Normal and Veteran Overland

Amottica

Castagere wrote: »

The real problem with these threads is the fact that the majority of the player base doesn't visit the forums. I wouldn't mind a difficulty setting like normal veteran or hardcore. Star Trek Online has this. If you group up the group leader's setting will be for all to see. And players could request what group setting they are looking for. It works really well in Star Trek Online.

True that forums are always a small portion of the player base and probably not very indicative of the player base.

I did not play STO but did play Neverwinter which is another Cryptic game. My guess is STO has many small instances like Neverwinter did which would allow more flexibility with such things. Many times since I started playing ESO I have seen more players in one location than I have seen across an entire area of Neverwinter. Given the overall quality of their games I expect it required significantly less resources than this game does.

SilverBride

Thechuckage wrote: »

GW actually has a better system for this. Squash a player down to the zones level. You are still more powerful by simply having more skills and stats on gear but not a walking forest fire.

It has been suggested that players could have the option to be "squashed" down to the zone's level, or that quest bosses could have a optional scroll to increase their difficulty, but the players asking for this don't want that. They want veteran overland with veteran quest bosses that can be killed repeatedly, which they have suggested more than once. This would put quest bosses on farm as a way to get veteran gear without having to step foot into veteran dungeons or trials.

Jeremy

SilverBride wrote: »

Thechuckage wrote: »

GW actually has a better system for this. Squash a player down to the zones level. You are still more powerful by simply having more skills and stats on gear but not a walking forest fire.

It has been suggested that players could have the option to be "squashed" down to the zone's level, or that quest bosses could have a optional scroll to increase their difficulty, but the players asking for this don't want that. They want veteran overland with veteran quest bosses that can be killed repeatedly, which they have suggested more than once. This would put quest bosses on farm as a way to get veteran gear without having to step foot into veteran dungeons or trials.

The whole point of an RPG game is to grow stronger so you can take on greater challenges. That is the basic structure of the genre and the whole purpose of having "levels" to begin with. So this idea that players should intentionally weaken themselves to make things more challenging is antithetical to everything that makes RPG games fun and addictive.

Level scaling was a great addition to the game because it enabled experienced players to play in any zone instead of grossly out-leveling them to the point they become tedious and dull. But for the level scaling to be effective it has to keep scaling as the levels of the players advance. If it doesn't, then you end up with the initial problem you had in the first place that level scaling was intended to fix, which is that players have vastly out-leveled them to the point they are no longer enjoyable to play in.

You're always going to have a gap between new players and experienced players in an RPG. It is an unavoidable outcome due to the structure of the game and there is no way around it.

SilverBride

Jeremy wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

It has been suggested that players could have the option to be "squashed" down to the zone's level, or that quest bosses could have a optional scroll to increase their difficulty, but the players asking for this don't want that. They want veteran overland with veteran quest bosses that can be killed repeatedly, which they have suggested more than once. This would put quest bosses on farm as a way to get veteran gear without having to step foot into veteran dungeons or trials.

The whole point of an RPG game is to grow stronger so you can take on greater challenges. That is the basic structure of the genre and the whole purpose of having "levels" to begin with. So this idea that players should intentionally weaken themselves to make things more challenging is antithetical to everything that makes RPG games fun and addictive.

It is a fact that content is going to get easier as your character gets stronger. That is why veteran content, such as dungeons and trials, exist... as a challenge for the stronger characters who want that.

It is not part of the basic structure of the genre to create veteran instances of the base content.

NewBlacksmurf

I think the content just needs to go back to how it was originally designed when we were in closed alpha.
All this dips measurement is the whole issue..

The game should be like Elder Scrolls where what you do matters rather than DPS meters focus and animation canceling, etc.

Honestly CP shouldn’t even be a thing unless it comes by ways of mastering specific armors, weapons and other mini game cycles….ya know like Elder Scrolls games

Just one perspective

CP5

SilverBride wrote: »

Sanguinor2 wrote: »

OP is asking for a second difficulty, not for the current difficulty to be replaced so your prefered difficulty would still be just as it is now.
Easy mode for all hard content already exists. Its called normal.

It has been explained multiple times why this idea won't work. But let's look at this from an industry standard.

