Best Of
Re: Official Night Market Feedback Thread
We are making progress.... 
I just wonder how much longer it will take for obvious suggestions and advice that has been given not only from myself but from other numerous sources of players that are truly invested in the best interest of ESO's development before we "get it right".
In the sense of combat as I have stated months and years ago.... Simply adding more HP to monsters to make them "more difficult" is not a proper way to develop and create content. The short answer here and you are being told again ZOS is that combat should be balanced in a manner where the player does not feel like they are "God mode" the entire time and not challenged what so ever and the same is the opposite of where players feel like they should "avoid" combat because they know they're going to get wrecked in .5 seconds of entering combat. Combat should feel like I need to actually pay attention to what is going on in front of me, use abilities at my disposal to do the "dance" of combat in dealing damage and staying alive in a dynamic form and not a static form of a "rotation". If your team can thread the needle I am talking about where combat is a balanced enjoyable form of "fun" in the sense that I am not a mindless zombie running around the world mashing a series of buttons simply because "its time to hit that button" but also whenever I choose to engage ANY enemy in the game world I am greeted with a feeling that the enemy absolutely has the potential to take my player down if I dont dedicate some level of focus in what I am doing. The next target in this design is the amount of "time" involved for each interaction of combat. So just exactly what is the "perfect" amount of time in combat? Well that depends. If I am just roaming around stonefalls fighting random beetles that combat time probably needs to be pretty short, but because they're beetles they're not dangerous right? Wrong. You could absolutely make that combat interaction just as fun and threatening with a short amount of time required for that combat. Versus going into a fight of me versus 8 monsters at once and I spend 3 minutes fighting them only to realize there is another 8 monsters 10 feet away thats going to be another 3 minutes of fighting. Your problem with both of these scenarios currently is the beetles I smack once and off to the next beetle and its honestly pretty pointless to interact with it and not fun and I just run around that beetle and carry on to whatever I am doing. Where as your 8 monsters that I have to dedicate 3 min of fighting to and eventually can kill them off seems to long winded of a fight and I am about to spend the next 30 min of my life trying to cover a small section of the map only for them to respawn behind me and that also becomes of thing that I am going to figure out a way to avoid that combat altogether (sneaking around / vampire stage 4) and get to my target. Both scenarios are not "fun". How do we fix this? Scaling. Give the monsters enough health by default so that if 1 player decides to interact then that 1 player can kill the monsters and have a fun interaction of combat where they cant just waltz in and get whatever loot they want and be a mindless zombie but the combat is actually fun and engaging and at the end of the combat they're left with the feeling of "that was fun". Versus if you have 10 people who choose to jump in and fight monsters they adjust to that influx of numerous players in combat with them and maybe even a new set of combat dynamics get thrown into the mix because its not a single player attacking them, but the point here is 1 player or 10 players all trying to kill the target should have similar experiences in the combat of something being "fun" and everyone is paying attention to what they're doing and not being stuck with this "just press the buttons because its time to press the buttons" and the monsters will eventually die. Now onto the next part that I know some of you will start hollering "Night Market is GROUP content". Yes I agree GROUP content is absolutely necessary in the game and rewards should reflect the such for putting together a GROUP to do GROUP content. These encounters are absolutely intended to have numerous players engaging the encounters and all contributing to the effort of surviving and becoming victorious over whatever the encounter is. Should a solo player be able to go in by himself and complete any and all GROUP content? Short answer is No, that is why its GROUP content. Where I feel like the hiccup is in the Night Market is a good chunk of it is group content, but I literally dont see anyone else in the vast majority of the area. I have a much better chance of seeing someone standing in the palace afk than I do dynamically running into someone fighting monsters. I can probably count on 1 hand right now the number of people I have dynamically seen in the "group" areas of the night market. Yea I could absolutely start a group up and get people to go in there with me, but its not a forced setting like you would see with like a dungeon finder system. So if we're going to leave it open and just let people waltz in and continue to bash their head against mobs that they need 3+ minutes of constant interaction just to get the most basic adds down you probably need to litter the place with real players who can all contribute to fighting them and make the content more bearable OR force a queue system that will party people up with a common goal in mind and a sense of direction. Because what you have right now is just the wild west of chaos of people running in all cardinal directions doing different things when they do manage to see other players. On top of that you end up with the issue of to many people being in one spot killing something and these really powerful monsters die within seconds of spawning, again proving my point of needing a scalable system which leaves players with a positive combat experience after the fight is over with.
