Alternatives to nerfing vWGT, vICP and vCOA

Magdalina

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

Magdalina wrote: »

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

@KoshkaMurka :

Just count how many "if" there are in your post.
It's not difficult IF.... a hundred of conditions are fulfilled. Which aren't.

The primary condition being that people put effort into learning it.

But that's precisely what people don't want and you have no control over this.

Well yes. IF people want to do it, then they should put effort into learning how to do it. If people don't want to put any effort, they should play graphical novels. There's nothing wrong with those, they can be really awesome too, and all you have to do is occasionally click "continue" or choose a conversation option - no effort included. But this is not a graphical novel. This is a game centered around fighting. Fighting means effort of some sort at least, don't you agree?

Do you seriously want this game to be like a graphical novel? Click click click dialogue, enter a room for the quest, mobs insta die, press a few "interact" buttons, click click click more dialogue?

Personally I'd like that, (I'm happier farming, exploring, reading or solving puzzles than fighting) but I agree it's not what ESO is meant to be.
As to the question whether fighting should include effort, well you can agree or disagree, I think the answer is not *that* obvious. Some, and apparently many, people just like to kill stuff without challenge, easily and mechanically, that's a fact.

Look at how people are grinding... ok, they do that for levelling and CP, but they could also do that by actually playing and they choose to grind. If ZOS had set up an area with "aggro-AOE-cash XP-rinse-repeat" as basic mechanics, everyone would complain that it is stupidly easy and boring. However, many players play that way.

Alright. You would enjoy a graphical novel kind of game more. I think it's fine; there's nothing wrong with that, it's like arguing that apples are better than oranges. But this game is an orange. Don't try to turn it into an apple.

People grind to achieve something. I have yet to meet a person who says "grinding is fun, let's do it just because!". People do this in order to acquire gold, xp, loot, skills etc - stuff they can use further one...most frequently in order to complete endgame content, because this is where the fun and actual "play" lies for some of us. So don't try to justify "agro-aoe-mobs instadied=>profit" "mechanics" by saying "people like playing that way". They don't. It's just the quickest way to achieve being able to do the content people do like.

...isn't effort the definition of the fight? If you don't like it when things fight back, you don't like fighting. You like killing things(which is okay in a game I suppose). Killing things=/= fighting unless things might actually kill you as well, or at least fight back at all.

Maybe they should start advertising ESO as "the game where you can kill things. Easy. Simple. No effort required! You can just go and kill things without worrying about them fighting back!" if what you say is the case >.<

anitajoneb17_ESO

Magdalina wrote: »

...isn't effort the definition of the fight? If you don't like it when things fight back, you don't like fighting. You like killing things(which is okay in a game I suppose). Killing things=/= fighting unless things might actually kill you as well, or at least fight back at all.

MMhhh... I'd say "Uncertainty and suspense" are the definition of the fight... and I think you nailed it with "killing vs. fighting".
And yes I think many people in this game like just killing stuff instead of actually fighting stuff. I'm afraid that's how it is... at least that's my conclusion from what I observe in the game and all the nerfing.

(My personal preference would be to have less, but really far less mobs, not even 1/10th of what we have now overland, and that those mobs would be really worth fighting. But that's only me. ).

Jsmalls

On console no one runs ICP because the rewards aren't worth the effort.

WGT is a joke, I can't even imagine what it'll get nerfed into.

Increase the drop rates for both and maybe then people will run them more often... Or keep them that challenging and make the gear BoE, wouldn't that be something having a chance to make a profit running a dungeon...

(And what's so bad about some dungeons being for "better players")

sentientomega

helediron wrote: »

I am copying (and a bit modifying) a post from vMA thread. These ideas are pretty straight copy from Dungeons & Dragons Online MMO. What i propose is already tested there and working well.

TL;DR: I am willing to trade exclusive BiS rewards to avoid constant nerfing of content..

vWGT and vICP are getting nerfed. This is because we have only two difficulty levels and how gear rewards work. All players want to get meaningful rewards. If they can't get them from veteran difficulty, they demand nerfs until they can pass the content to get the gear rewards. In fact there is only one valid difficulty, veteran, because people despise rewards from normal mode.

I am suggesting to have four difficulty levels and change to gear rewards. The difference should not be level of gear but how fast we get them. A hardcore player could grind one vMA weapon in a week with multiple runs per day in hardest difficulty, while a casual gets it in half year running few times per week.

I think these changes should happen to instanced PvE content:
- Every player should have a way to play content at level they believe they can pass it.
- Every player should have a way to play content at level that is challenging.
- We need more difficulty levels because now we have very easy and very difficult, and people can't find the level they can pass but still challenges them.
- We should not end up nerfing every trial/dungeon because most people can't pass them.
- Easier difficulty should give also BiS gear but significantly slower than harder difficulties. Keep easier difficulty still relevant path for rewards to avoid nerfing.
- We should have more predictable path to acquiring gear and real, visible progress. RNG is sometimes too easy, sometimes too unfair.

The solutions could be
- All instanced content should have four difficulty levels: casual, normal, veteran, elite.
- Keep rare RNG drops as they are, but add tokens to get rewards like vMA weapon e.g. every 20th to 80th run in MA, depending on difficulty. Set items require less tokens.
- Use the tokens in crafting tables to produce the special item. We have there all selections we need to create it.
- This would need jewelry crafting tables too. But even without it, jewelry could be purchasable from a vendor with tokens.

I am not yet sure about the token scaling, but it should be such that if good player selects easier difficulty their farming rate gets slower. This gives us two good things:
- No one can argue easier difficulties give away BiS gear because easier difficulty require more effort than harder difficulties. Players want to select the highest difficulty they still can run trough without too many deaths.
- At the same time not-so-good players can see there is a path for them for the BIS gear, and therefore do not demand nerfs.