How many MMOs do you know of that have multiple difficulty levels of their base game? It is the standard in MMOs that the base game is for questing and leveling and telling the story, and the challenging content is in dungeons and raids or trials.

It is not reasonable that a completely new version of the base game be created and maintained on 4 different servers/ platforms just because some players don't want to play the challenging content that the game provides.

As others have said and I just want to clarify so everyone is on the same page, when ESO first came out every zone had 3 versions, bronze, silver, and gold, and each faction had a level range within them, so Auridon was something like level 5-15 for people who started in AD but vet 1 if you were DC. This technology, to have different instances of the same zone, is something at the very core of ESO that it was built on and reimplementing it would be child's play. Have mobs in the 'vet' version of the zone be a 'higher level', taking advantage of the already existing level scaling to give them some more power, and all you would need beyond that are slight tweaks to enemies to make the fights not a slog to get through.

For example. NPC healers are a joke, they occasionally do a single target heal that does so little they are easy to ignore, and when they aren't healing they are staring off into space or launching a worthlessly weak projectile. Simply reduce the cooldown on their channeled heal, bump up its numbers, and even give them the aoe channel heal that many healer mobs already have, and voila, more engaging enemy. Between the above mentioned changes, and slight AI package tweaks they could retroactively revitalize overland. And for those saying 'its to expensive' or 'not worth the resources', they're introducing companions this coming dlc, and the sticker book not long before that, how easy would it be for zos to have vet overland be a base game feature just like many other things.

Sanguinor2

SilverBride wrote: »

It has been suggested that players could have the option to be "squashed" down to the zone's level, or that quest bosses could have a optional scroll to increase their difficulty, but the players asking for this don't want that. They want veteran overland with veteran quest bosses that can be killed repeatedly, which they have suggested more than once. This would put quest bosses on farm as a way to get veteran gear without having to step foot into veteran dungeons or trials.

Zones dont have fixed levels in Eso anymore how would you get squashed to a zones level when it doesnt even have a fixed one? Does it level you down to 160 CP? to level 50?I wouldnt mind scrolls at quest bosses for optional increases that way I only fall asleep while unlocking the boss instead of during the whole thing but I would much rather not fall asleep at all while doing overland.

There is no veteran gear outside of perfected sets, from which many are weaker than some overland sets, and monster masks from vet dungeons. In fact you can get a close to BIS build without once entering veteran content as soon as the new mythic comes out. The only thing you would be missing is a 1 piece monster set which you could even get from looted undaunted keys during events. Quest bosses dont even drop set pieces in most cases the thought of repeatedly farming quest bosses for "veteran" non piece sets is laughable at best. Quest bosses are not gonna suddenly start dropping perfected relequen pieces. It is as simple as applying the loot system of vet dungeons compared to normal ones, increase the item quality by one step (blue to purple in most cases), maybe drop a bit more gold or something instead of getting a gold weapon from usually purple quest rewards and thats it. For all I care there doesnt even need to be a reward as long as the difficulty is enough to get me doing story quests again.

Jeremy

SilverBride wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

It has been suggested that players could have the option to be "squashed" down to the zone's level, or that quest bosses could have a optional scroll to increase their difficulty, but the players asking for this don't want that. They want veteran overland with veteran quest bosses that can be killed repeatedly, which they have suggested more than once. This would put quest bosses on farm as a way to get veteran gear without having to step foot into veteran dungeons or trials.

The whole point of an RPG game is to grow stronger so you can take on greater challenges. That is the basic structure of the genre and the whole purpose of having "levels" to begin with. So this idea that players should intentionally weaken themselves to make things more challenging is antithetical to everything that makes RPG games fun and addictive.

It is a fact that content is going to get easier as your character gets stronger. That is why veteran content, such as dungeons and trials, exist... as a challenge for the stronger characters who want that.

It is not part of the basic structure of the genre to create veteran instances of the base content.

Which is also why there needs to be Veteran content for the landscape as well - which is not "base content" but the bulk of any new content released in expansions as well.

This whole idea that new content should only be made for new players is just ridiculous to me, especially considering this is an RPG game where the whole point of the game is to grow stronger. So experienced players should be able to enjoy questing as well.

