Overland Content Feedback Thread

Kyip

They did it again, just now, HERE, where we were talking about what difficulty people expect for individual mobs.'

That was a solid, insightful, constructive, on-topic conversation that provide value. I was learning from the people who disagreed with me. I was forced to better articulate my positions. I saw reactions to my posts indicating people found them insightful and helpful too. Now it's dead. Again.

Kyip

@ZOS_GregoryV

Please stop thanking us for understanding. Do not rub salt in the damned wound.

Surgee

Kyip wrote: »

They did it again, just now, HERE, where we were talking about what difficulty people expect for individual mobs.'

That was a solid, insightful, constructive, on-topic conversation that provide value. I was learning from the people who disagreed with me. I was forced to better articulate my positions. I saw reactions to my posts indicating people found them insightful and helpful too. Now it's dead. Again.

Reading through the OP's post, I don't think difficulty should be about how long it takes to kill something due to high hp pool, but the damage and frequency of enemy attacks. The difficulty should mean higher engagement in combat by dodging, blocking, countering etc, not spamming attack for a longer time.

Increase hp - longer fight, not harder. Boring.
Increase damage / attack frequency, response timeframes - harder fight, same duration
Increased all of the above - much harder fight, slightly longer duration.

And before someone says it, this doesn't require rewriting everything. It's a bunch of parameters that ZOS can already control (as seen in veteran dungeon challenges)

Franchise408

Kyip wrote: »

They did it again, just now, HERE, where we were talking about what difficulty people expect for individual mobs.'

That was a solid, insightful, constructive, on-topic conversation that provide value. I was learning from the people who disagreed with me. I was forced to better articulate my positions. I saw reactions to my posts indicating people found them insightful and helpful too. Now it's dead. Again.

Even more evidence of the poor moderation methods used on this forum that are being highlighted in another thread.

SilverBride

From the original post:

"With the creation of this thread, please note that future threads created to address overland content will be closed and redirected to this one."

o_Primate_o

how about minor expedition when players are traveling on the roads.

colossalvoids

Franchise408 wrote: »

Kyip wrote: »

They did it again, just now, HERE, where we were talking about what difficulty people expect for individual mobs.'

That was a solid, insightful, constructive, on-topic conversation that provide value. I was learning from the people who disagreed with me. I was forced to better articulate my positions. I saw reactions to my posts indicating people found them insightful and helpful too. Now it's dead. Again.

Even more evidence of the poor moderation methods used on this forum that are being highlighted in another thread.

Honestly this exact two threads were quickly derailed by the posters to be closed and redirected here, if you're reading them post factum already closed it's getting more obvious. Moderation is an issue but some posters (not OP) intentionally or not triggering the end result by the current ruleset.

mocap

Surgee wrote: »

Increase hp - longer fight, not harder. Boring.
Increase damage / attack frequency, response timeframes - harder fight, same duration
Increased all of the above - much harder fight, slightly longer duration.

An increase in HP is unlikely. Two players: one turned on high overland difficulty, other did not. Both are looking at the same mob. Obviously, HP of this mob should be the same for both players. Now all sorts of percentages (% more mob damage, % less your damage) are very suitable.

In general, I wouldn't change the difficulty of trash mobs in any way. Impact of overland difficulty should be only for bosses, mini-bosses, some unique (named) opponents. Normal 32k HP mobs should remain either unchanged or with minimal buffs.

Surgee

mocap wrote: »

Surgee wrote: »

Increase hp - longer fight, not harder. Boring.
Increase damage / attack frequency, response timeframes - harder fight, same duration
Increased all of the above - much harder fight, slightly longer duration.

An increase in HP is unlikely. Two players: one turned on high overland difficulty, other did not. Both are looking at the same mob. Obviously, HP of this mob should be the same for both players. Now all sorts of percentages (% more mob damage, % less your damage) are very suitable.

In general, I wouldn't change the difficulty of trash mobs in any way. Impact of overland difficulty should be only for bosses, mini-bosses, some unique (named) opponents. Normal 32k HP mobs should remain either unchanged or with minimal buffs.

I don't think overland difficulty will be toggable. That's a good thing.