TL;DR: Combat needs to be reworked across the board with scalability to make simple encounter and difficult encounters engaging and fun.
Next the "rewards". All I'm going to really say with this is I truly though that there would be some "different" rewards depending on my choice of faction and honestly there isn't. They all 3 have the exact same rewards with the exception of a helm and shoulders. If you're going to go through the trouble of making a full system of factions and dicing things up and there suppose to be a sense of "choice" at least make it feel like there truly is a difference in what I am choosing. Honestly I feel like the Night Market would have been better off with no factions being involved and then having 1 vendor with the rewards and then you can choose 1 of 3 helm / shoulders that you like and then buy the other stuff that all 3 vendors have.
I could easily go on about other items of suggestion but I've been on my soapbox long enough I'll go back to my hole and wait patiently for the light bulb to come on I still love you ZOS 
and ESO
Thank you,
Defatank
I just wonder how much longer it will take for obvious suggestions and advice that has been given not only from myself but from other numerous sources of players that are truly invested in the best interest of ESO's development before we "get it right".
In the sense of combat as I have stated months and years ago.... Simply adding more HP to monsters to make them "more difficult" is not a proper way to develop and create content. The short answer here and you are being told again ZOS is that combat should be balanced in a manner where the player does not feel like they are "God mode" the entire time and not challenged what so ever and the same is the opposite of where players feel like they should "avoid" combat because they know they're going to get wrecked in .5 seconds of entering combat. Combat should feel like I need to actually pay attention to what is going on in front of me, use abilities at my disposal to do the "dance" of combat in dealing damage and staying alive in a dynamic form and not a static form of a "rotation". If your team can thread the needle I am talking about where combat is a balanced enjoyable form of "fun" in the sense that I am not a mindless zombie running around the world mashing a series of buttons simply because "its time to hit that button" but also whenever I choose to engage ANY enemy in the game world I am greeted with a feeling that the enemy absolutely has the potential to take my player down if I dont dedicate some level of focus in what I am doing. The next target in this design is the amount of "time" involved for each interaction of combat. So just exactly what is the "perfect" amount of time in combat? Well that depends. If I am just roaming around stonefalls fighting random beetles that combat time probably needs to be pretty short, but because they're beetles they're not dangerous right? Wrong. You could absolutely make that combat interaction just as fun and threatening with a short amount of time required for that combat. Versus going into a fight of me versus 8 monsters at once and I spend 3 minutes fighting them only to realize there is another 8 monsters 10 feet away thats going to be another 3 minutes of fighting. Your problem with both of these scenarios currently is the beetles I smack once and off to the next beetle and its honestly pretty pointless to interact with it and not fun and I just run around that beetle and carry on to whatever I am doing. Where as your 8 monsters that I have to dedicate 3 min of fighting to and eventually can kill them off seems to long winded of a fight and I am about to spend the next 30 min of my life trying to cover a small section of the map only for them to respawn behind me and that also becomes of thing that I am going to figure out a way to avoid that combat altogether (sneaking around / vampire stage 4) and get to my target. Both scenarios are not "fun". How do we fix this? Scaling. Give the monsters enough health by default so that if 1 player decides to interact then that 1 player can kill the monsters and have a fun interaction of combat where they cant just waltz in and get whatever loot they want and be a mindless zombie but the combat is actually fun and engaging and at the end of the combat they're left with the feeling of "that was fun". Versus if you have 10 people who choose to jump in and fight monsters they adjust to that influx of numerous players in combat with them and maybe even a new set of combat dynamics get thrown into the mix because its not a single player attacking them, but the point here is 1 player or 10 players all trying to kill the target should have similar experiences in the combat of something being "fun" and everyone is paying attention to what they're doing and not being stuck with this "just press the buttons because its time to press the buttons" and the monsters will eventually die. Now onto the next part that I know some of you will start hollering "Night Market is GROUP content". Yes I agree GROUP content is absolutely necessary in the game and rewards should reflect the such for putting together a GROUP to do GROUP content. These encounters are absolutely intended to have numerous players engaging the encounters and all contributing to the effort of surviving and becoming victorious over whatever the encounter is. Should a solo player be able to go in by himself and complete any and all GROUP content? Short answer is No, that is why its GROUP content. Where I feel like the hiccup is in the Night Market is a good chunk of it is group content, but I literally dont see anyone else in the vast majority of the area. I have a much better chance of seeing someone standing in the palace afk than I do dynamically running into someone fighting monsters. I can probably count on 1 hand right now the number of people I have dynamically seen in the "group" areas of the night market. Yea I could absolutely start a group up and get people to go in there with me, but its not a forced setting like you would see with like a dungeon finder system. So if we're going to leave it open and just let people waltz in and continue to bash their head against mobs that they need 3+ minutes of constant interaction just to get the most basic adds down you probably need to litter the place with real players who can all contribute to fighting them and make the content more bearable OR force a queue system that will party people up with a common goal in mind and a sense of direction. Because what you have right now is just the wild west of chaos of people running in all cardinal directions doing different things when they do manage to see other players. On top of that you end up with the issue of to many people being in one spot killing something and these really powerful monsters die within seconds of spawning, again proving my point of needing a scalable system which leaves players with a positive combat experience after the fight is over with.