SilverBride

CP5 wrote: »

As others have said and I just want to clarify so everyone is on the same page, when ESO first came out every zone had 3 versions, bronze, silver, and gold, and each faction had a level range within them, so Auridon was something like level 5-15 for people who started in AD but vet 1 if you were DC.

And players didn't like it, which was one factor in why it was removed with One Tamriel.

CP5 wrote: »

And for those saying 'its to expensive' or 'not worth the resources', they're introducing companions this coming dlc, and the sticker book not long before that, how easy would it be for zos to have vet overland be a base game feature just like many other things.

Companions are being added to help the casual players who make up a large percentage of the player population. They realize that casual players are the majority or they wouldn't put the time and resources into developing something to help them. So if casual players are the majority, then it stands to reason that the more hare core players are the minority... which doesn't justify the time and cost to develop something that so few would ever use.

CP5

SilverBride wrote: »

CP5 wrote: »

As others have said and I just want to clarify so everyone is on the same page, when ESO first came out every zone had 3 versions, bronze, silver, and gold, and each faction had a level range within them, so Auridon was something like level 5-15 for people who started in AD but vet 1 if you were DC.

And players didn't like it, which was one factor in why it was removed with One Tamriel.

CP5 wrote: »

And for those saying 'its to expensive' or 'not worth the resources', they're introducing companions this coming dlc, and the sticker book not long before that, how easy would it be for zos to have vet overland be a base game feature just like many other things.

Companions are being added to help the casual players who make up a large percentage of the player population. They realize that casual players are the majority or they wouldn't put the time and resources into developing something to help them. So if casual players are the majority, then it stands to reason that the more hare core players are the minority... which doesn't justify the time and cost to develop something that so few would ever use.

Yes, players didn't like having to do 2 full main quest lines to visit a single zone. But having 2 optional instances of each zone and being able to navigate them freely isn't the same at all. And companions are a far more intensive system, designed to make overland even more trivial, which if anything will actually make it harder for new players to adjust to harder content if they always expect to have an npc supporting them. But it doesn't change the fact that ZOS always adds things alongside major content updates out of nowhere, it isn't a case of "if they make vet overland they'll have to skip putting out another piece of content". They aren't a single indie developer, they have the staff to do something like this since they already have, the only case against it is personal preference.

Jeremy

SilverBride wrote: »

CP5 wrote: »

As others have said and I just want to clarify so everyone is on the same page, when ESO first came out every zone had 3 versions, bronze, silver, and gold, and each faction had a level range within them, so Auridon was something like level 5-15 for people who started in AD but vet 1 if you were DC.

And players didn't like it, which was one factor in why it was removed with One Tamriel.

CP5 wrote: »

And for those saying 'its to expensive' or 'not worth the resources', they're introducing companions this coming dlc, and the sticker book not long before that, how easy would it be for zos to have vet overland be a base game feature just like many other things.

Companions are being added to help the casual players who make up a large percentage of the player population. They realize that casual players are the majority or they wouldn't put the time and resources into developing something to help them. So if casual players are the majority, then it stands to reason that the more hare core players are the minority... which doesn't justify the time and cost to develop something that so few would ever use.

The initial veteran system on this game was a tedious grind to advance in rank, that's why people didn't like it. It wasn't just the option to play in a mirrored veteran version of each zone scaled to a higher level. Veteran dungeons are popular, and it defies reason to expect that veteran landscapes wouldn't be just as popular if they were constructed the same way.

It also would not take a lot of resources to simply scale an existing zone that is already designed to a higher level. This would be very easy to do. You would just copy and paste one of the already-made environments and instances, then make a simple alteration to the code that determines the enemy level. And poof, you're done. It would be a modicum of effort that would greatly improve the enjoyment for many players on this game.

Amottica

Jeremy wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Thechuckage wrote: »

GW actually has a better system for this. Squash a player down to the zones level. You are still more powerful by simply having more skills and stats on gear but not a walking forest fire.

It has been suggested that players could have the option to be "squashed" down to the zone's level, or that quest bosses could have a optional scroll to increase their difficulty, but the players asking for this don't want that. They want veteran overland with veteran quest bosses that can be killed repeatedly, which they have suggested more than once. This would put quest bosses on farm as a way to get veteran gear without having to step foot into veteran dungeons or trials.

