Too many fights are just STUPID hard

Sariias

AngryNord wrote: »

You are familiar with group dungeons, yes? The one whos icon is a torch and a plus sign? You know what the description of these groups say, right? Well, guess what - the dialogue in the quests connected with these, still treat you as if you are on your own, not in a group of four.

Fanboy Fail again.

Except there's no lore history for those dungeons in regards to who did what. They're just small skirmishes and relatively unimportant compared to other events that occur during this timeline.

The main storylines on the otherhand were done by one person. You. (and four NPC heroes or with Shalindor/Aelif)

So, they must be done alone.

Besides, the game may not be totally balanced for one player quests, but it's absolutely not balanced at all for two players working together.

What's the % of "difficult" that people are having a problem with? Right now, it's just all opinions and preferences, which may or may not be blowing things out of proportion especially when emotions are on high. Clearly, other players are capable of doing them alone, but that doesn't include builds or luck or skill.

And don't get me wrong, I'm not a "L2P" kind of person, but I think the vast majority of the game will be a cakewalk with two players working on single player quests. There won't be a single quest encounter that you barely eek out with your life. There will be no real trials (excluding world bosses and 4 player dungeons).

So people have issues with Harvesters. That seems to be the real reason. Should we make the rest of the game trivial (because allowing two party quests is no different than nerfing single player content, really) just because of one encounter?

I don't think the difficulty warrants two person questing. Questing with your significant other is a much better reason, but again, it will make most of the encounters trivial.

If you said two person questing WITH increased difficulty, I'd agree.

I still think there should also be some things that must be done alone, because that's epic in of itself. I like the fact that the game forces you to think and fend for yourself at times. Even in the real world, a social world, there are still times when we have to do things alone. To me that makes this digital world that more realistic.

Noswell

GreySix wrote: »

I'm considering offering a cash prize to anyone - ANYONE - who can offer a logical argument in favor of continuing to disable dual-players in currently solo-only content, as I know what I ask to be impossible.

Because the main story line is the only thing holding back the flood of bots into the vet zones, even if it's starting to crack a little too. I know this doesn't address the spirit of the discussion, but at this point I think most people would agree that anything holding back the bots until some kind of permanent "solution" is found shouldn't be messed with.

Once that's no longer an issue, one way or another, I'd be in favor of your idea if it came with a slightly higher difficulty. And for the mages and fighter's guild quest, same deal since they don't affect zone progression.

babylon

Noswell wrote: »

GreySix wrote: »

I'm considering offering a cash prize to anyone - ANYONE - who can offer a logical argument in favor of continuing to disable dual-players in currently solo-only content, as I know what I ask to be impossible.

Because the main story line is the only thing holding back the flood of bots into the vet zones, even if it's starting to crack a little too. I know this doesn't address the spirit of the discussion, but at this point I think most people would agree that anything holding back the bots until some kind of permanent "solution" is found shouldn't be messed with.

Once that's no longer an issue, one way or another, I'd be in favor of your idea if it came with a slightly higher difficulty. And for the mages and fighter's guild quest, same deal since they don't affect zone progression.

This is the reason I support not allowing other players into the boss fights. It's really the only thing keeping bots out of the vet areas.

Alphashado

babylon wrote: »

Noswell wrote: »

GreySix wrote: »

I'm considering offering a cash prize to anyone - ANYONE - who can offer a logical argument in favor of continuing to disable dual-players in currently solo-only content, as I know what I ask to be impossible.

Because the main story line is the only thing holding back the flood of bots into the vet zones, even if it's starting to crack a little too. I know this doesn't address the spirit of the discussion, but at this point I think most people would agree that anything holding back the bots until some kind of permanent "solution" is found shouldn't be messed with.

Once that's no longer an issue, one way or another, I'd be in favor of your idea if it came with a slightly higher difficulty. And for the mages and fighter's guild quest, same deal since they don't affect zone progression.

This is the reason I support not allowing other players into the boss fights. It's really the only thing keeping bots out of the vet areas.