Each instance would have their own tokens. Running CoA gives Valkyn token and MA gives Maelström token. If elite CoA drops four tokens, then require 4*20=80 tokens in e.g. clothing table to make one Valkyn item. You can only select head or shoulder and style is locked, but can freely choose level and traits. With 80 WGT tokens i can make Kena or with 20 WGT tokens i can make one Imperium or Spellcure set item.

What we get from these changes?
- No need to nerf elite difficulty.
- Elite players lose exclusive rewards. Instead they earn them faster than others.
- Regular players gain access to best rewards, but don't have to struggle with elite difficulty. They still have to put more effort to get that gear.
- Normal difficulty becomes a valid choice.
- Everybody can pass every content. That's why there is casual difficulty. I have played with stoned or anxious players, who can barely use light attack, or quit from fear of death.
- Token system handles the balancing between difficulty levels. It also mitigates current RNG unfairness. I've witnessed people getting Valkyn head on their very first vCoA run, and NOT getting even one full set in vWGT after 200 runs. This is NOT making gear rewards easier. It makes them predictable.
- it is hard to make dungeon difficulty balanced correctly. In DDO people can compensate it by selecting different difficulty. There some trials are usually run at hard (=veteran) and others at normal difficulty. So instread ZOS tweaking the one difficulty people adapt.

Smaller changes:
- Integrate the veteran hard mode into the elite mode.
- Move weekly rewards to token system to keep overall drop rate same as now.
- Group leader chooses difficulty level.

I like this, at least it would allow more people to play the game and persist, rather than give up.

I also think the concept should be extended to the OW, and that could be implemented by a sort of player buff, to reflect difficulty, so there'd be no need to nerf content, or change it in any way at all.

The onus would be on the player, if a casual player wanted to complete something, kill a pesky one-pip boss like Aldimion, they'd be able to do so.

If a top player wanted to take on the same challenge, with a 50-lap-swimming stomach, palpitations, showering palms and a dry mouth, they'd have a diff slider option they could set themselves to (elite), and get the thrill they're after, because while I'm not an expert, and a strict non-believe in cookie-cutter paths to success (ZOS said we have the widest range of choice possible, and they should mean it if they really believe that, so they people who build however they want are not penalised for doing so).

The difficulty slider could be found Under Settings/Gameplay, with four settings like the ones quoted, with reward quantity and quality synced to each.

The only thing is, the buffs you get through the settings should state that said buffs would be inactive in Cyrodiil/IC, though I imagine those zones have their own "difficulties".

LadyNalcarya

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

Magdalina wrote: »

...isn't effort the definition of the fight? If you don't like it when things fight back, you don't like fighting. You like killing things(which is okay in a game I suppose). Killing things=/= fighting unless things might actually kill you as well, or at least fight back at all.

MMhhh... I'd say "Uncertainty and suspense" are the definition of the fight... and I think you nailed it with "killing vs. fighting".
And yes I think many people in this game like just killing stuff instead of actually fighting stuff. I'm afraid that's how it is... at least that's my conclusion from what I observe in the game and all the nerfing.

(My personal preference would be to have less, but really far less mobs, not even 1/10th of what we have now overland, and that those mobs would be really worth fighting. But that's only me. ).

You still cant tell the majority of players doesnt want any kind of challenge. You see, of course, you can say "Casuals are the majority of players. Im a casual and I dont want to fight, I just want to kill. The majority of players doesnt want to fight", but its a false syllogism. "Casuals" and "players who want everything nerfed" are overlapping sets, but it doesnt mean that all casuals, or even the majority, want it.

anitajoneb17_ESO

KoshkaMurka wrote: »

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

Magdalina wrote: »

...isn't effort the definition of the fight? If you don't like it when things fight back, you don't like fighting. You like killing things(which is okay in a game I suppose). Killing things=/= fighting unless things might actually kill you as well, or at least fight back at all.

MMhhh... I'd say "Uncertainty and suspense" are the definition of the fight... and I think you nailed it with "killing vs. fighting".
And yes I think many people in this game like just killing stuff instead of actually fighting stuff. I'm afraid that's how it is... at least that's my conclusion from what I observe in the game and all the nerfing.

(My personal preference would be to have less, but really far less mobs, not even 1/10th of what we have now overland, and that those mobs would be really worth fighting. But that's only me. ).

You still cant tell the majority of players doesnt want any kind of challenge. You see, of course, you can say "Casuals are the majority of players. Im a casual and I dont want to fight, I just want to kill. The majority of players doesnt want to fight", but its a false syllogism. "Casuals" and "players who want everything nerfed" are overlapping sets, but it doesnt mean that all casuals, or even the majority, want it.

True. But I didn't say that. All I said was that this is how it looks like considering ZOS' decision. Maybe my conclusions are false and ZOS is simply making the wrong decisions based on thin air, that's also possible.

Destruent

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

Destruent wrote: »

This decision is actually a decision against those who provide testresults from PTS/live, report bugs, stream on twitch or publish videos on youtube. So it's against those who advertise the game for zero cost and help them to fix stuff. Sounds like a great decision to loose those.

That simply means that those people you mention (streamers and youtubers) don't have as much impact and importance on sales and player retention as they (and you) think they have.

Bugs are a totally different story, and testers often get confused, they think they can comment on the overall design whereas what is asked of them is to test the implementation, not the design as such.

There are actually lots of players providing feedback on mechanics/bugs and even now lots of bugs make it to the release. Things only get worse if those do not play on PTS and provide feedback anymore.