The whole point of an RPG game is to grow stronger so you can take on greater challenges. That is the basic structure of the genre and the whole purpose of having "levels" to begin with. So this idea that players should intentionally weaken themselves to make things more challenging is antithetical to everything that makes RPG games fun and addictive.

This thread is requesting an option for more challenging overland. That is accomplished one of two ways. Nerfing the character of buffing the HP and damage of the NPCs which is ofc still a nerf to the character.

Granted, I do not have tons of experience in ESO but from what I have seen of vet dungeons they tend to just add more HP to the bosses and have them do more damage compared to their non-vet counterpart. Is that more challenging? Not really but it is what one should expect if Zos created a vet instance for each zone.

I hope that some of the more advanced dungeons actually adds some mechanics as the difficulty is increased, though I know they will basically still nerf the character by merely adding HP and increase the damage of NPCs.

Jeremy

Amottica wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Thechuckage wrote: »

GW actually has a better system for this. Squash a player down to the zones level. You are still more powerful by simply having more skills and stats on gear but not a walking forest fire.

It has been suggested that players could have the option to be "squashed" down to the zone's level, or that quest bosses could have a optional scroll to increase their difficulty, but the players asking for this don't want that. They want veteran overland with veteran quest bosses that can be killed repeatedly, which they have suggested more than once. This would put quest bosses on farm as a way to get veteran gear without having to step foot into veteran dungeons or trials.

The whole point of an RPG game is to grow stronger so you can take on greater challenges. That is the basic structure of the genre and the whole purpose of having "levels" to begin with. So this idea that players should intentionally weaken themselves to make things more challenging is antithetical to everything that makes RPG games fun and addictive.

This thread is requesting an option for more challenging overland. That is accomplished one of two ways. Nerfing the character of buffing the HP and damage of the NPCs which is ofc still a nerf to the character.

Granted, I do not have tons of experience in ESO but from what I have seen of vet dungeons they tend to just add more HP to the bosses and have them do more damage compared to their non-vet counterpart. Is that more challenging? Not really but it is what one should expect if Zos created a vet instance for each zone.

I hope that some of the more advanced dungeons actually adds some mechanics as the difficulty is increased, though I know they will basically still nerf the character by merely adding HP and increase the damage of NPCs.

Yeah, that's essentially all a Veteran Dungeon is - a normal dungeon scaled to a higher level so the mobs have more health, defense and offense.

We disagree that it doesn't make it more challenging, though. I believe it does. When an enemy has more health and defense, and hits harder it makes it to where you have to actually employ methods of survival instead of just running them over like a mac truck.

SilverBride

Jeremy wrote: »

You would just copy and paste one of the already-made environments and instances, then make a simple alteration to the code that determines the enemy level. And poof, you're done. It would be a modicum of effort that would greatly improve the enjoyment for many players on this game.

This is not a small task, and it would be more than just a simple copy and paste, because these players are asking for new mechanics for the mobs, not just increased health.

And this would have to be done for NA, EU, Xbox and PS servers and platforms. Then maintained.

This may improve the enjoyment for some players, but far from the majority. And when these players enter the veteran content and find it's nearly empty, how many of them do you think will stay?

I have given my opinion with facts to back them up, and I stand by that.

I'm out. Good luck...

Amottica

Jeremy wrote: »

Amottica wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Thechuckage wrote: »

GW actually has a better system for this. Squash a player down to the zones level. You are still more powerful by simply having more skills and stats on gear but not a walking forest fire.

It has been suggested that players could have the option to be "squashed" down to the zone's level, or that quest bosses could have a optional scroll to increase their difficulty, but the players asking for this don't want that. They want veteran overland with veteran quest bosses that can be killed repeatedly, which they have suggested more than once. This would put quest bosses on farm as a way to get veteran gear without having to step foot into veteran dungeons or trials.

The whole point of an RPG game is to grow stronger so you can take on greater challenges. That is the basic structure of the genre and the whole purpose of having "levels" to begin with. So this idea that players should intentionally weaken themselves to make things more challenging is antithetical to everything that makes RPG games fun and addictive.

This thread is requesting an option for more challenging overland. That is accomplished one of two ways. Nerfing the character of buffing the HP and damage of the NPCs which is ofc still a nerf to the character.

