There is too much separation between story and group content

Iccotak

This could be potentially addressed if ZOS took their dungeons philosophy (i.e. introduce new mechanics over the course of the dungeon to prepare players for the final boss) and applied it the Main Story as well as some of the overland content.

Imagine that as you leveled the enemies began using more complex tactics as a reaction to your increased skill, power, and experience.
Not Dark souls but more like the Single player Elder Scroll titles that many of the player base transitioned from.
It's like going from basic Draugr to fighting Draugr overlords, tougher and more abilities to counter your increased power. It caps at a certain point but hopefully you get my meaning.

another thing to consider is difference in creatures difficulty and tactics.
Example: concerning overland & delves - should Goblins act the same as Draugr? Should they use the same tactics and abilities?

Parasaurolophus

I wanted to create a new thread, but I will write in this. Very disappointed with the fight with the fins boss in Greymoor. NO SPOILERS! After Elsweyr, where the fight in the last bosses was divided into stages and generally looked (only looked) long and epic, I thought that ZoS learned some lessons from past experience. But in Greymoor, the last boss of the chapter has only 800k hp, which I could kill in 5 seconds. I did not do this just to feel the epic moment. Epic ... moment ...

robertthebard

Iccotak wrote: »

This could be potentially addressed if ZOS took their dungeons philosophy (i.e. introduce new mechanics over the course of the dungeon to prepare players for the final boss) and applied it the Main Story as well as some of the overland content.

Imagine that as you leveled the enemies began using more complex tactics as a reaction to your increased skill, power, and experience.
Not Dark souls but more like the Single player Elder Scroll titles that many of the player base transitioned from.
It's like going from basic Draugr to fighting Draugr overlords, tougher and more abilities to counter your increased power. It caps at a certain point but hopefully you get my meaning.

another thing to consider is difference in creatures difficulty and tactics.
Example: concerning overland & delves - should Goblins act the same as Draugr? Should they use the same tactics and abilities?

700 or so hours in Skyrim, what complex strategies are you referring to? Various dragons had various breath weapons? The very first draugr that had a shout had the same shout as the last one with a shout I fought, the one that disarms the player. Hey, some of them were mages, but wait, some of them were mages in all of the dungeons they were in. Hmm, seems like my version of Skyrim SE played differently from your own version. Were you a heavy mod user maybe?

Iccotak

@robertthebard

What I mean is that in Skyrim enemy units had varying degrees of difficulty to defeat. Not all enemies behave the same or can be tackled using the exact same methods. Fighting Bandits was different to fighting a Draugr which was different to fighting a Pyromancer or Cryomancer.
As you got more powerful those Pyromancers and Draugr use more powerful abilities. Dragons got more powerful from basic to Legendary so you had to take more precautions.

Sure at a certain point their levels cap and you basically become a God but there were difficulties in getting there.

If there were three things I could change in ESOs combat it would be
1. Enemies move as you fight and try to flank you more often
2. Enemy ranks: a Bandit is simple but a Bandit Chief leading that mob is going to be harder
3. A greater detection area

In the single player games when you engaged with say bandits, there was also the possibility that there was an archer sniping you from a distance - so not only did you have to take care of the nearby threats but you also had to try to find whoever was shooting at you while keeping aware of the mini-boss that was looming around the area.

Animus-ESO

xXMeowMeowXx wrote: »

If there are Vets asking that, than I truly wonder what they have not done....I watch noobs die all the time.

I have been playing since beta and overland is fine for what it is supposed to be. It was designed for a causal crowd, not tryhards....

If you’re not getting the harder achievements, skins, mount {still trying on this one }, playing PvP, grabbing those polys solo in IC earned to sell, then you have not really hit any true Vet content.

Sorry but when I look at the statistics of completion on certain achievements it is low.

The endgame community is small and I have never heard any of them ask for a hard mode. We have asked for harder arenas and trials, though.

Hey, you can make an alt account if you need but you still have 5+ years of experience.

The new trial is out and PvP has experienced a pretty interesting change. If you have not completed it and competed in PvP, you’re not doing Vet content, simple.

And I don’t mean Zerging garbage in PvP but 1 v X or small small....

People can't do end game PVE because the game never properly prepares you for it. Harder content breeds better players. End of story. If all mmo players wanted easy mode WoW classic wouldn't be a thing. They made WoW classic because millions of people felt WoW became too easy and casual. You can never predict people will quit if you make things harder.
If you want an amazing story that's easy to play go play the hundreds of single player games. -THIS IS AN MMO, NOT A SINGLE PLAYER EXPERIENCE-

robertthebard

Iccotak wrote: »

@robertthebard

What I mean is that in Skyrim enemy units had varying degrees of difficulty to defeat. Not all enemies behave the same or can be tackled using the exact same methods. Fighting Bandits was different to fighting a Draugr which was different to fighting a Pyromancer or Cryomancer.
As you got more powerful those Pyromancers and Draugr use more powerful abilities. Dragons got more powerful from basic to Legendary so you had to take more precautions.

Sure at a certain point their levels cap and you basically become a God but there were difficulties in getting there.

If there were three things I could change in ESOs combat it would be
1. Enemies move as you fight and try to flank you more often
2. Enemy ranks: a Bandit is simple but a Bandit Chief leading that mob is going to be harder
3. A greater detection area

In the single player games when you engaged with say bandits, there was also the possibility that there was an archer sniping you from a distance - so not only did you have to take care of the nearby threats but you also had to try to find whoever was shooting at you while keeping aware of the mini-boss that was looming around the area.