Frawr

What I fail to understand is why any precious and inept player would even thank ZOS for nerfing these dungeons.

'Yeah I am epic because I can complete it now that ZOS made it easy, thanks zos!'

The whole point is that it is an achievement.

ZOS, contrary to current gaming standards, a sense of achievement actually comes from overcoming something challenging and not from an e-badge.

timidobserver

sentientomega wrote: »

helediron wrote: »

I am copying (and a bit modifying) a post from vMA thread. These ideas are pretty straight copy from Dungeons & Dragons Online MMO. What i propose is already tested there and working well.

TL;DR: I am willing to trade exclusive BiS rewards to avoid constant nerfing of content..

vWGT and vICP are getting nerfed. This is because we have only two difficulty levels and how gear rewards work. All players want to get meaningful rewards. If they can't get them from veteran difficulty, they demand nerfs until they can pass the content to get the gear rewards. In fact there is only one valid difficulty, veteran, because people despise rewards from normal mode.

I am suggesting to have four difficulty levels and change to gear rewards. The difference should not be level of gear but how fast we get them. A hardcore player could grind one vMA weapon in a week with multiple runs per day in hardest difficulty, while a casual gets it in half year running few times per week.

I think these changes should happen to instanced PvE content:
- Every player should have a way to play content at level they believe they can pass it.
- Every player should have a way to play content at level that is challenging.
- We need more difficulty levels because now we have very easy and very difficult, and people can't find the level they can pass but still challenges them.
- We should not end up nerfing every trial/dungeon because most people can't pass them.
- Easier difficulty should give also BiS gear but significantly slower than harder difficulties. Keep easier difficulty still relevant path for rewards to avoid nerfing.
- We should have more predictable path to acquiring gear and real, visible progress. RNG is sometimes too easy, sometimes too unfair.

The solutions could be
- All instanced content should have four difficulty levels: casual, normal, veteran, elite.
- Keep rare RNG drops as they are, but add tokens to get rewards like vMA weapon e.g. every 20th to 80th run in MA, depending on difficulty. Set items require less tokens.
- Use the tokens in crafting tables to produce the special item. We have there all selections we need to create it.
- This would need jewelry crafting tables too. But even without it, jewelry could be purchasable from a vendor with tokens.

I am not yet sure about the token scaling, but it should be such that if good player selects easier difficulty their farming rate gets slower. This gives us two good things:
- No one can argue easier difficulties give away BiS gear because easier difficulty require more effort than harder difficulties. Players want to select the highest difficulty they still can run trough without too many deaths.
- At the same time not-so-good players can see there is a path for them for the BIS gear, and therefore do not demand nerfs.

Each instance would have their own tokens. Running CoA gives Valkyn token and MA gives Maelström token. If elite CoA drops four tokens, then require 4*20=80 tokens in e.g. clothing table to make one Valkyn item. You can only select head or shoulder and style is locked, but can freely choose level and traits. With 80 WGT tokens i can make Kena or with 20 WGT tokens i can make one Imperium or Spellcure set item.

What we get from these changes?
- No need to nerf elite difficulty.
- Elite players lose exclusive rewards. Instead they earn them faster than others.
- Regular players gain access to best rewards, but don't have to struggle with elite difficulty. They still have to put more effort to get that gear.
- Normal difficulty becomes a valid choice.
- Everybody can pass every content. That's why there is casual difficulty. I have played with stoned or anxious players, who can barely use light attack, or quit from fear of death.
- Token system handles the balancing between difficulty levels. It also mitigates current RNG unfairness. I've witnessed people getting Valkyn head on their very first vCoA run, and NOT getting even one full set in vWGT after 200 runs. This is NOT making gear rewards easier. It makes them predictable.
- it is hard to make dungeon difficulty balanced correctly. In DDO people can compensate it by selecting different difficulty. There some trials are usually run at hard (=veteran) and others at normal difficulty. So instread ZOS tweaking the one difficulty people adapt.

Smaller changes:
- Integrate the veteran hard mode into the elite mode.
- Move weekly rewards to token system to keep overall drop rate same as now.
- Group leader chooses difficulty level.

I like this, at least it would allow more people to play the game and persist, rather than give up.

I also think the concept should be extended to the OW, and that could be implemented by a sort of player buff, to reflect difficulty, so there'd be no need to nerf content, or change it in any way at all.

The onus would be on the player, if a casual player wanted to complete something, kill a pesky one-pip boss like Aldimion, they'd be able to do so.

If a top player wanted to take on the same challenge, with a 50-lap-swimming stomach, palpitations, showering palms and a dry mouth, they'd have a diff slider option they could set themselves to (elite), and get the thrill they're after, because while I'm not an expert, and a strict non-believe in cookie-cutter paths to success (ZOS said we have the widest range of choice possible, and they should mean it if they really believe that, so they people who build however they want are not penalised for doing so).

The difficulty slider could be found Under Settings/Gameplay, with four settings like the ones quoted, with reward quantity and quality synced to each.

The only thing is, the buffs you get through the settings should state that said buffs would be inactive in Cyrodiil/IC, though I imagine those zones have their own "difficulties".

A difficulty slider won't change anything. The only point to a difficulty slider would be to increase the reward/incentive for doing the content at a more difficult level. The problem is that the people that do content with the slider set low will find it unacceptable that their reward is not the same as those that do it with it set on high. There is no solution to people with their point of view.

Magdalina

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

Magdalina wrote: »

...isn't effort the definition of the fight? If you don't like it when things fight back, you don't like fighting. You like killing things(which is okay in a game I suppose). Killing things=/= fighting unless things might actually kill you as well, or at least fight back at all.