Granted, I do not have tons of experience in ESO but from what I have seen of vet dungeons they tend to just add more HP to the bosses and have them do more damage compared to their non-vet counterpart. Is that more challenging? Not really but it is what one should expect if Zos created a vet instance for each zone.

I hope that some of the more advanced dungeons actually adds some mechanics as the difficulty is increased, though I know they will basically still nerf the character by merely adding HP and increase the damage of NPCs.

Yeah, that's essentially all a Veteran Dungeon is - a normal dungeon scaled to a higher level so the mobs have more health, defense and offense.

We disagree that it doesn't make it more challenging, though. I believe it does. When an enemy has more health and defense, and hits harder it makes it to where you have to actually employ methods of survival instead of just running them over like a mac truck.

True that if someone was basically ignoring the mechanics with the lesser difficulty they may find it more challenging because they have to start paying attention to avoid the damage as long as it became meaningful damage.

I suppose that I was using the term challenging to suggest complexity. I will restate that I have not find the fights more complex. As such they are not much more interesting. It is my hope I will find some of the content increases the complexity and not just the simple buff HP and damage. I doubt this would happen for this suggestion.

Iccotak

Ravensilver wrote: »

Iccotak wrote: »

How much development energy and money would have to be put into making extra versions of the game for 'elite' players?

it's not just the "Elite Players" asking for this and I am tired of it being framed like it is.

Hm... but that is the impression that I'm getting here.

Did you take the time to make similar threads over on the other forums? On the German one? The French and Russian one? You do assume that everyone that plays is automatically here in the US English forum.
And so you also assume that *all* players want this.

*You* are asking for this. Not me. Not the people *I* play with. Not the players that have contradicted you on this and all the other threads that you opened on this subject.

I understand that it's hard to let go of a beloved idea. Of something that you *really, really, REALLY* want to see in a game...

I want to see smaller houses and an item cap of at least 2000 in each house. It ain't happening. I don't like it. I don't *have* to like it. But there is is...

Yeah, and I am not that "Elite" nor were many of my friends who didn't stick around because they found overland questing too easy to be engaged.

Like I said after looking in other online communities including the forums, reddit, steam, youtube, - this has been a point of criticism from old and new players alike.

I am not speaking for you. What I did was point out that I am not the only person asking for this. Which I am clearly not.

kargen27

SilverBride wrote: »

Thechuckage wrote: »

GW actually has a better system for this. Squash a player down to the zones level. You are still more powerful by simply having more skills and stats on gear but not a walking forest fire.

It has been suggested that players could have the option to be "squashed" down to the zone's level, or that quest bosses could have a optional scroll to increase their difficulty, but the players asking for this don't want that. They want veteran overland with veteran quest bosses that can be killed repeatedly, which they have suggested more than once. This would put quest bosses on farm as a way to get veteran gear without having to step foot into veteran dungeons or trials.

I still have the opinion that it isn't feasible for ZoS to create vet overland zones for a variety of reasons. I would like to see them but I don't think they can happen.

I still am opposed to any improved rewards for doing vet overland content. No way any overland content should give dungeon specific gear. Better gear for vet overland would be a very bad idea. It would alienate much of the player base.

Jeremy

SilverBride wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

You would just copy and paste one of the already-made environments and instances, then make a simple alteration to the code that determines the enemy level. And poof, you're done. It would be a modicum of effort that would greatly improve the enjoyment for many players on this game.

This is not a small task, and it would be more than just a simple copy and paste, because these players are asking for new mechanics for the mobs, not just increased health.

And this would have to be done for NA, EU, Xbox and PS servers and platforms. Then maintained.

This may improve the enjoyment for some players, but far from the majority. And when these players enter the veteran content and find it's nearly empty, how many of them do you think will stay?

I have given my opinion with facts to back them up, and I stand by that.

I'm out. Good luck...

Whether it's a majority or not, you have to admit considering how often this issue comes up that it would at least benefit a fair number of players. So I don't believe they would be empty (quite the contrary). But I'll admit it's theoretical at this point, if you can do me the deference of admitting past attempts at constructing veteran landscapes were not done in an identical fashion to what we are asking for now, so they aren't adequate comparisons.