There is some merit to that. But there has to be a line drawn between who has more leverage here. Bots or paying subscribers. At any rate, that is the first legit argument against duo questing. But even so, it would be a lot of work for gold farmers to duo every storyline quest two bots at a time. Because you still need to complete the storyline before you can port to anyone in VR

GreySix

Sariias wrote: »

The history is already set in stone, as it had been for years in previous Elder Scrolls games. There was no sidekick. There were 5 Companions, not 5 and a buddy.

... and the vestige would still be the hero, so nothing has changed. Plenty of other MMOs allow others, be they warped in, magicked in, fill-in-the-blank-in; it's a fictional universe based on a video game, wherein we've seen plenty of implausible things - so having a friend zapped in to help is hardly some sort of stretch, and below I'll provide a handy-dandy example from another popular MMO.

Sariias wrote: »

You're supposed to face the trial alone.

... as currently written, sure. Yet in SWTOR, my wife's character was a powerful Sith Lord, facing down some uber bad dude - alone. Yet she then leveraged her awesome Dark-Side sorcery to bring in a lowly Imperial Agent (my character) to assist. When it was over, she was still the hero, getting all the credit, my character relegated to the shadows and ignored.

See - it can be done, and it's been done plenty of times before.

Sariias wrote: »

Besides, they're patching phased groups anyway, to ensure that people who are in different phases join the same phase when grouped.

If it fixes the issue of forced-solo instances, then I'll be content.

theyancey

There are ways to balance the game so that people wanting hard challenges have them yet more causal players can advance through the game as well. I am hoping that we will see such balancing implemented within the next 90 days. In the end the overall game is healthier and we all benefit with a subscriber base that is as large as possible. I erect the spine of hopeful waiting.

FENGRUSH

GreySix wrote: »

Zero_Tolerance wrote: »

Like in any other online game, people think that everything is for everyone. If it is too hard and if you don't want to improve yourself to win then go away to play something else.
And if you think you really deserve to get through all the content in ESO, even though you don't have the skill, go shield bash. Any noob can do it and it'll win everything for you.

Ah, the ole, "Game designers designed this game the way it is, and if you don't like it then STFU and play something else" argument...

Those defending their egos tend to favor that particular one.

I'm considering offering a cash prize to anyone - ANYONE - who can offer a logical argument in favor of continuing to disable dual-players in currently solo-only content, as I know what I ask to be impossible.

Making the game too ez for those who can solo but will choose to duo if possible to speed it up and avoid failure.

Ysne58

FENGRUSH wrote: »

GreySix wrote: »

I'm considering offering a cash prize to anyone - ANYONE - who can offer a logical argument in favor of continuing to disable dual-players in currently solo-only content, as I know what I ask to be impossible.

Making the game too ez for those who can solo but will choose to duo if possible to speed it up and avoid failure.

That isn't an argument, it is a conclusion that doesn't include any facts to support it.

GreySix

FENGRUSH wrote: »

GreySix wrote: »

Zero_Tolerance wrote: »

Like in any other online game, people think that everything is for everyone. If it is too hard and if you don't want to improve yourself to win then go away to play something else.
And if you think you really deserve to get through all the content in ESO, even though you don't have the skill, go shield bash. Any noob can do it and it'll win everything for you.

Ah, the ole, "Game designers designed this game the way it is, and if you don't like it then STFU and play something else" argument...

Those defending their egos tend to favor that particular one.

I'm considering offering a cash prize to anyone - ANYONE - who can offer a logical argument in favor of continuing to disable dual-players in currently solo-only content, as I know what I ask to be impossible.

Making the game too ez for those who can solo but will choose to duo if possible to speed it up and avoid failure.

Too easy or too hard are always matters of opinion, and basing a decision whether or not to deny grouping based on such opinion would be illogical.

Moreover, the tweak to that is relatively simple: Scale the instance difficulty between one or two players. Its a fairly old and common practice in video gaming.

Sariias

GreySix wrote: »

Moreover, the tweak to that is relatively simple: Scale the instance difficulty between one or two players. Its a fairly old and common practice in video gaming.

And a hell of a lot of work. They'd have to write code for every encounter in game.