MMhhh... I'd say "Uncertainty and suspense" are the definition of the fight... and I think you nailed it with "killing vs. fighting".
And yes I think many people in this game like just killing stuff instead of actually fighting stuff. I'm afraid that's how it is... at least that's my conclusion from what I observe in the game and all the nerfing.

(My personal preference would be to have less, but really far less mobs, not even 1/10th of what we have now overland, and that those mobs would be really worth fighting. But that's only me. ).

Alright, this I can actually somewhat agree with XD Far as definition of the fight goes, "uncertainty and suspense" kind of overlap with effort included, and a "fight" where mob dies from 3 light attacks doesn't feature either.

I even kind of agree with the "less but fun mobs". As is, it's just grindy because you have 100500 mobs in the open world, 99.999999% of which die to basically 3 light attacks. I suppose that's standard for MMOs though? Guess makes for moar loot and xp and no overwhelming challenge overall. Oh well. I can live with current overworld mobs, but not so much with nerfing the literally last pieces of challenging 4 man content.

And yes, it does seem as though great many people prefer simply killing to actual fighting. But I think ZOS is overrating the number of those people and thinks the content should be dumbed down for them rather than the overall gaming experience be improved for the whole playerbase. I think a huge portion of the playerbase just really doesn't know any better - it might well be their first MMO and they just get confused, lost and perhaps rejected in challenging group content and then never want to give it another try. Maybe it's a sign group content should be done better, explained in more details, offer more opportunities to learn, encourage teaching and learning, rather than be weaker so that such problems(but also such opporunities - to better yourself, to gain that feeling of achievement and overcoming a challenge that will bring you back again and again to better your score) never arise?

I agree that apparently many people would love 100% of this game to pose zero challenge, but I'm not convinced it is "most" so much(although it does look that's what ZOS believes). I also believe ZOS greatly underrates the number of people who could actually enjoy challenging content if they were given proper opportunities and encouraged to at least try. This is why I'm making this thread and I really am hoping someone out there is reading it.

I also believe continuously nerfing everything is just a slow way to killing this game and I really hope ZOS, despite everything, is not okay with simply grabbing some cash right now and letting it slowly rot as there's nothing left to aspire to, no motivation to come back.

LadyNalcarya

Magdalina wrote: »

And yes, it does seem as though great many people prefer simply killing to actual fighting. But I think ZOS is overrating the number of those people and thinks the content should be dumbed down for them rather than the overall gaming experience be improved for the whole playerbase. I think a huge portion of the playerbase just really doesn't know any better - it might well be their first MMO and they just get confused, lost and perhaps rejected in challenging group content and then never want to give it another try. Maybe it's a sign group content should be done better, explained in more details, offer more opportunities to learn, encourage teaching and learning, rather than be weaker so that such problems(but also such opporunities - to better yourself, to gain that feeling of achievement and overcoming a challenge that will bring you back again and again to better your score) never arise?

I agree that apparently many people would love 100% of this game to pose zero challenge, but I'm not convinced it is "most" so much(although it does look that's what ZOS believes). I also believe ZOS greatly underrates the number of people who could actually enjoy challenging content if they were given proper opportunities and encouraged to at least try. This is why I'm making this thread and I really am hoping someone out there is reading it.

This is an interesting question, how do they gather their statistics.
There's many strictly solo players in this game, who dont run vet dungeons regardless of difficulty. There are players that dont care if they cant do harder dungeons. There are players that quitted/rerolled at vet ranks. There are pvpers. There are people who didnt buy IC because of gankers. There are people who gave up on those dungeons because of the bad loot system. And many other possibilities.
So if Zos counts all those players, it might actually seem that % of players that are doing vICP and vWGT is low.
And more importantly, how can they tell that the majority of players actually wants the nerf? Majority doesnt post on forums.

anitajoneb17_ESO

timidobserver wrote: »

A difficulty slider won't change anything. The only point to a difficulty slider would be to increase the reward/incentive for doing the content at a more difficult level. The problem is that the people that do content with the slider set low will find it unacceptable that their reward is not the same as those that do it with it set on high. There is no solution to people with their point of view.

There is no solution either to people who think that a maximum level of difficulty is not worth doing if not tied to a max level reward exclusive to that level.

Magdalina

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

timidobserver wrote: »

A difficulty slider won't change anything. The only point to a difficulty slider would be to increase the reward/incentive for doing the content at a more difficult level. The problem is that the people that do content with the slider set low will find it unacceptable that their reward is not the same as those that do it with it set on high. There is no solution to people with their point of view.

There is no solution either to people who think that a maximum level of difficulty is not worth doing if not tied to a max level reward exclusive to that level.

But those people don't want 100% of the game to fit exclusively to their taste. So called hardcore folks like one type of gameplay, and all they want is like 0.001% of the game's content. So called casuals like another type of content and for some reason many of them think 100% of the game should be that, and the other guys wanting just 0.001% is "forcing their gameplay on others" and generally awful. That doesn't even make any sense.

Also, a lot of us just do it for fun and would even sacrifice our exclusive BiS gear in order to keep having fun.

timidobserver

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

timidobserver wrote: »

A difficulty slider won't change anything. The only point to a difficulty slider would be to increase the reward/incentive for doing the content at a more difficult level. The problem is that the people that do content with the slider set low will find it unacceptable that their reward is not the same as those that do it with it set on high. There is no solution to people with their point of view.

There is no solution either to people who think that a maximum level of difficulty is not worth doing if not tied to a max level reward exclusive to that level.