You're correct that adding new "mechanics" would be more of an undertaking. So if that was the context of that post then I apologize. But merely scaling the enemies to a higher level and adding a veteran version of an existing zone would be incredibly easy to do.

Fair enough if you want to bow out.

CP5

SilverBride wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

You would just copy and paste one of the already-made environments and instances, then make a simple alteration to the code that determines the enemy level. And poof, you're done. It would be a modicum of effort that would greatly improve the enjoyment for many players on this game.

This is not a small task, and it would be more than just a simple copy and paste, because these players are asking for new mechanics for the mobs, not just increased health.

And this would have to be done for NA, EU, Xbox and PS servers and platforms. Then maintained.

This may improve the enjoyment for some players, but far from the majority. And when these players enter the veteran content and find it's nearly empty, how many of them do you think will stay?

I have given my opinion with facts to back them up, and I stand by that.

I'm out. Good luck...

Take healer mob, reduce heal cooldown and buff heal value, boom, actual enemy to focus down. Take pyromancer mob, buff size of the aoes they cast and their damage, boom, an enemy with the ability to zone the player. Take an archer mob, let them shoot an arrow faster than once every 10s. Take a tank mob, replace the ability where they yeet themselves out of a fight and replace it with the guard ability Bulwarks in kynes aegis have, boom, an actual tank. Tiny changes can make fights more engaging, and by chance the group comps that already exist in overland would then become vastly different encounters that could actually become enjoyable. Moving skills from one mob to another isn't out of scope nor time intensive.

Iccotak

kargen27 wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Thechuckage wrote: »

GW actually has a better system for this. Squash a player down to the zones level. You are still more powerful by simply having more skills and stats on gear but not a walking forest fire.

It has been suggested that players could have the option to be "squashed" down to the zone's level, or that quest bosses could have a optional scroll to increase their difficulty, but the players asking for this don't want that. They want veteran overland with veteran quest bosses that can be killed repeatedly, which they have suggested more than once. This would put quest bosses on farm as a way to get veteran gear without having to step foot into veteran dungeons or trials.

I still am opposed to any improved rewards for doing vet overland content. No way any overland content should give dungeon specific gear. Better gear for vet overland would be a very bad idea. It would alienate much of the player base.

No one has said that overland should give gear found in Dungeons. - That makes no sense.

What people have said is just increase the rarity (blue/purple) chances of something being dropped.

Jeremy

Amottica wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

Amottica wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Thechuckage wrote: »

GW actually has a better system for this. Squash a player down to the zones level. You are still more powerful by simply having more skills and stats on gear but not a walking forest fire.

It has been suggested that players could have the option to be "squashed" down to the zone's level, or that quest bosses could have a optional scroll to increase their difficulty, but the players asking for this don't want that. They want veteran overland with veteran quest bosses that can be killed repeatedly, which they have suggested more than once. This would put quest bosses on farm as a way to get veteran gear without having to step foot into veteran dungeons or trials.

The whole point of an RPG game is to grow stronger so you can take on greater challenges. That is the basic structure of the genre and the whole purpose of having "levels" to begin with. So this idea that players should intentionally weaken themselves to make things more challenging is antithetical to everything that makes RPG games fun and addictive.

This thread is requesting an option for more challenging overland. That is accomplished one of two ways. Nerfing the character of buffing the HP and damage of the NPCs which is ofc still a nerf to the character.

Granted, I do not have tons of experience in ESO but from what I have seen of vet dungeons they tend to just add more HP to the bosses and have them do more damage compared to their non-vet counterpart. Is that more challenging? Not really but it is what one should expect if Zos created a vet instance for each zone.

I hope that some of the more advanced dungeons actually adds some mechanics as the difficulty is increased, though I know they will basically still nerf the character by merely adding HP and increase the damage of NPCs.

Yeah, that's essentially all a Veteran Dungeon is - a normal dungeon scaled to a higher level so the mobs have more health, defense and offense.

We disagree that it doesn't make it more challenging, though. I believe it does. When an enemy has more health and defense, and hits harder it makes it to where you have to actually employ methods of survival instead of just running them over like a mac truck.