TL;DR: Combat needs to be reworked across the board with scalability to make simple encounter and difficult encounters engaging and fun.
Next the "rewards". All I'm going to really say with this is I truly though that there would be some "different" rewards depending on my choice of faction and honestly there isn't. They all 3 have the exact same rewards with the exception of a helm and shoulders. If you're going to go through the trouble of making a full system of factions and dicing things up and there suppose to be a sense of "choice" at least make it feel like there truly is a difference in what I am choosing. Honestly I feel like the Night Market would have been better off with no factions being involved and then having 1 vendor with the rewards and then you can choose 1 of 3 helm / shoulders that you like and then buy the other stuff that all 3 vendors have.
I could easily go on about other items of suggestion but I've been on my soapbox long enough I'll go back to my hole and wait patiently for the light bulb to come on
I still love you ZOS and ESO Thank you,
Defatank
Defatank
3
Re: U50 Feedback Thread for Class Mastery
Guys we are aware that most subclassed lines are a little bit o
Seconding this. Please make templars sustain passive work even when the shield is down, it wouldnt even be good or probably worth taking even then but it would at least be not as hilariously weak.
ArctosCethlenn wrote: »ItsNotLiving wrote: »Templar is still the lowest damage class and cannot compete in PvP. Judgements Brand double nerfed by battlespirit. 600 spell damage is not enough with how bad the damage options in the templars kit actually is.
Templar with the worst sustain and a terrible sustain mastery that only works if you're not being hit is pathetically hilarious, but when you add in the awful damage masteries you're left with a class that's only ever worth bringing along to buff the real classes to let them pad their numbers a bit more.
Seconding this. Please make templars sustain passive work even when the shield is down, it wouldnt even be good or probably worth taking even then but it would at least be not as hilariously weak.
acanca
3
Re: Skill-Based Combat is Back: Why the Night Market is the Ultimate "Mistake Check" for solo players
agelonestar wrote: »Very few people want this level of content. Most want the kind of new content we had with Chapters (zones, stories, quests, and other content in keeping with Elder Scrolls lore). That isn't to say there shouldn't be a balance and we can't do things in a different way from Chapters, but when a majority of players won't play the content because it's too frustrating, too difficult, too boring..... what's the point of it?
ZoS current direction is all wrong.
Just to add to this...
ZOS spent the first 10 (11?) years putting out zones with stories and delves and such. Because of that, they attracted and retained predominantly the type of player who enjoys that type of content, and a lot of those players prefer to solo/duo. Sure, there are players who only PvP or do arenas/dungeons/trials, and players who won't craft unless they're in a group. But a significant portion of the playerbase enjoyed the game and stuck around because of chapter (and story DLC) releases, and a significant number of those players only play solo or in a duo.
IOW, since ESO came out, ZOS released content on a regular schedule that attracted solo players, players interested in ES lore, and players who enjoy playing in a duo (often couples). And there are players who see ESO as a sort of comfort game - stress-free gaming.
The reason a lot of players are angry or upset about the NM is because it feels like a betrayal. ZOS set up a certain expectation content-wise, and perhaps unintentionally built a large solo/duo playerbase. The NM feels like a slap in the face. People that have supported the game for years are suddenly shut out of a major event.