Audigy

theyancey wrote: »

There are ways to balance the game so that people wanting hard challenges have them yet more causal players can advance through the game as well. I am hoping that we will see such balancing implemented within the next 90 days. In the end the overall game is healthier and we all benefit with a subscriber base that is as large as possible. I erect the spine of hopeful waiting.

You assume that every Casual wants it easy, but this isn't how things work. Casual does not mean bad, but just less online.

A player that only plays for 10 hours a week, can still be a much better player than someone who plays 30.

I always disliked that attitude about Casuals and their "low skill" as its just not true. I am a Casual and I want to face challenges and I love that ESO offers them to me.

If you divide a game into Casual and Nerd content like Blizzard did, then the only difference will be time and not skill. Most Casuals could easily raid at wow, but they lack the time. Yet anything that doesn't require time, was dumped down so much that its just boring.

They removed hard dungeon content, hard quest content, crafting, achievement hunting, level up content ... Instead they gave Casuals daily quest´s that are so boring that even a monkey on Speed wouldn't do them twice.

If someone doesn't has skill, then he or she might should accept that and stop demanding that the game shall be dumped down for them.

I absolutely dislike Elitism in gaming, but I also dislike that constant whine about too hard from people that don't even try and then say "we Casuals". Its not about Casual or Nerd, its about personal skill alone!

The whole VR content, the Solo Quest´s for the NPC´s are challenging yes, but they also give you the feeling of an accomplishment after you did them. Especially players that might not do PvP or in future trials will focus on Quest´s and if you dump those down, then these people lose their content.

You cant say that everyone who wants a challenge should raid, as this isn't possible. Raiding is mostly about time management and not so much about skill these days.

Right now I don't know if I can ever do a Trial at ESO due my RL; but I am absolutely looking forward to the VR quest and event content, and also the NPC faction quest´s which will come soon. This is something that you can do in an hour or two which also challenges your mind a bit and if you leave, you wont hold off a whole raid as well.

esoone

BSGDevastator wrote: »

Well, I can only give my opinion and tell about my experiences, but here I come:

There's no boss who's too hard. There are alot of bosses who are too easy. I, as a NB Vampire with alot of self healing through Leeching Strikes and Siphon Health, can easily solo any stunnable Boss. If they now have 20k health or 10000k health, the only thing that increases is the duration of the fight.

I think CC should be weakened against ANY boss so you can't just stunlock them. Against Harvesters I recommend using AOE spells to hit all balls simultaneously. I honestly don't know if that works, since I've never had to try it (again, stunlock OP).

I've tried my first Veteran dungeon yesterday and it was the best thing I've EVER seen in my entire life which only consists out of MMO.

My whole group got taken out by the first boss (an enormous spider) and I had to fight it all by myself. (The boss was at around 20%hp already)
I managed to kill it by kiting it and dodging the majority of attacks and poison spells.

That was pretty fun and it felt like a real accomplishment.
The second boss was WAY harder. It is a 3m big girl with shadow-oriented spells.
Basicly what the boss does is chain two players together to deal alot of DoT if you didn't manage to break it.
After that, one player gets chained to the ground by 4 shadows, while the sword of damocles slowly comes closer and closer.
If your group didn't manage to take one of those shadows out, you were dead. Instantly.
The third move made her disappear while around 5-7 shadows fought us instead of her.

One heavy attack = around 1500dmg

Even with our unbalanced group (1 DK Tank, 1 DK DPS, 1 NB DPS, 1 NB Healer) and some stupid mistakes (namely someone reviving one of us while another one is sentenced to death by the sword of damocles) we brought the boss down to 30% hp.

We tried to defeat the boss 16 times and never managed to do so.
However, that bossfight was still too easy imo. If my teammates only would've gotten the concept of not reviving someone while another is beeing chained to the ground... Oh well.

Anyways, I think a bossfight should punish every just so small mistake your group does, leading to your failure.
A bossfight shouldn't be easy and let you get away with even the slightest mistake.

Analyzing the behaviour of a boss and then countering its abilities is what should win you the fight.
If the chance to kill a boss is at 0.01% then that's perfectly fine. He's not impossible to kill, thus you can win.
You just have to find a way, switch your skillsets, etc etc.