Let me digress a little. I know this community want to be able to literally turn off mobs, damage, and any challenge, but if you look at forums outside of this one, where players talk about ESO but don't play it anymore, this type of "easy" mode is what killed the game for them. People here forget it's an MMO. You won't hear about it here though, because the only ones left here are the ones who enjoy the game enough to stay. Current concurrent player count, according to charts is around 2% of all the people who played the game, so obviously a lot of things are wrong, and if you read opinions outside of this bubble, it's very clear what was wrong for years.

mocap

Surgee wrote: »

Let me digress a little. I know this community want to be able to literally turn off mobs, damage, and any challenge, but if you look at forums outside of this one, where players talk about ESO but don't play it anymore, this type of "easy" mode is what killed the game for them. People here forget it's an MMO. You won't hear about it here though, because the only ones left here are the ones who enjoy the game enough to stay. Current concurrent player count, according to charts is around 2% of all the people who played the game, so obviously a lot of things are wrong, and if you read opinions outside of this bubble, it's very clear what was wrong for years.

Sure, there is such a thing. Community indeed can differ between official forum and say reddit.

The main thing is to keep everyone's interests in mind. I also want hard overland, because of this my questing stuck in Summerset due to super boring combat. But it needs to be done in a way that casual players don't feel rejected by any means.

disky

mocap wrote: »

Surgee wrote: »

Increase hp - longer fight, not harder. Boring.
Increase damage / attack frequency, response timeframes - harder fight, same duration
Increased all of the above - much harder fight, slightly longer duration.

An increase in HP is unlikely. Two players: one turned on high overland difficulty, other did not. Both are looking at the same mob. Obviously, HP of this mob should be the same for both players. Now all sorts of percentages (% more mob damage, % less your damage) are very suitable.

In general, I wouldn't change the difficulty of trash mobs in any way. Impact of overland difficulty should be only for bosses, mini-bosses, some unique (named) opponents. Normal 32k HP mobs should remain either unchanged or with minimal buffs.

No no, I want harder trash mobs. That's basically the entire reason I'm here. World bosses can take a while to defeat, and are at least somewhat lethal, so that's fine by me. I wouldn't mind the ability to raise their difficulty if I can but what I spend most of my time doing in the overland game is fighting disappointing enemies which die in a heartbeat. I want those enemies to feel like a challenge. Delve, public dungeon and story bosses definitely also need to be dramatically improved but like I said, I don't spend the bulk of my time fighting them.

I want my experience to be a challenge everywhere, and if my primary experience is fighting trash mobs then I want trash mobs to be a challenge. They don't HAVE to be trash. I want to be forced to consider angles and make choices when I'm entering an enemy camp instead of wrecking the entire place in moments.

The whole point of me being in this thread is to try and make things in the game matter more. To me the game is largely trash mobs, and so they should matter more.

Kyip

o_Primate_o wrote: »

how about minor expedition when players are traveling on the roads.

Wildstar did this, it was good. I think it would especially benefit newer players or alt characters who do not have their mount speeds build up yet.

Kyip

mocap wrote: »

In general, I wouldn't change the difficulty of trash mobs in any way. Impact of overland difficulty should be only for bosses, mini-bosses, some unique (named) opponents. Normal 32k HP mobs should remain either unchanged or with minimal buffs.

I think this is a very good idea. It shouldn't make the map a slog with hard wasp fights, like people have mentioned in old Craglorn. It also shouldn't negatively impact less powerful players/characters from enjoyment and progress through most overland zone content. It would also make the actual boss and/or unique encounters more meaningful/impactful for the people who want that.

Franchise408

My thing with trash mobs is... I don't think trash mobs should be particularly difficult, but bears and skeevers shouldn't be the exact same thing just with a different skin.

CP5

disky wrote: »

mocap wrote: »

Surgee wrote: »

Increase hp - longer fight, not harder. Boring.
Increase damage / attack frequency, response timeframes - harder fight, same duration
Increased all of the above - much harder fight, slightly longer duration.

An increase in HP is unlikely. Two players: one turned on high overland difficulty, other did not. Both are looking at the same mob. Obviously, HP of this mob should be the same for both players. Now all sorts of percentages (% more mob damage, % less your damage) are very suitable.

In general, I wouldn't change the difficulty of trash mobs in any way. Impact of overland difficulty should be only for bosses, mini-bosses, some unique (named) opponents. Normal 32k HP mobs should remain either unchanged or with minimal buffs.

No no, I want harder trash mobs. That's basically the entire reason I'm here. World bosses can take a while to defeat, and are at least somewhat lethal, so that's fine by me. I wouldn't mind the ability to raise their difficulty if I can but what I spend most of my time doing in the overland game is fighting disappointing enemies which die in a heartbeat. I want those enemies to feel like a challenge. Delve, public dungeon and story bosses definitely also need to be dramatically improved but like I said, I don't spend the bulk of my time fighting them.

I want my experience to be a challenge everywhere, and if my primary experience is fighting trash mobs then I want trash mobs to be a challenge. They don't HAVE to be trash. I want to be forced to consider angles and make choices when I'm entering an enemy camp instead of wrecking the entire place in moments.