I'm not trying to say the Night Market shouldn't have been released, or that it's unfair that it's not a good match for the majority of the playerbase. I'm fine with the Night Market event. I'm not participating, but that doesn't bother me.
I just wanted to point out that nobody should be surprised, including ZOS, that a playerbase they built over 10 years with annual chapters and story DLC (and dungeon DLC too) isn't a good match for a zone that requires other players, meta builds, etc. to complete. I'm certainly not surprised. The complaints were to be expected.
Of course, there will be solo/duo players who try it and enjoy it. But it misses the mark for most of the large story-focused, solo/duo crowd that ZOS built over the years. It's like when a writer is loved for their vampire stories, and suddenly they release a crime story. Sure, some will try it out and love it, but most people will be upset and not be interested. It's a case of "know your audience," or in this case, "know your playerbase."
Anyway, I guess ZOS will crunch the participation numbers and decide whether zones like this make sense in the future. Maybe there are a ton of players participating. We don't know how many instances exist at one time. On the other hand, if the numbers are low, or the NM is mostly dead in a couple of weeks, maybe they'll consider it a failed experiment and not do it again. Time will tell.
FOR 10 YEARS NOW THERE HAS BEEN POST HERE AND EVERY OTHER SOCIAL MEDIA PLACE ESO IS ASKING FOR HARDER CONTENT 10 YEARS THIS 1 PIECE OF THE GAME HAS BEEN ASKED FOR 10 YEARS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
you keep saying solo players , but never talking about skill level of said solos , if a solo player is having troubles doing something 99% of them looks at what their main issue is and fixes it not give up and cry this to hard for me solo players are them that want true challenges not shut down the moment they die , hell i like that i can die in the night market , helps me home my skills so that i dont die
Re: Exclude WW from Signet
Hmmm... hate to say I told you so to everyone that said Signet was fine and enabled a fun playstyle, but "I told you so."
Any set item that tells you "receive this massive benefit for not engaging with a core mechanic of the game" is problematic. Even Oakensoul understands this, it eliminates a bar, but it doesn't give you maximum ceiling DPS, it's for early-mid tier players. Warmask gives great single target, but it nukes your cleave meaning most people won't use it in real content, it also actually requires some type of effort.
Modifiers like 170% for Signet and 150% for Empower should be EYE OPENING to the dev team when majority of modifiers we use are between 5~12% for damage done. These effectively give 10x the value, so either they're overperforming (Signet) or the base thing it's modifying is underperforming (Heavy Attacks).
And they just keep going in circles, nerfing Permanent pets, then just Bear, in an effort to keep Signet exactly the same instead of tinkering with it any capacity. I want a status effect mythic, but I don't want this, something that works best when not casting your ultimate, doing nothing... or cheesing it with setups like Warden's Bear, Sorc's Overload, or WW's transformation.
I go back to my original suggestion:
Or something like this anyway, the point stands; big number go down, low number go up, all ultimates are rewarded, fun part of random effects improved. It should be usable for all status effect/elemental playstyles, instead of enabling this weird situation where anyone can use it just by never casting their ultimate.
I don't even want to hear about accessibility concerns on this one, because that's clearly not the intent of the design for Signet, and Oakensoul players who are disabled cast ultimates still. The part they're trying to avoid is the frequent APM requirements of bar swapping and managing 12 abilities instead of 6. Oakensoul includes Minor Heroism for a reason.
Any set item that tells you "receive this massive benefit for not engaging with a core mechanic of the game" is problematic. Even Oakensoul understands this, it eliminates a bar, but it doesn't give you maximum ceiling DPS, it's for early-mid tier players. Warmask gives great single target, but it nukes your cleave meaning most people won't use it in real content, it also actually requires some type of effort.
Modifiers like 170% for Signet and 150% for Empower should be EYE OPENING to the dev team when majority of modifiers we use are between 5~12% for damage done. These effectively give 10x the value, so either they're overperforming (Signet) or the base thing it's modifying is underperforming (Heavy Attacks).
And they just keep going in circles, nerfing Permanent pets, then just Bear, in an effort to keep Signet exactly the same instead of tinkering with it any capacity. I want a status effect mythic, but I don't want this, something that works best when not casting your ultimate, doing nothing... or cheesing it with setups like Warden's Bear, Sorc's Overload, or WW's transformation.
I go back to my original suggestion:
- Add a base effect; +20% damage done with status effects and 1 random status effect every 2s.