If you can't defeat a boss, level up, get better gear and try him again. There's always a way to defeat a boss and even if he's a harvester and the orbs spawn directly besides him, there's still a way to defeat him.


I am not saying L2P. Not at all. What I'm saying is, that you're not flexible enough. You can't try to defeat a boss over and over again without changing your playstyle even the slightest. Sometimes you have to admit that you don't have the slightest chance to defeat a boss. Then you have to tell yourself that you can't make it and that you will improve yourself and come back later.

I'm going back to that Shadow-damocles sword boss when I've grown a little stronger and then I'll be more than happy to beat his ass.

No your not saying L2P your saying that your so awsome you can do it all even making the statement extra by typing words in caps.

FENGRUSH

GreySix wrote: »

FENGRUSH wrote: »

GreySix wrote: »

Zero_Tolerance wrote: »

Like in any other online game, people think that everything is for everyone. If it is too hard and if you don't want to improve yourself to win then go away to play something else.
And if you think you really deserve to get through all the content in ESO, even though you don't have the skill, go shield bash. Any noob can do it and it'll win everything for you.

Ah, the ole, "Game designers designed this game the way it is, and if you don't like it then STFU and play something else" argument...

Those defending their egos tend to favor that particular one.

I'm considering offering a cash prize to anyone - ANYONE - who can offer a logical argument in favor of continuing to disable dual-players in currently solo-only content, as I know what I ask to be impossible.

Making the game too ez for those who can solo but will choose to duo if possible to speed it up and avoid failure.

Too easy or too hard are always matters of opinion, and basing a decision whether or not to deny grouping based on such opinion would be illogical.

Moreover, the tweak to that is relatively simple: Scale the instance difficulty between one or two players. Its a fairly old and common practice in video gaming.

They probably shouldnt cap raid sizes because difficulty will be based on peoples opinion too.

Tweak isnt simple at zos. Adjusting bash damage or vamp stacking sounds simple too. In fact, it is simpler than building a new instance.

People will figure these things out. If you need the game rebuilt around you, you should probably be doing <x>.

You dont need a counter argument. You just need enough people who are bad enough + dont want to try to post on the forums together to geta change. By the time its fixed to your satisfaction, there will be a new road block of difficulty for you to complain about just ahead.

starkerealm

Sariias wrote: »

GreySix wrote: »

I'm considering offering a cash prize to anyone - ANYONE - who can offer a logical argument in favor of continuing to disable dual-players in currently solo-only content, as I know what I ask to be impossible.

Lore. And dialogue.

It's not "There are the heroes that rescued King Casamir!" it's "There's the hero that rescued King Casamir!"

Lore wise, there is only one soul shriven who returns and takes on Molag Bal, not two. In the storyline you are alone, because you are the hero, and only you can save the day. There are not 6 Companions, there are 5.

Except M'aiq claims to have been the sixth companion. Sure, he's probably lying, but you might want to use an example that isn't actually in the game... just a thought.

Also, I've actually done the Casamir assassination thing with my girlfriend before we learned it's supposed to be a solo only fight. It's one of the solo zones where you actually can join other party members... you know how much it bothers me that the people around town just say, "there's that hero"? Here's a hint: it doesn't. You know what else? That fight was actually a lot of fun, because we were playing the MMO together, you know, the whole reason we're playing this and not, say, Skyrim in the same room.

GreySix

Sariias wrote: »

GreySix wrote: »

Moreover, the tweak to that is relatively simple: Scale the instance difficulty between one or two players. Its a fairly old and common practice in video gaming.

And a hell of a lot of work. They'd have to write code for every encounter in game.

Incorrect, sir.

Or is your assertion that every encounter in the game a forced-solo instance?

starkerealm

GreySix wrote: »

Sariias wrote: »

GreySix wrote: »

Moreover, the tweak to that is relatively simple: Scale the instance difficulty between one or two players. Its a fairly old and common practice in video gaming.

And a hell of a lot of work. They'd have to write code for every encounter in game.

Incorrect, sir.

Or is your assertion that every encounter in the game a forced-solo instance?