The whole point of me being in this thread is to try and make things in the game matter more. To me the game is largely trash mobs, and so they should matter more.

When Dragons Dogma 2 came out, I spent no small amount of time just wandering areas I had already gone in, and while some of the encounters were dynamic, so I could fight different groups of enemies in the same place, many weren't, but I was still able to enjoy even early areas because this was done well. Wolves, for example, may take a low level player a half dozen hits to slay, and a higher level player can one shot them, but if your stamina is drained an opportunistic wolf on the sidelines of a battle can still run in, grab you by the neck, and run away to eat your face with their friends. Enemies can be simple and easy but still demand respect, and while I don't expect ESO to support something that dynamic, they could do anything more than nothing so that random bandits aren't interchangeable with deadra from oblivion. It is hard to feel like a cult poised to end the world is made up of members no stronger than your average street thug.

disky

CP5 wrote: »

disky wrote: »

mocap wrote: »

Surgee wrote: »

Increase hp - longer fight, not harder. Boring.
Increase damage / attack frequency, response timeframes - harder fight, same duration
Increased all of the above - much harder fight, slightly longer duration.

An increase in HP is unlikely. Two players: one turned on high overland difficulty, other did not. Both are looking at the same mob. Obviously, HP of this mob should be the same for both players. Now all sorts of percentages (% more mob damage, % less your damage) are very suitable.

In general, I wouldn't change the difficulty of trash mobs in any way. Impact of overland difficulty should be only for bosses, mini-bosses, some unique (named) opponents. Normal 32k HP mobs should remain either unchanged or with minimal buffs.

No no, I want harder trash mobs. That's basically the entire reason I'm here. World bosses can take a while to defeat, and are at least somewhat lethal, so that's fine by me. I wouldn't mind the ability to raise their difficulty if I can but what I spend most of my time doing in the overland game is fighting disappointing enemies which die in a heartbeat. I want those enemies to feel like a challenge. Delve, public dungeon and story bosses definitely also need to be dramatically improved but like I said, I don't spend the bulk of my time fighting them.

I want my experience to be a challenge everywhere, and if my primary experience is fighting trash mobs then I want trash mobs to be a challenge. They don't HAVE to be trash. I want to be forced to consider angles and make choices when I'm entering an enemy camp instead of wrecking the entire place in moments.

The whole point of me being in this thread is to try and make things in the game matter more. To me the game is largely trash mobs, and so they should matter more.

When Dragons Dogma 2 came out, I spent no small amount of time just wandering areas I had already gone in, and while some of the encounters were dynamic, so I could fight different groups of enemies in the same place, many weren't, but I was still able to enjoy even early areas because this was done well. Wolves, for example, may take a low level player a half dozen hits to slay, and a higher level player can one shot them, but if your stamina is drained an opportunistic wolf on the sidelines of a battle can still run in, grab you by the neck, and run away to eat your face with their friends. Enemies can be simple and easy but still demand respect, and while I don't expect ESO to support something that dynamic, they could do anything more than nothing so that random bandits aren't interchangeable with deadra from oblivion. It is hard to feel like a cult poised to end the world is made up of members no stronger than your average street thug.

I agree with that. Not everything has to, or should, feel equal in difficulty, but a base level difficulty should be established for different types of enemies and using an optional system, those enemies should all be made to scale up. So a skeever is weak on its own but a pack of skeevers is a threat if ignored, wolves are stronger but still relatively weak and more dangerous than skeevers in smaller packs, humanoids like bandits are stronger still, and the scale travels upward through to more imposing monsters and daedra.

Overland boss-level encounters in delves, public dungeons and zone stories would need a separate scale but one that still considers their type. So if you're fighting a bandit leader, it's a challenge, but it still feels like you're fighting a skilled humanoid. And if you're fighting a Daedric Lord, your character is having a bad day.

Please make encounters make sense and make them feel like they matter, ZOS. That's all I want.

Arunei

Surgee wrote: »

I don't think overland difficulty will be toggable. That's a good thing.

Let me digress a little. I know this community want to be able to literally turn off mobs, damage, and any challenge, but if you look at forums outside of this one, where players talk about ESO but don't play it anymore, this type of "easy" mode is what killed the game for them. People here forget it's an MMO. You won't hear about it here though, because the only ones left here are the ones who enjoy the game enough to stay. Current concurrent player count, according to charts is around 2% of all the people who played the game, so obviously a lot of things are wrong, and if you read opinions outside of this bubble, it's very clear what was wrong for years.

Eh? Where are you seeing that people want to turn off all damage and mobs? I haven't seen a single person saying to make ESO into something akin to Peaceful mode in Minecraft. What I've seen are people wanting things to stay the same and any difficulty increases be strictly opt-in instead of forced across the board.