Bandits have versions that not only do move to flank, but do so with a "Move to flank" audible. Archers and casters are casting at you, and do move around. Goblins and Draugr already behave differently, depending on subtypes. Casters aren't running up to you trying to stab you with their staff, for example. So all of this is already in the game? More powerful versions of these mobs all already exist as well. Most of them are in dungeons and trials, but there are map zones where they are all lieutenant grades, or used to be, like Craglorn. I finished up a quest this morning that ended with two Lt. grade casters, with one of them being a summoner.

So given that these things are in game currently, one wonders, what zones are you playing in that they're not? You cite previous TES games, but as I said, our experience varies wildly. Bandits in the first maps behave very much like bandits later, right down to the archers and Lt. grade mobs. Yep, we get stronger dragons as we level, to a point, but even they stop leveling with the player eventually, and if you're doing your gear up as you progress, and why wouldn't you be, they're not much harder than the earlier versions, and that's w/out the crafting exploits, and mods.

Grandchamp1989

For me personly I've noticed:

Story wise the DLC quests seems to be of higher quality than base game.

Doing quests in groups feel like 2-3-4 people doing the same singleplayer quest right next to each other, without much meaningful interaction. IMHO..

Iccotak

I am an end game PvE player; zones, delves, dungeons, trials etc.

there are map zones where they are all lieutenant grades, or used to be, like Craglorn. I finished up a quest this morning that ended with two Lt. grade casters, with one of them being a summoner.

Honestly can't tell the difference. Sure there's different abilities but none of their current mechanics make them anymore of a threat. They are all the same difficulty to a point that I never notice. None of the individual unit, who may be of higher rank, actually seem to be more of a threat than their subordinates.

All mobs are usually groups of three with a tank, dps, and caster (healer or damage) and those fights almost always play out the same way. The only thing that changes it up is when you rush through a few mobs to get a larger group together as to include more variables.

Goblins and Draugr already behave differently, depending on subtypes.

This may be due to playing lots of dungeons but in my opinions there is nothing mechanical that separates goblins from draugr, they behave largely the same and they basically use the same model with a different skin and animation.
They could have done something unique with the Rieklings like in Skyrim by making them actually specific short models and not just hunched over people.
Skyrim Riekling

ESO Riekling

They could make unique Riekling units that attack while riding their boars, like from III & V.

Also It's not like we ever meet any Draugr that use shouts like unrelenting force. Imagine if one used elemental fury for increased attack speed

Most of them are in dungeons and trials.

This is my point, enemy capability is more of a concern in the dungeons. There is some level of thinking when going about beating the mobs. That is almost never the case when it comes to zones, there is a too big of a disconnect between skill needed for overland & dungeons. I am not saying that all of overland should be veteran but that there needs to be a way to bridge that disconnect so new players are better prepared for endgame should they wish to partake.

They could be tougher with two things:
1. More Mechanics and Abilities for each enemy unit, capable of doing more things
2. less telegraphing all of their moves, at beginner levels it makes sense and it's helpful in dungeons but by over-telegraphing all of their moves they become too predictable and the combat too stale.

An example of #2
Minotaurs and Gryphons actually have different charging mechanics because ZOS saw how normal enemy charging provides too much heads up to the players.

I know it is an issue when even new players to the game, who are starting from scratch, have pointed out to me that overland is too easy or they just get tedious from being a tiny bit stronger, but they don't have any tough enemies for the Solo content. All the hard stuff is put into group content like the Public Dungeons, Dolmens, and World Bosses. Some have said that they are not a fan of the "Big Bad" being so easily defeated.
They separate them too much.

Craglorn went too far in the extreme which is why people were not a fan of playing it. You had to have a group to do anything in that zone which was not fun, and even now you still should have a group for most of the places on the map. But that doesn't mean that we should completely discount it because when I got friends together to tackle it the zone actually became really fun. So there is something to learn from that experience.

Like others have said it's not choosing between face roll Easy or Old Craglorn Hard, it's finding a middle ground.

It's about giving the obstacles present in the game some actual presence so you don't feel guilty about wiping out half an army just by sneezing in their general direction.

I think we can find a better middle ground between current overland & old craglorn

ZOS could take note from PvP and how players move around the battlefield in a fight. Take lessons from that combat and see what can be applied to PvE enemy units.

In my opinion I think that story bosses should be more of a goal, a challenge to overcome as opposed to an easy victory that is for low level players. I do think that final story bosses done right could have something to offer to Veteran players as well.

However, at the end of the day we will have to wait and see ZOS plans for revision to the CP system and the issue of power creep in order to provide more insight into the situation.

Skykaiser_Ọlọrun

Hexi wrote: »

Most players can't even solo public dungeons

I don't believe this for a second.

robertthebard

Iccotak wrote: »

I am an end game PvE player; zones, delves, dungeons, trials etc.

there are map zones where they are all lieutenant grades, or used to be, like Craglorn. I finished up a quest this morning that ended with two Lt. grade casters, with one of them being a summoner.

Honestly can't tell the difference. Sure there's different abilities but none of their current mechanics make them anymore of a threat. They are all the same difficulty to a point that I never notice. None of the individual unit, who may be of higher rank, actually seem to be more of a threat than their subordinates.

All mobs are usually groups of three with a tank, dps, and caster (healer or damage) and those fights almost always play out the same way. The only thing that changes it up is when you rush through a few mobs to get a larger group together as to include more variables.

Goblins and Draugr already behave differently, depending on subtypes.

