not the same as what someone else might want (either it takes you the better part of an afternoon just to traverse a zone, or you're suddenly as weak as a beginner despite having played the game for 5 years). I'm honestly a little scared of the implementation of it; I'm certain it'll *** a lot of people, or me, or both, off.

MrLachance

spartaxoxo wrote: »

MrLachance wrote: »

It wasnt about both.

Yes. It was. He made a clear transition into present day and present tense speech. He was saying that they tried it once before and the majority didn't like it back then, and they still avoid harder areas to this very day. He was not only talking about the past, he was dismissing the idea that they will change things now.

Later on he states...

“I totally hear you on the difficulty thing. I like things to be more difficult. But the data doesn’t lie. And we have never been more successful than where we are today. And a lot of that has to do with just how much freedom players have to go an experience story.”

“And yes, go look at Craglorn. There’s not a lot of people in Craglorn and that’s not super difficult but it’s more hard than the regular overland.”

He was speaking about both. The majority didn't do it back then and he doesn't believe it wouldn't be different now, because the majority does not engage in difficult content. He's basically like they aren't doing difficult stuff. They aren't even doing Craglorn. Data doesn't lie, the majority isn't in to it.

This aligns with the trophy data and their decision to keep saying no. If they thought the majority would use it and it would bring in money, it would've happened a long time ago.

No it wasnt about own faction overland because first he never explicitly stated it, like he ''always'' did with cadwells silver + gold without exception or his statement in the quote I posted and what you posted would contradict each other. You just turn it that way u want it.

MrLachance

@Parasaurolophus

Its not a mistake. When you reached veteran rank 1 the enemys on the same veteran rank were way stronger 1. It was like another league. And also their stats scaled way higher from veteran rank to the next. The progression of mob lvl's is also one reason why the overland experience nowadays gets easier and easier the higher level you reach and the more gear you get. Its just lame.

MrLachance

BretonMage wrote: »

TaSheen wrote: »

joergino wrote: »

Ek1 wrote: »

Chest spawn and despawns
If there is a treasure chest or loot chest or such, some NPC should have an interest in protecting it. Also if there is no one protecting it anymore then leaving it to the wild should make it disappear as someone surely finds it and loots it. In other words, no more half-looted chests.

They already despawn, as has been mentioned here many times before.

Eh well.... he's wanting some mega overpowered NPC to stand guard over a chest so you're facing a major battle to just loot the damn thing.

*sigh*

See, this is the thing which makes me wary of the clamour for vet overland. Everyone seems to have a different vision of it. What I want (simply, just harder bosses, instanced is fine) is not the same as what someone else might want (either it takes you the better part of an afternoon just to traverse a zone, or you're suddenly as weak as a beginner despite having played the game for 5 years). I'm honestly a little scared of the implementation of it; I'm certain it'll *** a lot of people, or me, or both, off.

I wouldnt be scared at all. Having an option doesnt force people. The real issue here are those [snip] people wich dont even allow you to have an option.

[edited for baiting]

kloverleaf

I'm not sure if this has been suggested but.

I think it would be cool to have each zone the way it currently is. Then when you complete the zone story there could be a whole new story open up within the same zone but with each completion and with the new story the content gets harder. Maybe with another set of nifty achievements. Like there are some excellent zones that I really liked the story of but now that I've completed the zone I don't go there anymore.

ZOS wouldn't have to create a whole new zone, just more content to get tucked inside each zone

BretonMage

MrLachance wrote: »

BretonMage wrote: »

TaSheen wrote: »

joergino wrote: »

Ek1 wrote: »

Chest spawn and despawns
If there is a treasure chest or loot chest or such, some NPC should have an interest in protecting it. Also if there is no one protecting it anymore then leaving it to the wild should make it disappear as someone surely finds it and loots it. In other words, no more half-looted chests.

They already despawn, as has been mentioned here many times before.

Eh well.... he's wanting some mega overpowered NPC to stand guard over a chest so you're facing a major battle to just loot the damn thing.

*sigh*

See, this is the thing which makes me wary of the clamour for vet overland. Everyone seems to have a different vision of it. What I want (simply, just harder bosses, instanced is fine) is not the same as what someone else might want (either it takes you the better part of an afternoon just to traverse a zone, or you're suddenly as weak as a beginner despite having played the game for 5 years). I'm honestly a little scared of the implementation of it; I'm certain it'll *** a lot of people, or me, or both, off.