I believe Sariias was attempting to articulate, "buh, I dunwanna share wif ofer kids!!!"

Seriously, the only semi-valid rebuttal I've seen was that allowing grouping would mean the bots could get into veteran content, but the alternative is real players getting fed up and leaving because there's no point.

Incidentally, the exact reason I left TSW, you get to a certain point in that game and it's nothing but a never ending, pointless gear check. I don't want to see TESO in that light, but, that Harvester fight combined with the very steep penalties I'm seeing for actually playing the game make it pretty hard to actually log in anymore.

Now, I'm not important, that's one sub. And, I'm not going to pretend to speak for the silent majority... but, having players hitting walls like this can't be healthy.

Sariias

starkerealm wrote: »

GreySix wrote: »

Sariias wrote: »

GreySix wrote: »

Moreover, the tweak to that is relatively simple: Scale the instance difficulty between one or two players. Its a fairly old and common practice in video gaming.

And a hell of a lot of work. They'd have to write code for every encounter in game.

Incorrect, sir.

Or is your assertion that every encounter in the game a forced-solo instance?

I believe Sariias was attempting to articulate, "buh, I dunwanna share wif ofer kids!!!"

What?

No... what I meant was that ESO is going to have to take every single player quest in game and make a second formula to adjust it for two players, because otherwise it'd be stupid easy. Then they're going to have actually go into each quest and change the stats, unless they have some sort of over-encompassing code applying when there's two people which probably will have the exact same imbalance people are complaining about here. Then they have to implement it, get millions of players to download the change meaning server downtime, and then maybe a small percentage of players can play with their spouses.

Sakiri

Sariias wrote: »

GreySix wrote: »

Right, because no hero ever has a sidekick or help.
And in other MMOs, when I was helping my wife, the NPCs talked to her - while I just stood there ready to assist.

Next?

The history is already set in stone, as it had been for years in previous Elder Scrolls games. There was no sidekick. There were 5 Companions, not 5 and a buddy.

Only 5 made the journey. No one else helped them in the end. The rest is history.

You're supposed to face the trial alone. There's plenty of other things to do in game with other people.

Besides, they're patching phased groups anyway, to ensure that people who are in different phases join the same phase when grouped.

Then replace one of the useless npcs that stand there with their thumbs up their arse.

Its even mentioned that no one will know what happened so why you cant go against that grain is a garbage excuse.

Tavore1138

And even winning these fights does not reward you... Example VR6 Belrath... Tedious slog of a fight just having to do enough damage between his healing sessions to chip away at him... Around 30 mins during which I was in no danger except of death by boredom... End result I felt like I wasted that time on a futile grind, drops were dull, quest reward did not cover the gear repairs...

At level 8 doing it was fun and challenging, at VR all they had done was add HP and possibly the scamp spawns but they were just an irritant.

Some people seem to mistake long boring fights for a test of skill but they really are not.

Some content you can group... The encounter with the Dark Mane and his boss mobs was one I ultimately got thru because someone else having the same problem asked me to group and we took them out together.

If the big Molag Bal fight remained solo only that could still act to block bots while opening up most other content to be done as players preferred.

Sakiri

isengrimb16_ESO wrote: »

Sakiri wrote: »

isengrimb16_ESO wrote: »

Sakiri wrote: »

Ysne58 wrote: »

Some of these are not a learn to play type issue. Some of us have disabilities that make some of these battles impossible for us. Then there are the in game glitches that sometimes work for us but mostly against us.

I cant see the spell/power attack windups.

I had to turn active combat cues to always on.

There was some guy(thats still here and I wont name) that claims that should be cheating.

When its built into the game...

That's dumb. That would be calling Deadly Boss Mods a "cheat".

I call it a trainer (and a good teacher it was for me, too.) Most WoW players call it mandatory, even for LFR.

He did call DBM that actually.

*facepalm* I don't use mods in ESO because I don't want to. I enjoy the playstyle, and while WoW might have taught me a few things, it also failed in some areas, and taught the wrong things in others. I need the boot in the arse ESO is giving me, yet I don't find it frustratingly hard, like I did most other, old games that I'd try for 30 seconds and never look at again (so to speak).