You can't say "the community" wants something just because opinions voiced here are different than those voiced elsewhere. The people who want stuff either changed or to stay the same are ALL "the community". Also, a lot of people either don't have other social medias for whatever reason, or don't use those platforms to talk about ESO. That doesn't mean their opinions are somehow lesser than those given off the forums.

disky wrote: »

mocap wrote: »

Surgee wrote: »

Increase hp - longer fight, not harder. Boring.
Increase damage / attack frequency, response timeframes - harder fight, same duration
Increased all of the above - much harder fight, slightly longer duration.

An increase in HP is unlikely. Two players: one turned on high overland difficulty, other did not. Both are looking at the same mob. Obviously, HP of this mob should be the same for both players. Now all sorts of percentages (% more mob damage, % less your damage) are very suitable.

In general, I wouldn't change the difficulty of trash mobs in any way. Impact of overland difficulty should be only for bosses, mini-bosses, some unique (named) opponents. Normal 32k HP mobs should remain either unchanged or with minimal buffs.

No no, I want harder trash mobs. That's basically the entire reason I'm here. World bosses can take a while to defeat, and are at least somewhat lethal, so that's fine by me. I wouldn't mind the ability to raise their difficulty if I can but what I spend most of my time doing in the overland game is fighting disappointing enemies which die in a heartbeat. I want those enemies to feel like a challenge. Delve, public dungeon and story bosses definitely also need to be dramatically improved but like I said, I don't spend the bulk of my time fighting them.

I want my experience to be a challenge everywhere, and if my primary experience is fighting trash mobs then I want trash mobs to be a challenge. They don't HAVE to be trash. I want to be forced to consider angles and make choices when I'm entering an enemy camp instead of wrecking the entire place in moments.

The whole point of me being in this thread is to try and make things in the game matter more. To me the game is largely trash mobs, and so they should matter more.

I genuinely cannot get my head around wanting every single fight you get into to be a mini boss. Difficulty and fun are very subjective tho, which is why whatever they implement will hopefully be optional.

I do a lot of running around for mats, I do Surveys and Treasure Maps, I quest. I would HATE every single mob between me and what my current goal is to be more than a mild nuisance, even though I'd be more than capable of handling enemies like that. Before Craglorn was nefed I could take on those three-packs of Wasps. It was a REAL pita, but I could do it. I'd really rather not go back to the times where trash mobs required more effort than actual bosses.

Also...I do want to point out something. In this game we quite literally go toe-to-toe with several Daedric Princes, we fight massive Aedric beings (Dragons) right up in their faces, we travel to Oblivion regularly to beat up beings that never actually truly die, we take on ancient Vampires that would kill 99% of those trying to best them without any effort. Why would our characters struggle to beat mundane animals and simple bandits when you consider the much more powerful threats we've already beaten? It's like making it to the NFL but then also wanting kids playing football for fun to pose the same challenge.

Avran_Sylt

Kyip wrote: »

They did it again, just now, HERE, where we were talking about what difficulty people expect for individual mobs.'

That was a solid, insightful, constructive, on-topic conversation that provide value. I was learning from the people who disagreed with me. I was forced to better articulate my positions. I saw reactions to my posts indicating people found them insightful and helpful too. Now it's dead. Again.

At this point Overland Content needs to be its own forum section allowing for separated posts.

Overland Content is a nebulous term at best:

World bosses? Delves? Public Dungeons? Resource nodes? Thieves troves? Treasure Chests/Maps? Surveys? Reapers March? West Weald? Quests? Dailies? Etc…

Shutting down discussions and linking to a 260 page post with the expectation that a player reads through it all to be caught up with the current situation is untenable.

SilverBride

Avran_Sylt wrote: »

At this point Overland Content needs to be its own forum section allowing for separated posts.

They have announced an upcoming experiment with overland difficulty. We need to see what this entails then how they determine if the experiment will result in a permanent change or not. That will decide this issue once and for all, and this pinned thread can then be locked.

colossalvoids

SilverBride wrote: »

Avran_Sylt wrote: »

At this point Overland Content needs to be its own forum section allowing for separated posts.

They have announced an upcoming experiment with overland difficulty. We need to see what this entails then how they determine if the experiment will result in a permanent change or not. That will decide this issue once and for all, and this pinned thread can then be locked.