- Instead of 1% per ultimate stored up to 170%, give 80% for 1s per 10 ultimate spent.
- For the purposes of this proc condition, allow Rampage to be treated as an ultimate.
Or something like this anyway, the point stands; big number go down, low number go up, all ultimates are rewarded, fun part of random effects improved. It should be usable for all status effect/elemental playstyles, instead of enabling this weird situation where anyone can use it just by never casting their ultimate.
I don't even want to hear about accessibility concerns on this one, because that's clearly not the intent of the design for Signet, and Oakensoul players who are disabled cast ultimates still. The part they're trying to avoid is the frequent APM requirements of bar swapping and managing 12 abilities instead of 6. Oakensoul includes Minor Heroism for a reason.
Re: Why is everyone so adverse to grouping for NM?
FurryCandyHearts wrote: »DenverRalphy wrote: »FurryCandyHearts wrote: »OccultNerd wrote: »So....I generally play solo, I group up for trials/end etc but that's it. I play solo because I don't need a group for normal overland content,wbs, public dungeons etc.. I'm not an elitist, my DPS isn't amazing but I get on fine for the content I play.
Along comes Night Market...you need to group/follow a group/ sneak etc.. no problem, it was advertised as group content.
What I don't understand is why so many players refuse to group up and then come to the forums or FB groups and moan because they expected to do solo NM and they can't, so that's it they are quitting....what is they actual issue? Why won't these players join a team?
I've seen people asking for a solo or easier version of NM, why? Especially after the majority of players wanted harder content!
Night market is gross and offensive for reasons i am not at liberty to entirely disclose here on thew forums. I find the entire premise repugnant. Pledging myself to any of the 3 miscreants is repugnant. And the starter quest those who would rule is repugnant. The house looks like a frat boy party palace and not at all like a house i would like to live in. I really can't say more but the entire NM is more repugnant than scribing and scrying and the witches fest and tales of tribute and all the other stuff they've added to the game. I thiunk it's even more offensive than the ridiculous over the top graphiical effects they keep adding to the game: even more so than chakram shields animation, night market is offensive to me. If only i could say more and be specific, but you know, it's forbidden.
Have you not read, experienced, or followed any TES lore prior to the Night Market? Cannabilism, <sex with corpses> (the word for that is actually censored on the forums), slavery, sex trafficing, filicide... the list goes on and on.
THe point of any decent mmo is to be a hero and STOP IT, not to join in on the mischief making.
Those repulsive acts I listed (except perhaps the necro sex one) are all accepted practices within TES lore. The character you're playing interacts and accpets them on a regular basis throughout the game. :shrug: Just sayin.
Heck, Jesters festival even makes jovial cracks about Bosmer, their neighbors, and what's for dinner.
Re: Why isn't there a normal Night Market mode?
Today I started a group with a friend who mainly RPs, we put it on the group finder and we had a full group before reaching the first mob. Minimal communication done, we just circled the district a few times doing all the quests and defeating all the bosses. This was on a Monday afternoon.
Bottom-line: it really is not difficult to group up and you don't have to be a great nor sociable player to make it work. People only exclude themselves.
Bottom-line: it really is not difficult to group up and you don't have to be a great nor sociable player to make it work. People only exclude themselves.
Re: empower nerf
I am happy to see some Oakensoul heavy attack love, it was much needed. I think it would be good to see Rakkhat get some love too though. Even on live it was fairly behind without subclassing. I would like to see dark magic get some love too, but that is a different subject.
Re: Concerns About ESO’s Future Direction and Solo Player Experience
A big part of the ESO Community is right now learning to group up, speak to others und coordinate (in case of the "Trial") to get their goals accomplished. The group finder was kinda empty the first evening (on EU), but it filled up more and more over the weekend. As an Event Zone people who normally play solo are probably more likely to try that for the first time, than joining groups for a trial. Everyone can hop in and out as they please no harm done to anyone. And everyone who does, will immediately see the effect of the whole thing becoming easier. If the group even has a tank its again a much better experience. You will fly through the market with your group, maybe die sometimes, but who cares.
As a note. Every pvp event has the same discussion, there some pve players feel it is their absolute birthright to go in a pvp zone, during a pvp event, and not be disturbed while they do their pve stuff. How daring to kill a pve player in a pvp zone. If their argument cant hold up anymore, its always bad game design etc. Never is it even considered, that such players need to engage with the pvp aspects to get their stuff done more easy.