This may be due to playing lots of dungeons but in my opinions there is nothing mechanical that separates goblins from draugr, they behave largely the same and they basically use the same model with a different skin and animation.
They could have done something unique with the Rieklings like in Skyrim by making them actually specific short models and not just hunched over people.
Skyrim Riekling

ESO Riekling

They could make unique Riekling units that attack while riding their boars, like from III & V.

Also It's not like we ever meet any Draugr that use shouts like unrelenting force. Imagine if one used elemental fury for increased attack speed

Most of them are in dungeons and trials.

This is my point, enemy capability is more of a concern in the dungeons. There is some level of thinking when going about beating the mobs. That is almost never the case when it comes to zones, there is a too big of a disconnect between skill needed for overland & dungeons. I am not saying that all of overland should be veteran but that there needs to be a way to bridge that disconnect so new players are better prepared for endgame should they wish to partake.

They could be tougher with two things:
1. More Mechanics and Abilities for each enemy unit, capable of doing more things
2. less telegraphing all of their moves, at beginner levels it makes sense and it's helpful in dungeons but by over-telegraphing all of their moves they become too predictable and the combat too stale.

An example of #2
Minotaurs and Gryphons actually have different charging mechanics because ZOS saw how normal enemy charging provides too much heads up to the players.

I know it is an issue when even new players to the game, who are starting from scratch, have pointed out to me that overland is too easy or they just get tedious from being a tiny bit stronger, but they don't have any tough enemies for the Solo content. All the hard stuff is put into group content like the Public Dungeons, Dolmens, and World Bosses. Some have said that they are not a fan of the "Big Bad" being so easily defeated.
They separate them too much.

Craglorn went too far in the extreme which is why people were not a fan of playing it. You had to have a group to do anything in that zone which was not fun, and even now you still should have a group for most of the places on the map. But that doesn't mean that we should completely discount it because when I got friends together to tackle it the zone actually became really fun. So there is something to learn from that experience.

Like others have said it's not choosing between face roll Easy or Old Craglorn Hard, it's finding a middle ground.

It's about giving the obstacles present in the game some actual presence so you don't feel guilty about wiping out half an army just by sneezing in their general direction.

I think we can find a better middle ground between current overland & old craglorn

ZOS could take note from PvP and how players move around the battlefield in a fight. Take lessons from that combat and see what can be applied to PvE enemy units.

In my opinion I think that story bosses should be more of a goal, a challenge to overcome as opposed to an easy victory that is for low level players. I do think that final story bosses done right could have something to offer to Veteran players as well.

However, at the end of the day we will have to wait and see ZOS plans for revision to the CP system and the issue of power creep in order to provide more insight into the situation.

The problem with snipping a post to pieces to cherry pick parts is that you leave out some very important context, and I don't think it was an accident.

The problem still comes back to "how do they "fix" it"? I laid out a few possible solutions in my first post, and you don't want bullet sponges that do high damage, we can't nerf gear, there's reactions to that all over the first few pages of the forums. Shifting mechanics won't matter. I'm an endgame player too. I've played a lot of endgame, in a lot of games, SP, MP and MMO. I understand the mechanics, and I understand how to play my characters. How are they going to build around that to make the game challenging to me? The follow up question is "Are you sure you want to play a game where they do make it challenging to an endgame player"? They'd have to make it pretty hard for me, and I'm sure I'm not the best example of an endgame player here. So if they make it challenging for them, who else is going to be able to play?

"But they can group up". No, new players won't have that luxury. "You don't have enough CP" Vote Kick. "You took too long to kill that trash", vote kick. Where do I get that idea? From reading these forums. You're not helping the game, you're killing it.

MasterSpatula

Skykaiser_Ọlọrun wrote: »

Hexi wrote: »

Most players can't even solo public dungeons

I don't believe this for a second.

[snip]

EDIT: Oops, I misread the post. Skykaiser said "most" players, not "some." That is, indeed, probably not true.

Sylvermynx

Eh, well.... I can't solo pub dungeons. Probably never will be able to. 750+ ms satellite ping, not happening.

Iccotak

The problem with snipping a post to pieces to cherry pick parts is that you leave out some very important context, and I don't think it was an accident.

No, I just don't have all the answers.
I think there is an issue in how the game handles new players as well as vet players concerning Story & Group which resulted in a growing gap in skill and separation of target audience content and I think ZOS could do a better job bridging these the tiers of difficulty. Your responses repeatedly state I am saying to "force players to group" to which I clarified that is not the goal.

Do I know the exact and precise answer to the problem? No, nor did I ever claim to know the answer. That's why there's a discussion

I disagreed with a particular point you made that say goblins, bandits, and draugr do behave differently because imo they all use way too very similar tactics - they look & act too similarly. (however, some of that is for another discussion about recycling models & animation)

I believe I answered your point about enemies already doing what I suggested, (flanking, moving, distance, etc)

Bandits have versions that not only do move to flank, but do so with a "Move to flank" audible. Archers and casters are casting at you, and do move around. Goblins and Draugr already behave differently, depending on subtypes. Casters aren't running up to you trying to stab you with their staff, for example. So all of this is already in the game? More powerful versions of these mobs all already exist as well. Most of them are in dungeons and trials, but there are map zones where they are all lieutenant grades, or used to be, like Craglorn. I finished up a quest this morning that ended with two Lt. grade casters, with one of them being a summoner.

to which I replied

Honestly I can't tell the difference. Sure there's different abilities but none of their current mechanics make them anymore of a threat. They are all the same difficulty to a point that I never notice. None of the individual unit, who may be of higher rank, actually seem to be more of a threat than their subordinates.