I wouldnt be scared at all. Having an option doesnt force people. The real issue here are those [snip] people wich dont even allow you to have an option.

Having the option would be great, not scared of that at all. I'm anxious (just a little, I mean, we don't even know if this is what the reveal will be) about how they might implement it, as it might end up being extremely disappointing.

[edited to remove quote]

MrLachance

BretonMage wrote: »

MrLachance wrote: »

BretonMage wrote: »

TaSheen wrote: »

joergino wrote: »

Ek1 wrote: »

Chest spawn and despawns
If there is a treasure chest or loot chest or such, some NPC should have an interest in protecting it. Also if there is no one protecting it anymore then leaving it to the wild should make it disappear as someone surely finds it and loots it. In other words, no more half-looted chests.

They already despawn, as has been mentioned here many times before.

Eh well.... he's wanting some mega overpowered NPC to stand guard over a chest so you're facing a major battle to just loot the damn thing.

*sigh*

See, this is the thing which makes me wary of the clamour for vet overland. Everyone seems to have a different vision of it. What I want (simply, just harder bosses, instanced is fine) is not the same as what someone else might want (either it takes you the better part of an afternoon just to traverse a zone, or you're suddenly as weak as a beginner despite having played the game for 5 years). I'm honestly a little scared of the implementation of it; I'm certain it'll *** a lot of people, or me, or both, off.

I wouldnt be scared at all. Having an option doesnt force people. The real issue here are those [snip] people wich dont even allow you to have an option.

Having the option would be great, not scared of that at all. I'm anxious (just a little, I mean, we don't even know if this is what the reveal will be) about how they might implement it, as it might end up being extremely disappointing.

that's how i think about it too

[edited to remove quote]

Parasaurolophus

MrLachance wrote: »

@Parasaurolophus

Its not a mistake. When you reached veteran rank 1 the enemys on the same veteran rank were way stronger 1. It was like another league. And also their stats scaled way higher from veteran rank to the next. The progression of mob lvl's is also one reason why the overland experience nowadays gets easier and easier the higher level you reach and the more gear you get. Its just lame.

No, they weren't. Rank 1 enemies for a rank 1 player were as difficult as level 10 enemies for a level 10 player. I remember very well how in silver and gold I just spammed a snipe without using any healing skills and food. And it was still too easy. It was 2014.

Elsonso

BretonMage wrote: »

Having the option would be great, not scared of that at all. I'm anxious (just a little, I mean, we don't even know if this is what the reveal will be) about how they might implement it, as it might end up being extremely disappointing.

A lot of times, people suggest making things an option, and that makes perfect sense for players because this seems to be the proper method to achieve harmony in the community. Everyone sort of gets what they want.

Options can be expensive to develop, and expensive to maintain going forward. They may not always make sense to do, even if they sound on the forum like the ideal solution to a problem.

For this reason, I always hesitate to accept the "just make it an option" suggestion. This appeases the other people in the forum, and reduces the toxicity load, but my concern is that it is not cost effective. It may make the forum happy, but not the developers. It is a case of potentially setting up the players for an expectation that will never happen.

In this specific case, there are possible implementations of a "veteran overland" where I expect that ZOS would not do an option and everyone would just get the new normal, without any choice at all.

MrLachance

Parasaurolophus wrote: »

MrLachance wrote: »

@Parasaurolophus

Its not a mistake. When you reached veteran rank 1 the enemys on the same veteran rank were way stronger 1. It was like another league. And also their stats scaled way higher from veteran rank to the next. The progression of mob lvl's is also one reason why the overland experience nowadays gets easier and easier the higher level you reach and the more gear you get. Its just lame.

No, they weren't. Rank 1 enemies for a rank 1 player were as difficult as level 10 enemies for a level 10 player. I remember very well how in silver and gold I just spammed a snipe without using any healing skills and food. And it was still too easy. It was 2014.

yes they were. i also still know exactly how the difficulty increased by a lot after i killed molag bal first time and then started at VR 1. It was a different world. With Veteran Rank 1 i could kill maximum 2 mobs at a time and 3 were already to much. I did easly more in own faction overland.

Parasaurolophus

MrLachance wrote: »

Parasaurolophus wrote: »

MrLachance wrote: »

@Parasaurolophus

Its not a mistake. When you reached veteran rank 1 the enemys on the same veteran rank were way stronger 1. It was like another league. And also their stats scaled way higher from veteran rank to the next. The progression of mob lvl's is also one reason why the overland experience nowadays gets easier and easier the higher level you reach and the more gear you get. Its just lame.