The thread could be locked when the issues for vast majority of people would get resolved and that's unrealistic that it would be in one patch or with one sweeping change to it. That might be the beginning of tackling the issues people are having but it's as far from being resolved as any of the PvP issues which are taking most of the game's life span at this point and there's no light in the end to be seen yet.

disky

Arunei wrote: »

disky wrote: »

mocap wrote: »

Surgee wrote: »

Increase hp - longer fight, not harder. Boring.
Increase damage / attack frequency, response timeframes - harder fight, same duration
Increased all of the above - much harder fight, slightly longer duration.

An increase in HP is unlikely. Two players: one turned on high overland difficulty, other did not. Both are looking at the same mob. Obviously, HP of this mob should be the same for both players. Now all sorts of percentages (% more mob damage, % less your damage) are very suitable.

In general, I wouldn't change the difficulty of trash mobs in any way. Impact of overland difficulty should be only for bosses, mini-bosses, some unique (named) opponents. Normal 32k HP mobs should remain either unchanged or with minimal buffs.

No no, I want harder trash mobs. That's basically the entire reason I'm here. World bosses can take a while to defeat, and are at least somewhat lethal, so that's fine by me. I wouldn't mind the ability to raise their difficulty if I can but what I spend most of my time doing in the overland game is fighting disappointing enemies which die in a heartbeat. I want those enemies to feel like a challenge. Delve, public dungeon and story bosses definitely also need to be dramatically improved but like I said, I don't spend the bulk of my time fighting them.

I want my experience to be a challenge everywhere, and if my primary experience is fighting trash mobs then I want trash mobs to be a challenge. They don't HAVE to be trash. I want to be forced to consider angles and make choices when I'm entering an enemy camp instead of wrecking the entire place in moments.

The whole point of me being in this thread is to try and make things in the game matter more. To me the game is largely trash mobs, and so they should matter more.

I genuinely cannot get my head around wanting every single fight you get into to be a mini boss. Difficulty and fun are very subjective tho, which is why whatever they implement will hopefully be optional.

I do a lot of running around for mats, I do Surveys and Treasure Maps, I quest. I would HATE every single mob between me and what my current goal is to be more than a mild nuisance, even though I'd be more than capable of handling enemies like that. Before Craglorn was nefed I could take on those three-packs of Wasps. It was a REAL pita, but I could do it. I'd really rather not go back to the times where trash mobs required more effort than actual bosses.

Also...I do want to point out something. In this game we quite literally go toe-to-toe with several Daedric Princes, we fight massive Aedric beings (Dragons) right up in their faces, we travel to Oblivion regularly to beat up beings that never actually truly die, we take on ancient Vampires that would kill 99% of those trying to best them without any effort. Why would our characters struggle to beat mundane animals and simple bandits when you consider the much more powerful threats we've already beaten? It's like making it to the NFL but then also wanting kids playing football for fun to pose the same challenge.

Didn't say every fight should be a mini-boss, just that they should be challenging enough to feel like they matter. And that is my opinion of course, which is why it should be optional. I understand that most people don't want to be "inconvenienced" by challenge in overland during whatever else it is they're doing but for me, overland is not simply the field I travel across to get to where I want to be, it is the place I want to be. I'm not here to achieve, I'm here to have adventures, and crushing everything in my path at level 1 deflates that sense of adventure for me. I need all overland encounters to feel like they matter in order for overland itself to feel like it matters.

Surgee

The whole point of me being in this thread is to try and make things in the game matter more....

Well said, but unfortunately community on this forums want everything easy, and if you'll propose a harder, more rewarding, and challenging experience, they always say it MUST BE OPTIONAL because they enjoy it easy.

No wonder that on any other forum this game is called a "single player" game. The minor, vocal community definitely drives it that way, while the rest left.

As much as I love a lot of things about this game, looking at the dropping player count (currently sitting at 1% of total players who have the game) the single-player, everything-easy-mode, let a toddler solo the game - kind of approach, doesn't work, while games that promote a challenging experience and did not forget completely about group activities, or PvP, are much more successful. I'm glad that devs are finally seeing it.

I see some people here say "but I like it so easy, I like the way it is now. It should not change". Well, I'm happy you like it, but according to stats 99% of players did not, and if it continues that way, the game will die and shut down. It's time for a change or continuation of slow death.

TaSheen

Where do you get the "99%" of players number?

SilverBride

Surgee wrote: »

I see some people here say "but I like it so easy, I like the way it is now. It should not change". Well, I'm happy you like it, but according to stats 99% of players did not, and if it continues that way, the game will die and shut down. It's time for a change or continuation of slow death.

There is no data anywhere that shows that 99% of players do not like overland the way it is now.

Avran_Sylt

I can certainly say I don’t like West Wealds monsters having 100k HP, at least from the perspective of needing to farm 180 Rubedo Hide to refine to make a piece of gear.