All mobs are usually groups of three with a tank, dps, and caster (healer or damage) and those fights almost always play out the same way. The only thing that changes it up is when you rush through a few mobs to get a larger group together as to include more variables.

So to clarify that response none of the variables in the usual attack group make me have to think about what I am doing, as a Vet that's ok I have better gear and am more powerful but I found the same issue to be there with a character starting from scratch.

How are they going to build around that to make the game challenging to me? The follow up question is "Are you sure you want to play a game where they do make it challenging to an endgame player"?

That's not the point of the post - which is discussing closing the skill gap for low and high tier content. It is not a discussion about making overland as hard as end game or to make end game even harder, I enjoy end game as it is.
We are talking the overland and story which doesn't do anything to prepare players as well as making the main story antagonist more vet friendly as well as memorable it doesn't have to as hard as the end game but it could work harder to provide more of a challenge.

Sure, there are players that only quest and have zero interest in end game and they should still have the choice to not have to play in group content. What we're saying is that it's unfair to new players to not challenge them and better communicate the mechanics of the game while also telling Vet players that their enjoyment of the story has to come at the expense of making it easy for the sake of 100% accessibility for everyone.

The problem still comes back to "how do they "fix" it"? I laid out a few possible solutions in my first post

What solutions are you referring to? I read through your first post and it was full of points of how past games tried making overland harder but that led to even more complaints.

Post in Question

Here's the problem, how are they going to do that, by making it a "bullet sponge"? How are they going to counter player experience? How are they going to counter the player's use/understanding of mechanics? If they do something like what's suggested in this post you can bet we'll have a new thread: Making bosses into high damage bullet sponges isn't making the game harder.

It's true too, it's not. It's going to make it tedious, but tedious does not equate to hard/challenging. Well, maybe they can nerf the gear? We can see already how well that's going to go, just scan the first couple of pages of the forums. Your target audience for these changes? They'll be rage quitting faster than you can say "but they gave us what we wanted". Mandatory grouping sounds fun... /sarcasm Take a look at the forums again? What happens a couple of weeks or so down the road from a new release, when nobody is running that content? So a new player gets to it and can't get a group to finish their story arc? They'll be taking their ball and going home too. How many people here harping for more challenge are going to drop whatever it is they're doing to ensure a new player gets that done?

DDO's forums were abuzz for years about how they needed a higher difficulty. This is the game that made every single quest in the game, barring quests specifically marked as solo, with a difficulty slider. Casual, Normal, Hard and Elite. Yet, some 6 or 7 years into the game's life, it wasn't hard enough on Elite any more. I was against it, but decided "eh, why not, with the condition that once it's released, it's left alone". I got a permanent ban from their forums for laughing at them when, once they got it, it was "stupid hard" and needed to be nerfed, this, despite the fact that some players could solo it's highest setting. As much as they liked throwing out "play a lower difficulty" at those they considered noobs that were insisting Elite get nerfed for ease of soloing, they hated it when it was thrown back on them.

The excuses were the same there as we see here, and as we see in every other MMO's group content: PuGs suck, because none of these players know what they're doing. I've seen "they don't know how to dodge" both here, and in GW 2, with the claim in GW 2 being "nobody ever dodges", amongst other choice tidbits. Isn't part of the premise here that OL doesn't teach mechanics? Yet, your solution would be to throw players into a group and subject them to "lecturing" or "advising" on how to play? What about the players that see "under x threshold of CP" and quit the group, or worse, kick a player that needs it to advance their story? That'll be "it's ok, because we got what we wanted", or "players should have to grind out the CP before they're allowed to finish their story arcs"? Yeah, that'll go over well, especially given how many of the players in the target audience don't want to spend money on the game because of lag in endgame/group content, right?

And I agreed that I don't want enemies who are just tedious bullet sponges because the problem would still be there.

I said that they also have to have more mechanics to make them more capable because that is what would make them tough. That is what would make players think. i also said that they should look into adding more mechanical variety amongst the enemy units because much of them in overland just use the same abilities while all the surprising mechanics are only put into vet content which is unfair to new players who never get exposed to some at earlier level to better prepare them.

Take the Kaalgrontiid boss fight - does that fight need more health and damage dealt? Not really, he needed more mechanics in place because the mechanics in that fight were too simple which led to a stale and anti-climatic fight. the fight would just be longer if all they gave him was more health and higher damage.
And that fight wasn't solo, random players could join your instance because it was like a public dungeon. So getting help from other players from a more complicated boss fight could work.

Does that fight have to be as hard as the Maw of Lorkaj? Of course not, but it could have been a little more exciting and we know this because we have seen ZOS make really good solo content.

"But they can group up". No, new players won't have that luxury. "You don't have enough CP" Vote Kick. "You took too long to kill that trash", vote kick. Where do I get that idea? From reading these forums. You're not helping the game, you're killing it.

There's no need for that kind of talk. I am working on finding on what could be a better medium between low and high tier content as well as find way for Vets who like a challenge to have more enjoyment from Story Bosses.
No One is trying to kill the game.

robertthebard

Hmm, I've never seen a goblin, or a draugr that flip over the player's head shouting "Move to flank"...

Now, if you don't take the changes far enough, we'll be right back here with "why's the game too easy". That's not a supposition, as I mentioned DDO earlier, that had difficulties already, and the hardest difficulty wasn't hard enough, any more. I also mentioned what happened when they got their increased difficulty. "But this is stupid hard, it needs to be nerfed". Nothing so far has addressed one of my other questions though: How do they build around player skill, and use/understanding of mechanics?