No, they weren't. Rank 1 enemies for a rank 1 player were as difficult as level 10 enemies for a level 10 player. I remember very well how in silver and gold I just spammed a snipe without using any healing skills and food. And it was still too easy. It was 2014.

yes they were. i also still know exactly how the difficulty increased by a lot after i killed molag bal first time and then started at VR 1. It was a different world. With Veteran Rank 1 i could kill maximum 2 mobs at a time and 3 were already to much. I did easly more in own faction overland.

Are you sure that your equipment was appropriate and you did everything right? Because from my own experience I can say for sure that I have not experienced any difficulties.

MrLachance

Elsonso wrote: »

BretonMage wrote: »

Having the option would be great, not scared of that at all. I'm anxious (just a little, I mean, we don't even know if this is what the reveal will be) about how they might implement it, as it might end up being extremely disappointing.

A lot of times, people suggest making things an option, and that makes perfect sense for players because this seems to be the proper method to achieve harmony in the community. Everyone sort of gets what they want.

Options can be expensive to develop, and expensive to maintain going forward. They may not always make sense to do, even if they sound on the forum like the ideal solution to a problem.

For this reason, I always hesitate to accept the "just make it an option" suggestion. This appeases the other people in the forum, and reduces the toxicity load, but my concern is that it is not cost effective. It may make the forum happy, but not the developers. It is a case of potentially setting up the players for an expectation that will never happen.

In this specific case, there are possible implementations of a "veteran overland" where I expect that ZOS would not do an option and everyone would just get the new normal, without any choice at all.

ZOS got enough money. They get done their new hardware soon and they always talk about their new tech what gives them more possibilities. They spent the money for the hardware anyway, so let them usse them. Its their job to give us content instead of content in the crownstore.

And without an option there will be always people which press on the lacrimal *** because of handycap, dying doesnt fit in their roleplay and blablabla. Options are always nice. At the end there will always be people what are negative about something. Trying to satisfy them aswell is the biggest mistake.

MrLachance

Parasaurolophus wrote: »

MrLachance wrote: »

Parasaurolophus wrote: »

MrLachance wrote: »

@Parasaurolophus

Its not a mistake. When you reached veteran rank 1 the enemys on the same veteran rank were way stronger 1. It was like another league. And also their stats scaled way higher from veteran rank to the next. The progression of mob lvl's is also one reason why the overland experience nowadays gets easier and easier the higher level you reach and the more gear you get. Its just lame.

No, they weren't. Rank 1 enemies for a rank 1 player were as difficult as level 10 enemies for a level 10 player. I remember very well how in silver and gold I just spammed a snipe without using any healing skills and food. And it was still too easy. It was 2014.

yes they were. i also still know exactly how the difficulty increased by a lot after i killed molag bal first time and then started at VR 1. It was a different world. With Veteran Rank 1 i could kill maximum 2 mobs at a time and 3 were already to much. I did easly more in own faction overland.

Are you sure that your equipment was appropriate and you did everything right? Because from my own experience I can say for sure that I have not experienced any difficulties.

My equipment isnt relevant. I still get all trifectas ingame nvm my equipment. [snip]

[edited for baiting]

SilverBride

Parasaurolophus wrote: »

MrLachance wrote: »

Parasaurolophus wrote: »

MrLachance wrote: »

@Parasaurolophus

Its not a mistake. When you reached veteran rank 1 the enemys on the same veteran rank were way stronger 1. It was like another league. And also their stats scaled way higher from veteran rank to the next. The progression of mob lvl's is also one reason why the overland experience nowadays gets easier and easier the higher level you reach and the more gear you get. Its just lame.

No, they weren't. Rank 1 enemies for a rank 1 player were as difficult as level 10 enemies for a level 10 player. I remember very well how in silver and gold I just spammed a snipe without using any healing skills and food. And it was still too easy. It was 2014.

yes they were. i also still know exactly how the difficulty increased by a lot after i killed molag bal first time and then started at VR 1. It was a different world. With Veteran Rank 1 i could kill maximum 2 mobs at a time and 3 were already to much. I did easly more in own faction overland.