That sort of thing doesn't really affect other players, except insofar that you're playing better than you might be without them.

That being said, I wouldn't mind the solo instances being duo-able, but no more than teams of two; otherwise you get into the large-group faceroll thing I mentioned earlier. It's not even that I mind others facerolling stuff, it's when they demand it be made even HARDER, thus forcing everyone into a faceroll groupfinding situation. But the thing is, once you allow two, well, the third-wheelers over there will complain they can't bring their buddy, too. If two, why not three? etc. Unless they introduce "flex" technology, the whole idea of main quest bosses being checks goes out the window.

And I'm speaking here as someone who has never even bothered TRYING to play Skyrim, Oblivion OR Morrowind WITHOUT /tgm.

If you arent locked to only ever doing it once that wont matter. Have one pf them go do it again for the third wheel.

starkerealm

Sariias wrote: »

starkerealm wrote: »

GreySix wrote: »

Sariias wrote: »

GreySix wrote: »

Moreover, the tweak to that is relatively simple: Scale the instance difficulty between one or two players. Its a fairly old and common practice in video gaming.

And a hell of a lot of work. They'd have to write code for every encounter in game.

Incorrect, sir.

Or is your assertion that every encounter in the game a forced-solo instance?

I believe Sariias was attempting to articulate, "buh, I dunwanna share wif ofer kids!!!"

What?

No... what I meant was that ESO is going to have to take every single player quest in game and make a second formula to adjust it for two players, because otherwise it'd be stupid easy.

Obviously not, unless you're assuming everyone posting in here isn't a real player, or is lying about having issues.

Sariias wrote: »

Then they're going to have actually go into each quest and change the stats, unless they have some sort of over-encompassing code applying when there's two people which probably will have the exact same imbalance people are complaining about here.

Or they could just open up the solo instances to party members... you know, like how most of the non-main quest instances already are.

Sariias wrote: »

Then they have to implement it, get millions of players to download the change meaning server downtime, and then maybe a small percentage of players can play with their spouses.

So, your entire complaint is... they'd have to patch the game? I don't know if you've noticed, but there's already been downtime two or three times a week, every week, since launch. I also seem to think there were a few patches already.

Also, worth remembering that those Rings of Mara were built around couples gaming. TESO actually went courting that market. So, saying, "nah, that doesn't affect anyone," when marketing was actually trying to get those players in... this really makes sense to you?

Sariias

I never said that it doesn't affect anyone, I'm not sure where you're getting that.

And I don't have a complaint, I'm not sure where you're getting that either. I was saying that in order to let a small percentage of players play together, the entire rest of the playerbase would have to be affected. That's a fact, not a complaint. That was also only one factor in the argument I made.

And marketing still doesn't prevent the people with Ring of Mara being a minority- though I do see the contradiction it represents.

starkerealm

Sariias wrote: »

I never said that it doesn't affect anyone, I'm not sure where you're getting that.

That's okay, right now I literally don't know what you're referring to. What is this "it" and the "that" you refer to but never define?

EDIT: If you're talking about difficulty, it's an issue for some players and not for others. Trying to say, "no everyone must play exactly like me, because I had no problems," seems to be a common refrain, and your earlier comments about not opening up group content sounded, just close enough to that...

Sariias wrote: »

And I don't have a complaint, I'm not sure where you're getting that either. I was saying that in order to let a small percentage of players play together, the entire rest of the playerbase would have to be affected. That's a fact, not a complaint. That was also only one factor in the argument I made.

You said they'd have to take the server down, and perform maintenance. Which is true. You also presented it like downtime would be some horrible burden that could be avoided... except, hey, you know what? They take the server down and patch the game all the time. At which point, you are literally saying, "no, don't patch the game for this issue because it doesn't affect me."

Now, if you were saying, "no, don't fix it, because if you let these guys try to clean up anything, they'll bjork it up more than it was already..." that... just might be a legitimate argument.

Sariias wrote: »

And marketing still doesn't prevent the people with Ring of Mara being a minority- though I do see the contradiction it represents.