You're right, there's no reason to talk that way, but it's the reality of the game. It's not only something that happens, but it's apparently a point of pride when it does. So tuning it up so that players may want, or need to group up is literally killing it for new players.

Then there's the expense. It's going to take developer time and resources to do something that they can't sell. Contrary to popular opinions on YouTube, and other places, selling content is how gaming companies make their money. This also has the effect of diverting resources from other areas where they could be better used. I'm not talking loot crates here either, but actual content. I don't buy loot crates with sub stipends, let alone spending cash on them.

Iccotak

Hmm, I've never seen a goblin, or a draugr that flip over the player's head shouting "Move to flank"...

One tactic that not only has been the only one where enemies attempt to flank you but also one that is overly telegraphed is not a big difference.
Especially when the average overland encounter is just three enemies that have some basic abilities but mostly light attack.
There is clearly room for improvement and more dynamic movement & Ai.

Haven’t you ever played Oblivion and wandered into a castle and found yourself out of your depth with a couple of Flame Atronachs and had to figure it out?
Those kinds of moments are practically non existent in exploring or even the story.
Not for Vets, they should be tough that it’s a non issue. But for new players I hardly ever find myself in a situation that requires trial & error during overland and questing.

Nothing so far has addressed one of my other questions though: How do they build around player skill, and use/understanding of mechanics?

Well like was previously said, the point is to bridge the skill gap because it is clear that One Tamriel nerfed the existing overland content.
No one is saying to make veteran overland - Craglorn tried that and nobody played it.

As long as the content better prepares players for endgame, (meaning they have a basic grasp of what is needed to pull their weight) despite whether or not that is their intended goal, then wouldn’t that have done its job?
People can stay in that tier all they like but as long as they’re better prepared for the next tier or as long as the story can still be fun for vets, and not a walk in the park (whether or not that is their chosen instance) then that sounds fine.

Because from what I’ve seen a story with a decent challenge and a good boss fight sells. In many cases when people are told that it’s too easy to a point that it’s boring or that you lose investment in the story then there’s a lost interest and less buyers.
I’ve seen people say that.
It can be unattractive when there’s such a large disconnect between story and endgame to a point that they feel like two different games.
Another bad point is hearing that the MMO is not very social and can encourage anti social behavior.

I think there’s a problem when finding ways to encourage players ( Not Force) to work together, in an MMO, is met with such opposition. As if people will give up if their victory isn’t immediately handed to them and have to get better at the game or ask for help, even slightly. Why do people hate the trial & error so much?
Also isn’t always true that bringing even a little more challenge will scare everyone away.
WoW classic being such an example, over time the game became really easy not because of skill or just getting better at the game but because enemies literally were not as hard to beat as they were before and players got really bored with that.

Again am I saying go to before one Tamriel? No but there is a better balance than what we have now than these two extremes of easy & end game hard.

Not everyone is a monster or has such horrible experiences with getting into group content. Plenty have found friendships through positive experiences of working together to beat something difficult or slightly challenging, I know that’s in my experience.

I want final bosses to be a positive experience, not anticlimactic or unmemorable. Part of that is the story, the other is the gameplay.

@robertthebard
Is your overall point that the overland is fine as it is? That nothing should be changed because it isn’t worth changing?
Or do you have an idea of what they could try without those results in other games?
(Edit: that’s a genuine question, no snark or sarcasm)

How would you tackle the threads asking for a solo mode for group dungeons which are a result of people doing two things.
1. Refusing to play with others
2. Wasn’t prepared for group difficulty, trial & error, so they say it’s too hard and should be nerfed.

Both are things I’ve read on this forum.

idk

Iccotak wrote: »

@robertthebard

What I mean is that in Skyrim enemy units had varying degrees of difficulty to defeat. Not all enemies behave the same or can be tackled using the exact same methods. Fighting Bandits was different to fighting a Draugr which was different to fighting a Pyromancer or Cryomancer.
As you got more powerful those Pyromancers and Draugr use more powerful abilities. Dragons got more powerful from basic to Legendary so you had to take more precautions.

Sure at a certain point their levels cap and you basically become a God but there were difficulties in getting there.

If there were three things I could change in ESOs combat it would be
1. Enemies move as you fight and try to flank you more often
2. Enemy ranks: a Bandit is simple but a Bandit Chief leading that mob is going to be harder
3. A greater detection area

In the single player games when you engaged with say bandits, there was also the possibility that there was an archer sniping you from a distance - so not only did you have to take care of the nearby threats but you also had to try to find whoever was shooting at you while keeping aware of the mini-boss that was looming around the area.

And Skyrim is a single-player game where you can set your own difficulty level. There is a lot that can be done with a single-player game.

ESO is an MMORPG, and an expensive one to build, that needs to cater to the masses. There seems to a reason why most of the top MMORPGs of today make regular questing pretty easy and have tiered difficulty in the different content to give everyone something that offers a challenge.

WoW, FF14, ESO all have very easy questing and are three of the top five MMORPGs today. I am not someone who works in the gaming industry, but this tiered difficulty design seems to be highly successful. I seriously doubt Zos wants to rock the boat and abandon the model that has been so lucrative for them.

Iccotak

@idk
For a moment, put aside that ZOS is unlikely to change because the current model is financially successful.

Do you as a player have any issues with the how the final boss of the main Story is handled?
Not general questing, that should generally be easy.

If you had decision power as well as resources, would you change anything about it?

Lysette

navystylz_ESO wrote: »

xXMeowMeowXx wrote: »

I have been playing since beta and overland is fine for what it is supposed to be. It was designed for a causal crowd, not tryhards....