Sure there is. That is the difference between the two sides of the argument. One side is A okay with 2 remotely challenging Vet Dungeons and the rest being easy. The solution is to leave them a few challenging vet dungeons. The other side wants every vet dungeon to be made easy. There is no solution or compromise for that.

anitajoneb17_ESO

timidobserver wrote: »

Sure there is. That is the difference between the two sides of the argument. One side is A okay with 2 remotely challenging Vet Dungeons and the rest being easy. The solution is to leave them a few challenging vet dungeons. The other side wants every vet dungeon to be made easy. There is no solution or compromise for that.

No. They want access to the best gear.

But let's keep that aside.

You're actually derailing the discussion a bit by accusing the players to "want".
In this case, right now, it's not the players who "want" anything. It's ZOS who wants to increase the completion rate of those dungeons. Big difference.

Shunravi

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

timidobserver wrote: »

Sure there is. That is the difference between the two sides of the argument. One side is A okay with 2 remotely challenging Vet Dungeons and the rest being easy. The solution is to leave them a few challenging vet dungeons. The other side wants every vet dungeon to be made easy. There is no solution or compromise for that.

No. They want access to the best gear.

But let's keep that aside.

You're actually derailing the discussion a bit by accusing the players to "want".
In this case, right now, it's not the players who "want" anything. It's ZOS who wants to increase the completion rate of those dungeons. Big difference.

Well how about I give them my gear?

Destruent

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

timidobserver wrote: »

Sure there is. That is the difference between the two sides of the argument. One side is A okay with 2 remotely challenging Vet Dungeons and the rest being easy. The solution is to leave them a few challenging vet dungeons. The other side wants every vet dungeon to be made easy. There is no solution or compromise for that.

No. They want access to the best gear.

But let's keep that aside.

You're actually derailing the discussion a bit by accusing the players to "want".
In this case, right now, it's not the players who "want" anything. It's ZOS who wants to increase the completion rate of those dungeons. Big difference.

They CAN get all the equipment...they just refuse to do it the way they could do it

anitajoneb17_ESO

Magdalina wrote: »

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

timidobserver wrote: »

A difficulty slider won't change anything. The only point to a difficulty slider would be to increase the reward/incentive for doing the content at a more difficult level. The problem is that the people that do content with the slider set low will find it unacceptable that their reward is not the same as those that do it with it set on high. There is no solution to people with their point of view.

There is no solution either to people who think that a maximum level of difficulty is not worth doing if not tied to a max level reward exclusive to that level.

But those people don't want 100% of the game to fit exclusively to their taste. So called hardcore folks like one type of gameplay, and all they want is like 0.001% of the game's content. So called casuals like another type of content and for some reason many of them think 100% of the game should be that, and the other guys wanting just 0.001% is "forcing their gameplay on others" and generally awful. That doesn't even make any sense.

Also, a lot of us just do it for fun and would even sacrifice our exclusive BiS gear in order to keep having fun.

Same here : right now, players don't "want" anything, did not ask for anything. Haven't seen a "nerf IC dungeons" thread on this forum in ages. It's ZOS who wants to increase the completion rate.

As to your last sentence : I believe you when you speak for yourself, but I doubt strongly that many people would agree with you. High difficulty = exclusive BiS loot is anchored in players' mentality, almost written in stone.

Destruent

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

Magdalina wrote: »

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

timidobserver wrote: »

A difficulty slider won't change anything. The only point to a difficulty slider would be to increase the reward/incentive for doing the content at a more difficult level. The problem is that the people that do content with the slider set low will find it unacceptable that their reward is not the same as those that do it with it set on high. There is no solution to people with their point of view.

There is no solution either to people who think that a maximum level of difficulty is not worth doing if not tied to a max level reward exclusive to that level.

But those people don't want 100% of the game to fit exclusively to their taste. So called hardcore folks like one type of gameplay, and all they want is like 0.001% of the game's content. So called casuals like another type of content and for some reason many of them think 100% of the game should be that, and the other guys wanting just 0.001% is "forcing their gameplay on others" and generally awful. That doesn't even make any sense.

Also, a lot of us just do it for fun and would even sacrifice our exclusive BiS gear in order to keep having fun.

Same here : right now, players don't "want" anything, did not ask for anything. Haven't seen a "nerf IC dungeons" thread on this forum in ages. It's ZOS who wants to increase the completion rate.

As to your last sentence : I believe you when you speak for yourself, but I doubt strongly that many people would agree with you. High difficulty = exclusive BiS loot is anchored in players' mentality, almost written in stone.

ok, so tell me...which equipment is exclusive to get in the hardest content (regarding 4-men-dungeons)?

cote-bmsb16_ESO

ZOS doesnt know compromise they know how only nerf things. No Easy, Hard or Challenging mode for anyone.

Verbalinkontinenz

*cp-less mode as third, hardest mode, maybe with higher dropchance.

anitajoneb17_ESO

Destruent wrote: »

ok, so tell me...which equipment is exclusive to get in the hardest content (regarding 4-men-dungeons)?

Spellpower cure, scathing mage, etc... all IC sets are not obtainable anywhere else but in those dungeons.

helediron

timidobserver wrote: »

sentientomega wrote: »

helediron wrote: »

I am copying (and a bit modifying) a post from vMA thread. These ideas are pretty straight copy from Dungeons & Dragons Online MMO. What i propose is already tested there and working well.

TL;DR: I am willing to trade exclusive BiS rewards to avoid constant nerfing of content..

vWGT and vICP are getting nerfed. This is because we have only two difficulty levels and how gear rewards work. All players want to get meaningful rewards. If they can't get them from veteran difficulty, they demand nerfs until they can pass the content to get the gear rewards. In fact there is only one valid difficulty, veteran, because people despise rewards from normal mode.