Catering to couples may have been a singularly stupid idea on their part. They have to keep both happy with the game, and if the screw one of them over, both will leave. Doing this with major chunks of gameplay that are forced single player was beyond stupid.

Sariias

starkerealm wrote: »

Catering to couples may have been a singularly stupid idea on their part. They have to keep both happy with the game, and if the screw one of them over, both will leave. Doing this with major chunks of gameplay that are forced single player was beyond stupid.

I don't disagree with any of that. I just don't know if Venimax is going to take the effort to rehash what's needed, they've got a lot on their plate.

Chirru

Quote:
I am against weakening the game... in fact i find it currently a walk in the park even in vet zones.

The only thing I dont like is when mobs are spawning right on top of you in the middle of a battle. This is something which should be adressed.
End of quote

Now there is a contradictorily statement if I ever heard one. Oh, I like it tough, but if it gets too tough for me I do not like it and it ought to be changed. However, all those who want to group for certain quests, that I oppose because to Me these quests are easy.
Come on... what argument is that? roflol.

Chirru

Zero_Tolerance wrote: »

Like in any other online game, people think that everything is for everyone. If it is too hard and if you don't want to improve yourself to win then go away to play something else.
And if you think you really deserve to get through all the content in ESO, even though you don't have the skill, go shield bash. Any noob can do it and it'll win everything for you.

You name says it all.
I however pay to play the game and as such I have an entitlement to play all game content in a way that I am comfortable with.
You appear an elitist to me. Now go an troll somewhere else.

Chirru

Eivar wrote: »

I have to disagree with the op in general, Yes I've had some frustrating boss fights but overall i haven't had many issues, I think if every boss was easily killable the game would be boring and not worth my money. Challenging is good, something that makes you rethink your strategy is good, mindless fights where you just run up and swing your sword til the boss dies are just a waste of time. I see way to many people who just dogpile their way through content, jumping on every mob with 3-4 other players, never learning how to use their class effectively, then they get to solo content and are pit against a boss that doesn't let you just stand there and swing......and oh no it's the games fault it's balanced wrong cause it's to hard! TO THE FORUMS!!!!!

First: you missed the point of the original post.
Secondly: what you see as a challenge, other players, like me, see as just a nuisance. Beating the boss with your third Char is lame. I rather would bypass the story.
Thirdly: you are making an accusation concerning other players' style of play you simply have no way of substantiating.

Chirru

demonlkojipub19_ESO wrote: »

Id rather fights not be easy enough to just use light and heavy attacks, and maybe push 1 skill button. No, thats not an exadderated representation of what people are asking for, thats how easy it will be if they start swinging the nerf bat becuse some people cant display enough skill in combat.

You are missing the point of this discussion entirely since Not even a single poster (advocating the choice of a group-option) even suggested to nerf anything.

Quite to the contrary, leave the difficult of the game as it is and give people who find this too difficult an option to group for certain ( a minority) of quests. Your personal game-play would be in no way affected at all.

Ysne58

Ooh. I do like the idea of allowing subsequent characters to skip the main story, if they really want to give up all that exp and skill points.

As I've said before, this issue is more than a nuisance to me. I do have pancreatic cancer and the statistics on survival on that particular cancer are horrible. I'd like to get to vet level before I die.

isengrimb16_ESO

robertlive2014 wrote: »

isengrimb16_ESO wrote: »

... Pelial, I think his name is - it takes place on a ship, and you had to fight a sea serpent while fighting boarders - I'm not sure what he hits me with, but it hits like a truck ...

This was one of the best quests in the game. I enjoyed it a lot and completing it was satisfying. I encountered it in the VR6-VR10 range (iirc), so my assumption is the encounter I played was as hard as it gets. I believe my strategy was face tank with bash interrupts, and quick swaps to my AOE bar for killing those adds. Face tank with bash interrupts is my build's preferred strategy when dealing with bosses that have OP ranged spell attacks.

Yes, I'm a nightblade with a rangey build myself. Blocking _reflects_ spells, yes? I think I was trying to burn more than block; I dislike the porting effect of fan of knives, but it's the only AOE I have until I can get power drain at 42.