Depending on drop-rate that could be upwards of needing to kill 200 100k beasts who are in groups of two or just one.

disky

Surgee wrote: »

The whole point of me being in this thread is to try and make things in the game matter more....

Well said, but unfortunately community on this forums want everything easy, and if you'll propose a harder, more rewarding, and challenging experience, they always say it MUST BE OPTIONAL because they enjoy it easy.

No wonder that on any other forum this game is called a "single player" game. The minor, vocal community definitely drives it that way, while the rest left.

As much as I love a lot of things about this game, looking at the dropping player count (currently sitting at 1% of total players who have the game) the single-player, everything-easy-mode, let a toddler solo the game - kind of approach, doesn't work, while games that promote a challenging experience and did not forget completely about group activities, or PvP, are much more successful. I'm glad that devs are finally seeing it.

I see some people here say "but I like it so easy, I like the way it is now. It should not change". Well, I'm happy you like it, but according to stats 99% of players did not, and if it continues that way, the game will die and shut down. It's time for a change or continuation of slow death.

I'd appreciate it if you didn't twist my words to suit your narrative. In the post I made right before yours, I made it clear, as I always have ever since I started posting in this thread, that I believe optional overland challenge is the best way forward. If ZOS makes overland harder for everyone, not only will a lot of people who like things as they are leave the game, some of them will simply be unable to play. You and I may both want challenge but the game doesn't exist for us alone, and the game can accommodate everyone if things are implemented properly.

I will never understand this point of view. I can only surmise that it stems from a desire to compare oneself to - and feel superior to - others, and I hate that attitude. Just let people play the game how they want, their fun shouldn't make a difference to you.

disky

Avran_Sylt wrote: »

I can certainly say I don’t like West Wealds monsters having 100k HP, at least from the perspective of needing to farm 180 Rubedo Hide to refine to make a piece of gear.

Depending on drop-rate that could be upwards of needing to kill 200 100k beasts who are in groups of two or just one.

This is exactly why ZOS should even out difficulty across zones and provide difficulty options to those who want them.

Surgee

[

disky wrote: »

Surgee wrote: »

The whole point of me being in this thread is to try and make things in the game matter more....

Well said, but unfortunately community on this forums want everything easy, and if you'll propose a harder, more rewarding, and challenging experience, they always say it MUST BE OPTIONAL because they enjoy it easy.

No wonder that on any other forum this game is called a "single player" game. The minor, vocal community definitely drives it that way, while the rest left.

As much as I love a lot of things about this game, looking at the dropping player count (currently sitting at 1% of total players who have the game) the single-player, everything-easy-mode, let a toddler solo the game - kind of approach, doesn't work, while games that promote a challenging experience and did not forget completely about group activities, or PvP, are much more successful. I'm glad that devs are finally seeing it.

I see some people here say "but I like it so easy, I like the way it is now. It should not change". Well, I'm happy you like it, but according to stats 99% of players did not, and if it continues that way, the game will die and shut down. It's time for a change or continuation of slow death.

I'd appreciate it if you didn't twist my words to suit your narrative. In the post I made right before yours, I made it clear, as I always have ever since I started posting in this thread, that I believe optional overland challenge is the best way forward. If ZOS makes overland harder for everyone, not only will a lot of people who like things as they are leave the game, some of them will simply be unable to play. You and I may both want challenge but the game doesn't exist for us alone, and the game can accommodate everyone if things are implemented properly.

I will never understand this point of view. I can only surmise that it stems from a desire to compare oneself to - and feel superior to - others, and I hate that attitude. Just let people play the game how they want, their fun shouldn't make a difference to you.

I did not twist your words. I have quoted a specific part that I agreed with. As for making overland optional, I did propose an Optional VETERAN version of all zones years ago, where rewards would be much greater (not just quality of an item, it must be significant and exclusive) but some it was met with a backlash that: 1) you can't make items exclusive to veteran! It's unfair! All rewards should be accessible for everyone! 2) It would further split the tiny community and zones would have even less players, which I agree with.

Again. This is an Mmorpg, not a single-player game. Not everything should be achievable by simply toggling the difficulty setting. It's simply not possible and goes against the very nature of the game. ZOS tried to cater to this minor group and they've succeeded greatly, by keeping only and only this group of players and dropping the numbers of concurrent online players to maybe 1-2% tops on a great day (25 million owners, 10k average on steam which is probably doing best, few k on almost dead consoles, and few bought elsewhere). It only keeps going lower every month.