I am suggesting to have four difficulty levels and change to gear rewards. The difference should not be level of gear but how fast we get them. A hardcore player could grind one vMA weapon in a week with multiple runs per day in hardest difficulty, while a casual gets it in half year running few times per week.

I think these changes should happen to instanced PvE content:
- Every player should have a way to play content at level they believe they can pass it.
- Every player should have a way to play content at level that is challenging.
- We need more difficulty levels because now we have very easy and very difficult, and people can't find the level they can pass but still challenges them.
- We should not end up nerfing every trial/dungeon because most people can't pass them.
- Easier difficulty should give also BiS gear but significantly slower than harder difficulties. Keep easier difficulty still relevant path for rewards to avoid nerfing.
- We should have more predictable path to acquiring gear and real, visible progress. RNG is sometimes too easy, sometimes too unfair.

The solutions could be
- All instanced content should have four difficulty levels: casual, normal, veteran, elite.
- Keep rare RNG drops as they are, but add tokens to get rewards like vMA weapon e.g. every 20th to 80th run in MA, depending on difficulty. Set items require less tokens.
- Use the tokens in crafting tables to produce the special item. We have there all selections we need to create it.
- This would need jewelry crafting tables too. But even without it, jewelry could be purchasable from a vendor with tokens.

I am not yet sure about the token scaling, but it should be such that if good player selects easier difficulty their farming rate gets slower. This gives us two good things:
- No one can argue easier difficulties give away BiS gear because easier difficulty require more effort than harder difficulties. Players want to select the highest difficulty they still can run trough without too many deaths.
- At the same time not-so-good players can see there is a path for them for the BIS gear, and therefore do not demand nerfs.

Each instance would have their own tokens. Running CoA gives Valkyn token and MA gives Maelström token. If elite CoA drops four tokens, then require 4*20=80 tokens in e.g. clothing table to make one Valkyn item. You can only select head or shoulder and style is locked, but can freely choose level and traits. With 80 WGT tokens i can make Kena or with 20 WGT tokens i can make one Imperium or Spellcure set item.

What we get from these changes?
- No need to nerf elite difficulty.
- Elite players lose exclusive rewards. Instead they earn them faster than others.
- Regular players gain access to best rewards, but don't have to struggle with elite difficulty. They still have to put more effort to get that gear.
- Normal difficulty becomes a valid choice.
- Everybody can pass every content. That's why there is casual difficulty. I have played with stoned or anxious players, who can barely use light attack, or quit from fear of death.
- Token system handles the balancing between difficulty levels. It also mitigates current RNG unfairness. I've witnessed people getting Valkyn head on their very first vCoA run, and NOT getting even one full set in vWGT after 200 runs. This is NOT making gear rewards easier. It makes them predictable.
- it is hard to make dungeon difficulty balanced correctly. In DDO people can compensate it by selecting different difficulty. There some trials are usually run at hard (=veteran) and others at normal difficulty. So instread ZOS tweaking the one difficulty people adapt.

Smaller changes:
- Integrate the veteran hard mode into the elite mode.
- Move weekly rewards to token system to keep overall drop rate same as now.
- Group leader chooses difficulty level.

I like this, at least it would allow more people to play the game and persist, rather than give up.

I also think the concept should be extended to the OW, and that could be implemented by a sort of player buff, to reflect difficulty, so there'd be no need to nerf content, or change it in any way at all.

The onus would be on the player, if a casual player wanted to complete something, kill a pesky one-pip boss like Aldimion, they'd be able to do so.

If a top player wanted to take on the same challenge, with a 50-lap-swimming stomach, palpitations, showering palms and a dry mouth, they'd have a diff slider option they could set themselves to (elite), and get the thrill they're after, because while I'm not an expert, and a strict non-believe in cookie-cutter paths to success (ZOS said we have the widest range of choice possible, and they should mean it if they really believe that, so they people who build however they want are not penalised for doing so).

The difficulty slider could be found Under Settings/Gameplay, with four settings like the ones quoted, with reward quantity and quality synced to each.

The only thing is, the buffs you get through the settings should state that said buffs would be inactive in Cyrodiil/IC, though I imagine those zones have their own "difficulties".

A difficulty slider won't change anything. The only point to a difficulty slider would be to increase the reward/incentive for doing the content at a more difficult level. The problem is that the people that do content with the slider set low will find it unacceptable that their reward is not the same as those that do it with it set on high. There is no solution to people with their point of view.

Not true. It works in DDO. There people accept that setting game to easier affects the droprates. It is because they still get same rewards from easier setting, but they have to compensate easy with more runs. That is the difference to ESO. Here easier mode completely blocks players from good rewards. That is why veteran modes are nerfed.

Difficulty slider ALONE won't change anything.

timidobserver

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

Magdalina wrote: »

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

timidobserver wrote: »

A difficulty slider won't change anything. The only point to a difficulty slider would be to increase the reward/incentive for doing the content at a more difficult level. The problem is that the people that do content with the slider set low will find it unacceptable that their reward is not the same as those that do it with it set on high. There is no solution to people with their point of view.

There is no solution either to people who think that a maximum level of difficulty is not worth doing if not tied to a max level reward exclusive to that level.

But those people don't want 100% of the game to fit exclusively to their taste. So called hardcore folks like one type of gameplay, and all they want is like 0.001% of the game's content. So called casuals like another type of content and for some reason many of them think 100% of the game should be that, and the other guys wanting just 0.001% is "forcing their gameplay on others" and generally awful. That doesn't even make any sense.