You've been playing since beta but conveniently forget how overland used to be more difficult. It was One Tamriel that dumbed it down, and they did it way too hard. Now overland content is mind-numbingly easy and boring. Let's not even get me started on how good bosses like Doshia, Mannimarco and Molag Bal were.

Since most story bosses making you enter some kind of instance area that isn't overland. Having a veteran toggle so taht when you went into those instances, those enemies were scaled harder would be so much better.

Either that or get away from the:

Run to X and loot Y
Run to X and kill Y
Run to X and kill Y to loot Z

Style of quests. This is like vanilla world of warcraft boring. Just look at WoW too see how much questing evolved to have more engaging fun with them that wasn't tied to a difficulty slider.

Truth is Zos does bare minimum for this game. But is very good about asking for month 4 times a year for the same Chapter. Else get ESO plus to keep up with the stuff. And the crown store... ha! Let's make all the best cosmetics purchased for really money. But wait, there's more. If you want a good mount you have to get lottery boxes. Pay more than 3 times the amount than the full game w/ chapter itself for a house.

Lysette wrote: »

i am one of those not being able to do public dungeon on my own - died twice in elsweyr in a public dungeon lately. but this is as well because of my problem with high ping and proper targeting when latency is spiking and i can't get out of red because i do not even see it glowing red before it hit me.

i have 16700 km distance to the server - nothing will enable me to get out of red in time, if there is not an oceanic server as well. i do not need any more challenge therefore.

While this sucks. You chose to play a MMO with the conditions. You can't expect conditions that have NOTHING TO DO WITH GAME, but everything to do with your internet, to be a balancing factor for 99% of the playerbase that has internet that's fine.

well, I'n not the one complaining here - I like the game as it is and don't want it to change towards more difficulty. i just gave my reasoning for why I think it is good as it is - sometime in the future I might be able to master public dungeons on my own I'm not complaining about how it currently is - I just don't want it to get any harder and I don't want to be forced to group up.

idk

Iccotak wrote: »

@idk
For a moment, put aside that ZOS is unlikely to change because the current model is financially successful.

Do you as a player have any issues with the how the final boss of the main Story is handled?
Not general questing, that should generally be easy.

If you had decision power as well as resources, would you change anything about it?

Your questions, especially the second are very vague. I expect you are asking if I would change the difficulty level. As someone who enjoys the challenge of learning the new vet HM trials, I would not change the difficulty of any storyline fights.

If I had the decision power I would need to consider what you asked me to put aside. I would want to keep that decision power/employment. Beyond that, it is a meaningless hypothetical because decisions like this are not made in the vacuum you are creating with your request of me.

Iccotak

@idk
Let’s make it simpler without a hypothetical of tempting power.

Is how ESO handles difficulty right now your ideal?
Do you think there is a disconnect between Overland (zone, delves, Ai, story, etc) and end game content?

If you like it just the way it is, all the more power to you.
If you are dissatisfied with an aspect; What is it and what would make it better, in your opinion?

Gnome_Saiyan

I know this won't solve the issue, but maybe a No CP overland option would help? The people in this thread are way smarter than me, so if I'm talking out my ***, lemme know.

Iccotak

From Reddit about 1 year ago
Link: https://www.reddit.com/r/elderscrollsonline/comments/bwdb0r/comment/epwrb9x

ZOS_MattF
Hello! We have no plans on implementing spears, but we have talked off and on about cool ways to do the one hand magic/one hand weapon thing. That's not on our roadmap anywhere, but we have been brainstorming.

There are so many cool things we could do! Seriously, we love these ideas too, but it all comes down to a matter of time and priorities.

EDIT: to respond to your edit. Yes, we've talked about this, in fact we tried to get that into the game as part of One Tamriel, but we just couldn't get it done. So we have ideas on how to have difficulty settings for overland content, but it's not currently planned. It's a great idea.

Mr_Wolfe

Not to sound like an old man, but back in my day if someone wanted more challenge out of a video game, they found a way to challenge themselves. Do a speed run. Do a no death run. Heck, do a naked run. There are plenty of ways to increase the difficulty for yourself, but not many ways to make it easier besides a lot of time and practice.

Don't forget, each new chapter becomes the starting questline for new characters. If the devs make it hard enough to challenge seasoned veterans with max cp in meta gear that'll also make it impossible for most of the player base to complete. Do you really expect ZOS to cater soley to a vocal minority who think the game is too easy? Don't get me wrong, I kinda miss the days before One Tamriel too, but not enough to drive away new players and potentially kill the game.

BlueRaven

Noxavian wrote: »

Lysette wrote: »

Noxavian wrote: »

AcadianPaladin wrote: »

mavfin wrote: »

Other MMOs have found (and ESO knows as well), don't gate too much behind forced grouping. People will leave before grouping for overland content in many cases. ...

Raises hand. So much this, and thank Mara for it.

Imagine having to....group....in an online game to do some overland content.

Scary thoughts, I know. Maybe the people that want an easy face roll experience that don't want to play with others shouldn't be playing an online MMO game? Just a thought.

see, elder scrolls comes from single player - for decades it was just that - and therefore a large part of the player base just wants elder scrolls as it has been with the option of occasionally play with a friend - ESO is not supposed to be the typical MMO and that is why it is how it is - mainly playable as what it always has been - a single player experience.

elder scrolls has never been a mindless face roll unless you play on Novice/Apprentice difficulty though.

Novice/apprentice may be easier then the other levels, but they can’t be leveled as “easy(faceroll)” because that determination can only be placed by each player on an individual basis.

In other words, what is easy fo some may not be easy for others.