And yet, you want them to continue this direction. I rather have them test it out than let this beautiful game vanish. As for the difficulty, I think a lot of you are overreacting. The game is now INSANELY easy. I have never played an RPG this easy to be honest, let alone Mmorpg. I've got my friend into the game recently, and she totally sucks in any games. She started 2 months ago, and she absolutely smashes through the game. The only things she can not kill with one eye closed is zone bosses in dlc maps. She already got extremely bored due to no challenge and stopped playing for now despite loving everything else.

I simply can not comprehend how bad one can be at ESO if they're afraid of a even a slightly harder overland mobs. I consider myself casual, and my HP almost never moves when questing, and when it does, companion does the job without me even noticing I had a scratch.

Try to understand why Zenimax is completely changing the direction of updates this year, and you'll see that this and many changes coming are absolutely necessary for the game to stay alive. They either test it and succeed or leave it on life support in 2026 which would happen already this year according to charts if this changes wouldn't be planned.

CP5

Arunei wrote: »

Surgee wrote: »

I don't think overland difficulty will be toggable. That's a good thing.

Let me digress a little. I know this community want to be able to literally turn off mobs, damage, and any challenge, but if you look at forums outside of this one, where players talk about ESO but don't play it anymore, this type of "easy" mode is what killed the game for them. People here forget it's an MMO. You won't hear about it here though, because the only ones left here are the ones who enjoy the game enough to stay. Current concurrent player count, according to charts is around 2% of all the people who played the game, so obviously a lot of things are wrong, and if you read opinions outside of this bubble, it's very clear what was wrong for years.

Eh? Where are you seeing that people want to turn off all damage and mobs? I haven't seen a single person saying to make ESO into something akin to Peaceful mode in Minecraft. What I've seen are people wanting things to stay the same and any difficulty increases be strictly opt-in instead of forced across the board.

You can't say "the community" wants something just because opinions voiced here are different than those voiced elsewhere. The people who want stuff either changed or to stay the same are ALL "the community". Also, a lot of people either don't have other social medias for whatever reason, or don't use those platforms to talk about ESO. That doesn't mean their opinions are somehow lesser than those given off the forums.

disky wrote: »

mocap wrote: »

Surgee wrote: »

Increase hp - longer fight, not harder. Boring.
Increase damage / attack frequency, response timeframes - harder fight, same duration
Increased all of the above - much harder fight, slightly longer duration.

An increase in HP is unlikely. Two players: one turned on high overland difficulty, other did not. Both are looking at the same mob. Obviously, HP of this mob should be the same for both players. Now all sorts of percentages (% more mob damage, % less your damage) are very suitable.

In general, I wouldn't change the difficulty of trash mobs in any way. Impact of overland difficulty should be only for bosses, mini-bosses, some unique (named) opponents. Normal 32k HP mobs should remain either unchanged or with minimal buffs.

No no, I want harder trash mobs. That's basically the entire reason I'm here. World bosses can take a while to defeat, and are at least somewhat lethal, so that's fine by me. I wouldn't mind the ability to raise their difficulty if I can but what I spend most of my time doing in the overland game is fighting disappointing enemies which die in a heartbeat. I want those enemies to feel like a challenge. Delve, public dungeon and story bosses definitely also need to be dramatically improved but like I said, I don't spend the bulk of my time fighting them.

I want my experience to be a challenge everywhere, and if my primary experience is fighting trash mobs then I want trash mobs to be a challenge. They don't HAVE to be trash. I want to be forced to consider angles and make choices when I'm entering an enemy camp instead of wrecking the entire place in moments.

The whole point of me being in this thread is to try and make things in the game matter more. To me the game is largely trash mobs, and so they should matter more.

I genuinely cannot get my head around wanting every single fight you get into to be a mini boss. Difficulty and fun are very subjective tho, which is why whatever they implement will hopefully be optional.

I do a lot of running around for mats, I do Surveys and Treasure Maps, I quest. I would HATE every single mob between me and what my current goal is to be more than a mild nuisance, even though I'd be more than capable of handling enemies like that. Before Craglorn was nefed I could take on those three-packs of Wasps. It was a REAL pita, but I could do it. I'd really rather not go back to the times where trash mobs required more effort than actual bosses.

Also...I do want to point out something. In this game we quite literally go toe-to-toe with several Daedric Princes, we fight massive Aedric beings (Dragons) right up in their faces, we travel to Oblivion regularly to beat up beings that never actually truly die, we take on ancient Vampires that would kill 99% of those trying to best them without any effort. Why would our characters struggle to beat mundane animals and simple bandits when you consider the much more powerful threats we've already beaten? It's like making it to the NFL but then also wanting kids playing football for fun to pose the same challenge.