Its the same with this honestly. Players engaging with the aspects of such content (grouping up, looking to improve their builds and playstyle, not expecting to be handheld for everything) will get through it no problem, while ones who dont will loudly complain and demand it all be changed, just like their pvp experience.
Thats not to say everything is perfect. Zos can make it easier for players to find stuff, explain stuff, and help their players who are actually engaging in the content to get a better experience (ex: i dont know where the other players are, where the fights happen, is everyone afk in the hub?, do i really need to switch instance for my group and how do i do that (a "solo player" wouldnt know that, etc). Difficulty wise, from a endgame player who plays for trifectas: No, NM is most definitely not hardcore and to suggest that is absolutely ridiculous.
For the balance aspect of solo friendly vs group content, Zos is not really bringing more group content this year than before. There are no dungeons on the roadmap, instead we get this and i am generally very happy they're changing things up with new stuff and trying to make it exciting. Which they - for the most part - succeded in and can build upon, instead of dumbing everything down again.
I know every Comunity has something to complain about all the time. But looking at other MMOs, and also playing some of them, its most amazing for me that the casual Eso Crowd doesnt seem to realize how good they are treated by Zos. Still.
As a note. Every pvp event has the same discussion, there some pve players feel it is their absolute birthright to go in a pvp zone, during a pvp event, and not be disturbed while they do their pve stuff. How daring to kill a pve player in a pvp zone. If their argument cant hold up anymore, its always bad game design etc. Never is it even considered, that such players need to engage with the pvp aspects to get their stuff done more easy.
Its the same with this honestly. Players engaging with the aspects of such content (grouping up, looking to improve their builds and playstyle, not expecting to be handheld for everything) will get through it no problem, while ones who dont will loudly complain and demand it all be changed, just like their pvp experience.
Thats not to say everything is perfect. Zos can make it easier for players to find stuff, explain stuff, and help their players who are actually engaging in the content to get a better experience (ex: i dont know where the other players are, where the fights happen, is everyone afk in the hub?, do i really need to switch instance for my group and how do i do that (a "solo player" wouldnt know that, etc). Difficulty wise, from a endgame player who plays for trifectas: No, NM is most definitely not hardcore and to suggest that is absolutely ridiculous.
For the balance aspect of solo friendly vs group content, Zos is not really bringing more group content this year than before. There are no dungeons on the roadmap, instead we get this and i am generally very happy they're changing things up with new stuff and trying to make it exciting. Which they - for the most part - succeded in and can build upon, instead of dumbing everything down again.
I know every Comunity has something to complain about all the time. But looking at other MMOs, and also playing some of them, its most amazing for me that the casual Eso Crowd doesnt seem to realize how good they are treated by Zos. Still.
excole10
10
Re: Wouldnt it be great if there was a heavy armor passive for taunt
I don’t like the aspect of taunting in this game. I find threat generation type of mechanics to be better. In other games tank’s offensive skills generated a large amount of threat. This allowed for a large diversity of skill choice and control. Making a passive on heavy armor that increases the tank’s threat (not eso taunting) would be something I would welcome.
To be clear the tank would still have to maintain attack rotations to stay on the top of the threat list in those games, so it did not make tanking easier it just streamlined things a bit.
Part of the problem with taunt in this game is the very fact it is an auto target the tank skill, which why the devs tend to avoid any type “aoe taunt”. It’s kind of too powerful because for the most part players hit one button get the npc on them instantly.
To be clear the tank would still have to maintain attack rotations to stay on the top of the threat list in those games, so it did not make tanking easier it just streamlined things a bit.
Part of the problem with taunt in this game is the very fact it is an auto target the tank skill, which why the devs tend to avoid any type “aoe taunt”. It’s kind of too powerful because for the most part players hit one button get the npc on them instantly.
umagon
3
Re: Why is everyone so adverse to grouping for NM?
OccultNerd wrote: »I've seen people asking for a solo or easier version of NM, why? Especially after the majority of players wanted harder content!
How do you know the majority of players wanted harder content? ESO is a casual game, played mostly by casual players and a lot of solo players, so putting a zone in that's just trial trash and dungeon bosses is too hard for them. Also, ZOS makes "play your way" a major selling point and people expect that, so when they can't, there's backlash.
Frayton
6