Are you sure that your equipment was appropriate and you did everything right? Because from my own experience I can say for sure that I have not experienced any difficulties.

I had the same experience with mobs being too hard once I reached the veteran level zones. I followed where the quests took me and did them in the order that they were given to me. If the mobs were scaling to my level then the scaling was way off because I would die trying to fight off a pack of wolves.

Elsonso

SilverBride wrote: »

Parasaurolophus wrote: »

MrLachance wrote: »

Parasaurolophus wrote: »

MrLachance wrote: »

@Parasaurolophus

Its not a mistake. When you reached veteran rank 1 the enemys on the same veteran rank were way stronger 1. It was like another league. And also their stats scaled way higher from veteran rank to the next. The progression of mob lvl's is also one reason why the overland experience nowadays gets easier and easier the higher level you reach and the more gear you get. Its just lame.

No, they weren't. Rank 1 enemies for a rank 1 player were as difficult as level 10 enemies for a level 10 player. I remember very well how in silver and gold I just spammed a snipe without using any healing skills and food. And it was still too easy. It was 2014.

yes they were. i also still know exactly how the difficulty increased by a lot after i killed molag bal first time and then started at VR 1. It was a different world. With Veteran Rank 1 i could kill maximum 2 mobs at a time and 3 were already to much. I did easly more in own faction overland.

Are you sure that your equipment was appropriate and you did everything right? Because from my own experience I can say for sure that I have not experienced any difficulties.

I had the same experience with mobs being too hard once I reached the veteran level zones. I followed where the quests took me and did them in the order that they were given to me. If the mobs were scaling to my level then the scaling was way off because I would die trying to fight off a pack of wolves.

According to what I remember them saying... ZOS has never used dynamically scaled mobs. Their mobs are hand set at the level that they appear in the game. That means that before One Tamriel, this was by zone, with each zone having a range, and then each mob in that zone was placed in that range. Zones were placed in order by level range, so we started somewhere like Bleakrock and worked through Bal Foyen, Stonefalls, Deshaan, Shadowfen, Eastmarch, and then The Rift, before finally heading to (our alliance specific version of) Coldharbour. In that order.

MrLachance

Elsonso wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Parasaurolophus wrote: »

MrLachance wrote: »

Parasaurolophus wrote: »

MrLachance wrote: »

@Parasaurolophus

Its not a mistake. When you reached veteran rank 1 the enemys on the same veteran rank were way stronger 1. It was like another league. And also their stats scaled way higher from veteran rank to the next. The progression of mob lvl's is also one reason why the overland experience nowadays gets easier and easier the higher level you reach and the more gear you get. Its just lame.

No, they weren't. Rank 1 enemies for a rank 1 player were as difficult as level 10 enemies for a level 10 player. I remember very well how in silver and gold I just spammed a snipe without using any healing skills and food. And it was still too easy. It was 2014.

yes they were. i also still know exactly how the difficulty increased by a lot after i killed molag bal first time and then started at VR 1. It was a different world. With Veteran Rank 1 i could kill maximum 2 mobs at a time and 3 were already to much. I did easly more in own faction overland.

Are you sure that your equipment was appropriate and you did everything right? Because from my own experience I can say for sure that I have not experienced any difficulties.

I had the same experience with mobs being too hard once I reached the veteran level zones. I followed where the quests took me and did them in the order that they were given to me. If the mobs were scaling to my level then the scaling was way off because I would die trying to fight off a pack of wolves.

According to what I remember them saying... ZOS has never used dynamically scaled mobs. Their mobs are hand set at the level that they appear in the game. That means that before One Tamriel, this was by zone, with each zone having a range, and then each mob in that zone was placed in that range. Zones were placed in order by level range, so we started somewhere like Bleakrock and worked through Bal Foyen, Stonefalls, Deshaan, Shadowfen, Eastmarch, and then The Rift, before finally heading to (our alliance specific version of) Coldharbour. In that order.

That is correct. It was about the scaling in own faction overland between two lvl's was way lower than between two veteran ranks. that is way cadwells almanach was a lot harder.

SilverBride

Elsonso wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

I had the same experience with mobs being too hard once I reached the veteran level zones. I followed where the quests took me and did them in the order that they were given to me. If the mobs were scaling to my level then the scaling was way off because I would die trying to fight off a pack of wolves.