Since this is an mmo, difficulty switching can only be done in confined and controlled areas (dungeons) doing it for overland would only split the player base. Splitting the base makes the player experience worse for everyone. (Ever had to wait for people to help with a world boss? Imagine it with the player base cut in half.)

Vet content is only done by a small fraction of the community. A harder “server” would be very underpopulated.

If a player is having it too easy for themselves in overland, just play with the greens and blues that fall as drops, and take off the champion points. Use that as the “difficulty switch”.

BlueRaven

This conversation is odd as we had a harder “group only” overland zone in the game once. It did not go over well.

robertthebard

Iccotak wrote: »

Hmm, I've never seen a goblin, or a draugr that flip over the player's head shouting "Move to flank"...

One tactic that not only has been the only one where enemies attempt to flank you but also one that is overly telegraphed is not a big difference.
Especially when the average overland encounter is just three enemies that have some basic abilities but mostly light attack.
There is clearly room for improvement and more dynamic movement & Ai.

Haven’t you ever played Oblivion and wandered into a castle and found yourself out of your depth with a couple of Flame Atronachs and had to figure it out?
Those kinds of moments are practically non existent in exploring or even the story.
Not for Vets, they should be tough that it’s a non issue. But for new players I hardly ever find myself in a situation that requires trial & error during overland and questing.

Nothing so far has addressed one of my other questions though: How do they build around player skill, and use/understanding of mechanics?

Well like was previously said, the point is to bridge the skill gap because it is clear that One Tamriel nerfed the existing overland content.
No one is saying to make veteran overland - Craglorn tried that and nobody played it.

As long as the content better prepares players for endgame, (meaning they have a basic grasp of what is needed to pull their weight) despite whether or not that is their intended goal, then wouldn’t that have done its job?
People can stay in that tier all they like but as long as they’re better prepared for the next tier or as long as the story can still be fun for vets, and not a walk in the park (whether or not that is their chosen instance) then that sounds fine.

Because from what I’ve seen a story with a decent challenge and a good boss fight sells. In many cases when people are told that it’s too easy to a point that it’s boring or that you lose investment in the story then there’s a lost interest and less buyers.
I’ve seen people say that.
It can be unattractive when there’s such a large disconnect between story and endgame to a point that they feel like two different games.
Another bad point is hearing that the MMO is not very social and can encourage anti social behavior.

I think there’s a problem when finding ways to encourage players ( Not Force) to work together, in an MMO, is met with such opposition. As if people will give up if their victory isn’t immediately handed to them and have to get better at the game or ask for help, even slightly. Why do people hate the trial & error so much?
Also isn’t always true that bringing even a little more challenge will scare everyone away.
WoW classic being such an example, over time the game became really easy not because of skill or just getting better at the game but because enemies literally were not as hard to beat as they were before and players got really bored with that.

Again am I saying go to before one Tamriel? No but there is a better balance than what we have now than these two extremes of easy & end game hard.

Not everyone is a monster or has such horrible experiences with getting into group content. Plenty have found friendships through positive experiences of working together to beat something difficult or slightly challenging, I know that’s in my experience.

I want final bosses to be a positive experience, not anticlimactic or unmemorable. Part of that is the story, the other is the gameplay.

@robertthebard
Is your overall point that the overland is fine as it is? That nothing should be changed because it isn’t worth changing?
Or do you have an idea of what they could try without those results in other games?
(Edit: that’s a genuine question, no snark or sarcasm)

How would you tackle the threads asking for a solo mode for group dungeons which are a result of people doing two things.
1. Refusing to play with others
2. Wasn’t prepared for group difficulty, trial & error, so they say it’s too hard and should be nerfed.

Both are things I’ve read on this forum.

My overall point is that they can't "fix" it. There are only so many things they can do, and none of them are going to satisfy everyone. If they try to tweak it a little at a time, it's going to be "they're not doing anything to address my concerns". We can see that on these forums every day. Where's the cutoff point where they say "This is all we're doing, or it's going to negatively impact new/less skilled players"? We're not talking about instanced content with a slider here, we're talking the vast majority of the game. Haven't you already stated that they took some OL content too far, with Craglorn? Imagine that for the entirety of OL content. I thought it was fine as it was, and any nerfs to that content came during my absence, or I'd have railed against it.

I tend to ignore threads demanding that content that's intended for group play be dumbed down for solo play. If I were to respond, however, it would be with something along the lines of "this content is built for group play, get some friends, or join a guild". Ironically, it's for the same reason, or at least in part, that I oppose jacking up OL content to match endgame content. The difficulty levels, or lack there of, may not be aimed at the players complaining about it. In DDO, my responses to "nerf elite so I can solo it" threads was the same thing. No, that content is intended to be challenging. While the crème de la crème of the player base may have found it too easy, at least according to what they say, the reality was somewhat different when they got their harder content, and my position even then was to tell them to play a lower difficulty, which is what got me banned from the forums there.

You left out a few variables, but there's one I want to touch on for the sake of this conversation: vote kicking for low CP or for taking too long to clear some trash. While I can somewhat sympathize with that in optional content, it's unacceptable in content that's required to advance the story portion of the game. Even if it's just the last boss, you're locking some players out by virtue of how the community operates. Or, and I'm not sure that this isn't worse, nobody's running that content any more, and a new player can't get a group they may actually need to complete their story. Dungeons, trials and pledges can be ignored w/out impacting the story lines in the game, but the final resolutions of the story lines can't be. So it's easy to tell someone "No, that content isn't designed with solo play in mind" in regard to those, but it's harder to say "sorry, but you'll have to beg around in chat until you find someone to help you, if you can" for story content.