Also, a lot of us just do it for fun and would even sacrifice our exclusive BiS gear in order to keep having fun.

Same here : right now, players don't "want" anything, did not ask for anything. Haven't seen a "nerf IC dungeons" thread on this forum in ages. It's ZOS who wants to increase the completion rate.

As to your last sentence : I believe you when you speak for yourself, but I doubt strongly that many people would agree with you. High difficulty = exclusive BiS loot is anchored in players' mentality, almost written in stone.

Like I said somewhere else, if you want to put forth the idea that the nerf is an arbitrary decision from ZOS and not based on any of the heated nerf ICP/WGT threads that have cropped up from time to time, I can't be bothered to argue that point.

As far as it being my opinion goes, have you looked at the title of the thread you are posting in? It's filled with people who are completely open to compromise. I am completely open to almost any compromise that leaves some remotely challenging 4 man content in the game.

LadyNalcarya

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

Destruent wrote: »

ok, so tell me...which equipment is exclusive to get in the hardest content (regarding 4-men-dungeons)?

Spellpower cure, scathing mage, etc... all IC sets are not obtainable anywhere else but in those dungeons.

True... But:
1)You can scale it down to vr1, collect embers and get 2 random vr16 items from the chest;
2)You can farm vr15 versions that have marginally less stats, which wont make or break your char if youre not minmaxing
3)You're very naive if you think that ability to beat these dungeons on vr16 means that you can get the sets. It took me months to get 5 pieces of spell cure, and 3 of them are stll not divine. I farm since release. Dont you think that more reliable way to fram these would be more casual friendly than nerfing the dungeon?

anitajoneb17_ESO

KoshkaMurka wrote: »

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

Destruent wrote: »

ok, so tell me...which equipment is exclusive to get in the hardest content (regarding 4-men-dungeons)?

Spellpower cure, scathing mage, etc... all IC sets are not obtainable anywhere else but in those dungeons.

True... But:
1)You can scale it down to vr1, collect embers and get 2 random vr16 items from the chest;
2)You can farm vr15 versions that have marginally less stats, which wont make or break your char if youre not minmaxing
3)You're very naive if you think that ability to beat these dungeons on vr16 means that you can get the sets. It took me months to get 5 pieces of spell cure, and 3 of them are stll not divine. I farm since release. Dont you think that more reliable way to fram these would be more casual friendly than nerfing the dungeon?

Only your 1st option is a real option to get the gear.

to your 3rd point : You've done *exactly* what ZOS wanted (me too, by the way, I also have my 5pcs SPC...) : running the dungeons. ZOS wants the casual to do the same : run the dungeons. Not play less of hard content for more reliable loot, but play more of nerfed content for the same rare loot, forcing to more play.

I'm not saying that's good. All I'm saying is that's what ZOS wants and by those standards, your suggestion isn't a good one to them.

helediron

sentientomega wrote: »

helediron wrote: »

I am copying (and a bit modifying) a post from vMA thread. These ideas are pretty straight copy from Dungeons & Dragons Online MMO. What i propose is already tested there and working well.

TL;DR: I am willing to trade exclusive BiS rewards to avoid constant nerfing of content..

vWGT and vICP are getting nerfed. This is because we have only two difficulty levels and how gear rewards work. All players want to get meaningful rewards. If they can't get them from veteran difficulty, they demand nerfs until they can pass the content to get the gear rewards. In fact there is only one valid difficulty, veteran, because people despise rewards from normal mode.

I am suggesting to have four difficulty levels and change to gear rewards. The difference should not be level of gear but how fast we get them. A hardcore player could grind one vMA weapon in a week with multiple runs per day in hardest difficulty, while a casual gets it in half year running few times per week.

I think these changes should happen to instanced PvE content:
- Every player should have a way to play content at level they believe they can pass it.
- Every player should have a way to play content at level that is challenging.
- We need more difficulty levels because now we have very easy and very difficult, and people can't find the level they can pass but still challenges them.
- We should not end up nerfing every trial/dungeon because most people can't pass them.
- Easier difficulty should give also BiS gear but significantly slower than harder difficulties. Keep easier difficulty still relevant path for rewards to avoid nerfing.
- We should have more predictable path to acquiring gear and real, visible progress. RNG is sometimes too easy, sometimes too unfair.

The solutions could be
- All instanced content should have four difficulty levels: casual, normal, veteran, elite.
- Keep rare RNG drops as they are, but add tokens to get rewards like vMA weapon e.g. every 20th to 80th run in MA, depending on difficulty. Set items require less tokens.
- Use the tokens in crafting tables to produce the special item. We have there all selections we need to create it.
- This would need jewelry crafting tables too. But even without it, jewelry could be purchasable from a vendor with tokens.

I am not yet sure about the token scaling, but it should be such that if good player selects easier difficulty their farming rate gets slower. This gives us two good things:
- No one can argue easier difficulties give away BiS gear because easier difficulty require more effort than harder difficulties. Players want to select the highest difficulty they still can run trough without too many deaths.
- At the same time not-so-good players can see there is a path for them for the BIS gear, and therefore do not demand nerfs.

Each instance would have their own tokens. Running CoA gives Valkyn token and MA gives Maelström token. If elite CoA drops four tokens, then require 4*20=80 tokens in e.g. clothing table to make one Valkyn item. You can only select head or shoulder and style is locked, but can freely choose level and traits. With 80 WGT tokens i can make Kena or with 20 WGT tokens i can make one Imperium or Spellcure set item.