According to what I remember them saying... ZOS has never used dynamically scaled mobs. Their mobs are hand set at the level that they appear in the game. That means that before One Tamriel, this was by zone, with each zone having a range, and then each mob in that zone was placed in that range. Zones were placed in order by level range, so we started somewhere like Bleakrock and worked through Bal Foyen, Stonefalls, Deshaan, Shadowfen, Eastmarch, and then The Rift, before finally heading to (our alliance specific version of) Coldharbour. In that order.

Well some are saying that the mobs in Cadwell's Silver and Gold weren't more difficult than the ones in our own faction's zones, but they definitely were. I played all the zones in the order that the quests took me and didn't veer off so it wasn't anything I did such as going ahead to mobs I hadn't reached the level of yet.

Regardless, as far as the game today I still feel that overland is fine just as it is, but in a good faith effort to make the game more enjoyable for those who don't feel this way I fully support difficulty sliders and challenge banners as options. I also find difficulty levels for overland instanced content, such as delves and public dungeons more than reasonable. The only thing I don't support is a separate veteran overland instance for reasons previously stated.

BretonMage

Elsonso wrote: »

In this specific case, there are possible implementations of a "veteran overland" where I expect that ZOS would not do an option and everyone would just get the new normal, without any choice at all.

You suggested previously that their solution might be to scale us down. Are you suggesting, then, that the player is scaled down (presumably at high CP levels) without a choice? I can't imagine that going down well.

Even if it is the solution they settle for, I hope it isn't an across-the-board solution where we are scaled down against ALL the enemies. As others have mentioned, having super-powerful mudcrabs would be ridiculous (and tedious). If they could fine-tune our scaling/debuffs, and I've no idea if that's even possible, that might make the scaling feel a little more natural.

Elsonso

BretonMage wrote: »

Elsonso wrote: »

In this specific case, there are possible implementations of a "veteran overland" where I expect that ZOS would not do an option and everyone would just get the new normal, without any choice at all.

You suggested previously that their solution might be to scale us down. Are you suggesting, then, that the player is scaled down (presumably at high CP levels) without a choice? I can't imagine that going down well.

Even if it is the solution they settle for, I hope it isn't an across-the-board solution where we are scaled down against ALL the enemies. As others have mentioned, having super-powerful mudcrabs would be ridiculous (and tedious). If they could fine-tune our scaling/debuffs, and I've no idea if that's even possible, that might make the scaling feel a little more natural.

If they go with the scaling down of the character, then I expect there will be an Option. Perhaps even a slider, as this would be a dynamic thing that is applied as the game is played. It would not matter who else is around, since the monsters would all be the same as they are today. Scaling down the character and having an option/slider is the only solution that I have heard from players that I think has any chance of seeing the light of day. But, what do I know. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

What I was referring to up above was full on veteran zones. No scaling of the character. If they do those, I doubt there will be an option. I expect everyone will just get whatever it is they roll out. I think this path is unlikely, so it does not matter whether there is an option or not.

TaSheen

*rolls eyes* At this point I just want them to BE DAMNED DONE WITH IT. This sort of "tease" from a dev drives me NUTS. [snip]

Seriously.

And it does NOT - DECIDEDLY does not - make me want to live here and pant after the January reveal. QUITE the opposite in fact. If they had something that would cause every player here to salivate and pop an annual sub....

They'd have posted it.

They haven't. So.... yeah, nothing to see here. Move along.

[edited for bashing]

francesinhalover

TaSheen wrote: »

*rolls eyes* At this point I just want them to BE DAMNED DONE WITH IT. This sort of "tease" from a dev drives me NUTS. [snip]

Seriously.

And it does NOT - DECIDEDLY does not - make me want to live here and pant after the January reveal. QUITE the opposite in fact. If they had something that would cause every player here to salivate and pop an annual sub....

They'd have posted it.

They haven't. So.... yeah, nothing to see here. Move along.

[edited for bashing]

They want to create hype, the issue is, even if people are curious, they will also be irritated.
It for sure did annoy me. I do not want a new class, but it's most likely a monk? class (monks are a...they punch and kick things, ya know martial arts... for a game that tries to stay realistic it sure is a weird thing to add.
but who knows, maybe it's npc marriage?.
This game's engine is so limited, i wouldn't be surprised if changing overland dificulty is hard or impossible.
That being said, i am fine with the current overland. tbh overland mobs annoy me and i rather dodge them than take longer to kill them.
My bigger issue is the quest bosses. they die way too fast for me.