I'm a former progression raider. Former because running the content all the time was starting to have a negative impact on my health. Chronic migraines triggered by light. So all the flashy stuff really does a number on me. How many threads have I started insisting that this content be toned down so that I can "safely" run it? I'll save you some searching, 0. I had to quit Tera for the same reason, and all of the endgame content was raiding/dungeon type stuff. Still no threads insisting they tune it for my benefit, and I'm certainly not going to insist that OL, or any part of it, be tuned to my level of play. As we can see, since you thought they went too far with Craglorn, and I thought it was fine as it was, that tuning it for me would make it too hard for you. But if they tuned it for you, and I was inclined to complain about "too easy", they wouldn't have fixed it for me, and others like me, or even more skilled/better geared, and they may be inclined to start even more threads, and we're right back here, as if nothing had happened. Which brings me back to my initial comment in this post: They can't "fix" it. DDO had Casual, Normal, Hard and Elite on almost every quest in the game, and explorer zones, while instanced, were aimed at specific level ranges. Yet, as players became stronger, and more knowledgeable, the game got to the point where it was "too easy", until they got 10 levels of Reaper, and then they insisted that they should be able to run everything at Reaper 10, and so, it was "stupid hard" and needed to be nerfed. I'd rather not go through that again.

idk

Iccotak wrote: »

@idk
Let’s make it simpler without a hypothetical of tempting power.

Is how ESO handles difficulty right now your ideal?
Do you think there is a disconnect between Overland (zone, delves, Ai, story, etc) and end game content?

If you like it just the way it is, all the more power to you.
If you are dissatisfied with an aspect; What is it and what would make it better, in your opinion?

I think it is just fine. There is no disconnect between Overland and veteran HM trials because there is plenty of content at various challenge levels between the two. You seem to be trying to twist this to make it look like overland and vet HM trials should be on a similar level and ignore all the rest..

I enjoy the stories and Zos does it well. Zos also gives me plenty of content to offer greater challenges for when I raid with my raid groups and some middle ground challenges for when I run with some more casual friends I have had since the game launched.

Shortly after the game launched I was disappointed with Zos has they did leave many out of some content. Trials had two modes, veteran and HM. There were few normal dungeons at max level. Granted, in the first month of the game I was clearing the vet dungeons and soon afterward I was cleaning the first trials of the game and making the leaderboards.

Zos has since corrected those mistakes and has a good design for tiered difficultly giving everyone something for their skill level.

Lysette

then there is my personal goal for the game - for example I intend to never do anything what is champion based - when a character reaches level 50 then this is about as far as I intend to get in this game if at all. I'm not interested in any of the other content - I'm here to see Tamriel and when I distribute the quests on my 14 characters I won't get to level 50 with any of them and this is just fine for me. So there is no disconnect because I won't do any of the non-rpg content anyway.

imo people run into problems because they play the game in a weird way - grinding to level 50 within a couple of hours or days then do cp runs and overpower themselves with meta gear and then they want to do quests, which are meant for players below level 50. that is doing it the wrong way around and that is why they have problems enjoying the rpg content.

daemonor

Noxavian wrote: »

Lysette wrote: »

Noxavian wrote: »

AcadianPaladin wrote: »

mavfin wrote: »

Other MMOs have found (and ESO knows as well), don't gate too much behind forced grouping. People will leave before grouping for overland content in many cases. ...

Raises hand. So much this, and thank Mara for it.

Imagine having to....group....in an online game to do some overland content.

Scary thoughts, I know. Maybe the people that want an easy face roll experience that don't want to play with others shouldn't be playing an online MMO game? Just a thought.

see, elder scrolls comes from single player - for decades it was just that - and therefore a large part of the player base just wants elder scrolls as it has been with the option of occasionally play with a friend - ESO is not supposed to be the typical MMO and that is why it is how it is - mainly playable as what it always has been - a single player experience.

elder scrolls has never been a mindless face roll unless you play on Novice/Apprentice difficulty though.

And there's a large part of the player base that likes a bit of challenge. Not asking for every fight to be uber hard, but at the very least having to PLAN a strategy for the final boss of a chapter and/or main story bosses would add a sense of immersion to the game....

Not too sure how people are against this idea. People having to think on big bad evil /bosses/? How terrifying.

I remember in Skyrim having to spend times using trial and error on quest bosses to get a strat down to fight them. Those fights were epic and cool.

0 idea where you people are getting TES is meant to be a mindless face roll when it comes to story bosses.

Wouldnt call it a "start" on skyrim by any means...would keep chugging pots and reloading over over again untill you get a lucky string of damage avoided and damage done. Or wait 24 hours to recharge your racial power before every dungeon lol.

robertthebard

Iccotak wrote: »

@idk
For a moment, put aside that ZOS is unlikely to change because the current model is financially successful.

Do you as a player have any issues with the how the final boss of the main Story is handled?
Not general questing, that should generally be easy.

If you had decision power as well as resources, would you change anything about it?

I'm curious, why would a business that was formed to make money put financial considerations on hold when making design decisions?

No. As I've pointed out elsewhere, you found Craglorn too far, and I was fine with it as it was. Do you really want them building the game to suit me? What if they build it for the players that are better than me?

No. Financially successful is exactly what a gaming company is looking for, why change something that's making us money, to feed into your hypothetical? The short answer is, "You don't". If it works, don't fix it. Players are going to complain, no matter what you do. Too hard, too easy, no communication, didn't say what I want to hear, etc. etc.