What we get from these changes?
- No need to nerf elite difficulty.
- Elite players lose exclusive rewards. Instead they earn them faster than others.
- Regular players gain access to best rewards, but don't have to struggle with elite difficulty. They still have to put more effort to get that gear.
- Normal difficulty becomes a valid choice.
- Everybody can pass every content. That's why there is casual difficulty. I have played with stoned or anxious players, who can barely use light attack, or quit from fear of death.
- Token system handles the balancing between difficulty levels. It also mitigates current RNG unfairness. I've witnessed people getting Valkyn head on their very first vCoA run, and NOT getting even one full set in vWGT after 200 runs. This is NOT making gear rewards easier. It makes them predictable.
- it is hard to make dungeon difficulty balanced correctly. In DDO people can compensate it by selecting different difficulty. There some trials are usually run at hard (=veteran) and others at normal difficulty. So instread ZOS tweaking the one difficulty people adapt.

Smaller changes:
- Integrate the veteran hard mode into the elite mode.
- Move weekly rewards to token system to keep overall drop rate same as now.
- Group leader chooses difficulty level.

I like this, at least it would allow more people to play the game and persist, rather than give up.

I also think the concept should be extended to the OW, and that could be implemented by a sort of player buff, to reflect difficulty, so there'd be no need to nerf content, or change it in any way at all.
...snip...
The only thing is, the buffs you get through the settings should state that said buffs would be inactive in Cyrodiil/IC, though I imagine those zones have their own "difficulties".

For now i'd be happy if this would be implemented first into all instanced dungeons and delves. Instances are easier to manage, and implementation cost is much lower. And in practice, people would select different difficulties in different instances.

Later, OW? Why yes! I was leveling a new NB, and i got grumpy when mobs didn't drop in two hits. When i reached v16 during cake walk week, the game got SO difficult. I have to hit them thrice... I agree in Cyrodiil it's impossible. It's not even desirable there, i think.

Dubhliam

Well written @Magdalina !

The only thing I would add is: ZOS needs to revert the difficulty of the story (solo) content to the way it used to be at launch.
With the current disparity between the difficulty of the group and solo content, many of newer players have no incentive to improve themselves.
Once they experience a group dungeon for the first time, many will simply avoid such "difficult" content and stick to the no-brainer solo PvE.

One other thing the devs could add in the game (if they decide to increase the difficulty of the story content) to help players are Crafting Requests.

On the boards where you pick up daily writs, new players can open an IU very similar to the crafting UI, but it would contain tabs of all crafting professions. There they can "craft" their desired items and add those phantom items to their Crafting Request that gets posted on the board, along with a suggested amount of gold for completion.
Other players can then look up all posted requests and sort them with "have knowledge" and "have materials".

This ability to complete requests should be added to the Hireling passives which are currently useless IMO. Meaning there could be no Alchemy requests (special potions are not mandatory for new players anyway).
1 skill point in Hireling: able to take and complete Crafting Requests, if you take a contract and don't complete within 1 hour, the contract is forfeit, returned to the board, and you get a cooldown of 24 hours before you can take a new one
2 skill point ins Hireling: once per day, when you successfully complete a request, you get exp and a random set item
3 skill points in Hireling: able to "haggle" for rewards: meaning you can counter propose a gold reward for completion, if the requester accepts, you gain the contract

Wearing a full set item means a world of difference, even in green quality. Having such a system at their disposal would surely help new players cope with (improved) monster difficulty and group dungeons.

anitajoneb17_ESO

timidobserver wrote: »

Like I said somewhere else, if you want to put forth the idea that the nerf is an arbitrary decision from ZOS and not based on any of the heated nerf ICP/WGT threads that have cropped up from time to time, I can't be bothered to argue that point.

It's not arbitrary. But I'm convinced that it isn't based on players' requests or complaints. It's based on ZOS' desire/strategic goal to have more players play more and longer.

timidobserver wrote: »

As far as it being my opinion goes, have you looked at the title of the thread you are posting in? It's filled with people who are completely open to compromise. I am completely open to almost any compromise that leaves some remotely challenging 4 man content in the game.

And that's very relevant to this thread's purpose. Because if your argumentation is "some players want hard content vs. most players want the dungeons nerfed", you're simply mistargeting. The issue is not that casual players want to run those dungeons, it's that ZOS want more players to run those dungeons.

In other words, if 100% of the players would actually express that they're absolutely fine with the current difficulty (and those who find it too hard are ok with not running them), ZOS would answer "we'll nerf them anyway because we want you to run them and play more".

The entity with whom you have to negotiate a compromise here is not "casual players", it's ZOS.

Shunravi

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

timidobserver wrote: »

Like I said somewhere else, if you want to put forth the idea that the nerf is an arbitrary decision from ZOS and not based on any of the heated nerf ICP/WGT threads that have cropped up from time to time, I can't be bothered to argue that point.

It's not arbitrary. But I'm convinced that it isn't based on players' requests or complaints. It's based on ZOS' desire/strategic goal to have more players play more and longer.

timidobserver wrote: »

As far as it being my opinion goes, have you looked at the title of the thread you are posting in? It's filled with people who are completely open to compromise. I am completely open to almost any compromise that leaves some remotely challenging 4 man content in the game.

And that's very relevant to this thread's purpose. Because if your argumentation is "some players want hard content vs. most players want the dungeons nerfed", you're simply mistargeting. The issue is not that casual players want to run those dungeons, it's that ZOS want more players to run those dungeons.

In other words, if 100% of the players would actually express that they're absolutely fine with the current difficulty (and those who find it too hard are ok with not running them), ZOS would answer "we'll nerf them anyway because we want you to run them and play more".

The entity with whom you have to negotiate a compromise here is not "casual players", it's ZOS.

Then instead of nerfing, they should be incentivising.