Two good things to point out here. First, it isn't, for me, about each fight being a 12 minute long epic against a single rat, it is about the fight mattering. Who am I fighting, where am I fighting, what am I fighting with? Those things should matter, but as an experienced player the only thing that matters is, if I bother fighting in the first place, is how to most efficiently stack the trash mobs cluttering the world and using a single aoe skill to clear them all. Doesn't matter if they are bandits, deadra, vampires, or the like, who I'm fighting doesn't matter, where I'm fighting doesn't matter, so all fights feel the same, and they are all the same difficulty wise down to being too simplistic to engage me. So I turn on a video on the other screen, because ESO's overland content doesn't do enough to warrent my attention.

And to elaborate on that second point. I, don't struggle against bandits, or deadra, or vampires, or necromancers, or cultist, or robots, or any of them, because they are all the same. If the bandits were easier by comparison to trained and heavily armored knights, then bandits being easy would make sense, but when demons who can revive themselves when being slain are as much of a threat as a starving farmer wielding a stick, those deadra don't seem threatening. For things to matter they need to stand out from one another, but when everything is sanded down to the same level, those 'high threats' are as threatening as basic enemies, meaning those 'high threats' are only basic enemies, no different from bandits.

Avran_Sylt wrote: »

I can certainly say I don’t like West Wealds monsters having 100k HP, at least from the perspective of needing to farm 180 Rubedo Hide to refine to make a piece of gear.

Depending on drop-rate that could be upwards of needing to kill 200 100k beasts who are in groups of two or just one.

And as a side note, all elite tier mobs in overland have 100k health. The giant boars in Southern Elsweyr, the minotaurs in the Gold Coast, trolls in base game zones, 100k is normal. If you want to farm materials, focus on things like wolves, who hunt in packs, and are much easier to kill en-mass. Speaking of, if you want drops (gear, materials, exc.) or experience, you're pretty much always better off fighting larger numbers of weaker enemies rather than smaller numbers of stronger enemies. Food for thought.

disky

Surgee wrote: »

[

disky wrote: »

Surgee wrote: »

The whole point of me being in this thread is to try and make things in the game matter more....

Well said, but unfortunately community on this forums want everything easy, and if you'll propose a harder, more rewarding, and challenging experience, they always say it MUST BE OPTIONAL because they enjoy it easy.

No wonder that on any other forum this game is called a "single player" game. The minor, vocal community definitely drives it that way, while the rest left.

As much as I love a lot of things about this game, looking at the dropping player count (currently sitting at 1% of total players who have the game) the single-player, everything-easy-mode, let a toddler solo the game - kind of approach, doesn't work, while games that promote a challenging experience and did not forget completely about group activities, or PvP, are much more successful. I'm glad that devs are finally seeing it.

I see some people here say "but I like it so easy, I like the way it is now. It should not change". Well, I'm happy you like it, but according to stats 99% of players did not, and if it continues that way, the game will die and shut down. It's time for a change or continuation of slow death.

I'd appreciate it if you didn't twist my words to suit your narrative. In the post I made right before yours, I made it clear, as I always have ever since I started posting in this thread, that I believe optional overland challenge is the best way forward. If ZOS makes overland harder for everyone, not only will a lot of people who like things as they are leave the game, some of them will simply be unable to play. You and I may both want challenge but the game doesn't exist for us alone, and the game can accommodate everyone if things are implemented properly.

I will never understand this point of view. I can only surmise that it stems from a desire to compare oneself to - and feel superior to - others, and I hate that attitude. Just let people play the game how they want, their fun shouldn't make a difference to you.

I did not twist your words. I have quoted a specific part that I agreed with. As for making overland optional, I did propose an Optional VETERAN version of all zones years ago, where rewards would be much greater (not just quality of an item, it must be significant and exclusive) but some it was met with a backlash that: 1) you can't make items exclusive to veteran! It's unfair! All rewards should be accessible for everyone! 2) It would further split the tiny community and zones would have even less players, which I agree with.

That's the problem though. You asked for something significant in exchange, as if what you're asking for isn't really a greater challenge but greater rewards. I understand that people want to be rewarded for their time and achievement, but if what you really want is for the game to be fun, you shouldn't be too terribly worried about compensation because the fun you have IS the reward. Maybe you can get slightly better gear levels like in vet dungeons, but you have to give up the idea that you're going to be rewarded in a dramatically better way because that's only going to cause controversy and backlash. It's bad for everyone.

And to address the rest of what you said, I really wish more players took a step back and recognized that when there are more people playing the game, no matter how they play or what they want to do, it is good for everyone playing. Yes, it may mean we have to be in this thread begging for change for years because things have gotten away from where we want them to be, but it does also mean the game is still popular enough to keep going.