True that if someone was basically ignoring the mechanics with the lesser difficulty they may find it more challenging because they have to start paying attention to avoid the damage as long as it became meaningful damage.

I suppose that I was using the term challenging to suggest complexity. I will restate that I have not find the fights more complex. As such they are not much more interesting. It is my hope I will find some of the content increases the complexity and not just the simple buff HP and damage. I doubt this would happen for this suggestion.

I believe it would add some "complexity" to the gameplay in the sense players would actually have to consider the damage of their opponents as a threat and react accordingly, whether through reflex and/or build adjustments. IN other words: if an enemy is allowed to actually fight back - instead of just instantly becoming dead - then you will have added complexity just by the sheer fact the player actually has to consider their defenses and/or other survival options as well as their offense.

I get what you're saying though about mechanics. But honestly I'm not a fan of overly-complex mechanics, and prefer challenges based on individual performance in respect to their build and how they use it instead of possessing inside knowledge about how any particular fight is scripted.

Iccotak

SilverBride wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

You would just copy and paste one of the already-made environments and instances, then make a simple alteration to the code that determines the enemy level. And poof, you're done. It would be a modicum of effort that would greatly improve the enjoyment for many players on this game.

This is not a small task, and it would be more than just a simple copy and paste, because these players are asking for new mechanics for the mobs, not just increased health.

And this would have to be done for NA, EU, Xbox and PS servers and platforms. Then maintained.

Do you know how the game operates? Do you know this for a fact? Or is this what you think would be the case

This may improve the enjoyment for some players, but far from the majority. And when these players enter the veteran content and find it's nearly empty, how many of them do you think will stay?

1. This frames it as if the player base is really small already - which it is not
2. The zones already "feel" empty because the zones are already instanced. The player base is already in shards. You think everyone in a zone is sharing the same space at the same time?

I have given my opinion with facts to back them up, and I stand by that.

What Facts? I have seen many claims and opinions, but no facts.

Thechuckage

SilverBride wrote: »

Thechuckage wrote: »

GW actually has a better system for this. Squash a player down to the zones level. You are still more powerful by simply having more skills and stats on gear but not a walking forest fire.

It has been suggested that players could have the option to be "squashed" down to the zone's level, or that quest bosses could have a optional scroll to increase their difficulty, but the players asking for this don't want that. They want veteran overland with veteran quest bosses that can be killed repeatedly, which they have suggested more than once. This would put quest bosses on farm as a way to get veteran gear without having to step foot into veteran dungeons or trials.

Self nerf is at best a 1/3rd measure of a solution. It fails to take into account those not nerfed and players who have exceeded the games difficulty with lower ranked characters.
It can work for other games because there are set levels to zones and player power is controlled for everyone.

While vet overland is not a complete solution, it offers more to the players.

And as Sanguinor eloquently pointed out, quest bosses aren't farmed anyway. Occasionally world bosses or public dungeons that already have a respawn mechanic so that particular argument holds even less water.
That's not even mentioning crafted gear, which can be outstrip many overland sets and even dungeon sets. "Veteran gear" is hardly gated behind dungeons or bosses.

kargen27

Iccotak wrote: »

kargen27 wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Thechuckage wrote: »

GW actually has a better system for this. Squash a player down to the zones level. You are still more powerful by simply having more skills and stats on gear but not a walking forest fire.

It has been suggested that players could have the option to be "squashed" down to the zone's level, or that quest bosses could have a optional scroll to increase their difficulty, but the players asking for this don't want that. They want veteran overland with veteran quest bosses that can be killed repeatedly, which they have suggested more than once. This would put quest bosses on farm as a way to get veteran gear without having to step foot into veteran dungeons or trials.

I still am opposed to any improved rewards for doing vet overland content. No way any overland content should give dungeon specific gear. Better gear for vet overland would be a very bad idea. It would alienate much of the player base.

No one has said that overland should give gear found in Dungeons. - That makes no sense.

What people have said is just increase the rarity (blue/purple) chances of something being dropped.

"This would put quest bosses on farm as a way to get veteran gear without having to step foot into veteran dungeons or trials."

That is what I responded to. Vet gear was specifically mentioned.

BlueRaven

Iccotak wrote: »

What Facts? I have seen many claims and opinions, but no facts.

That budget and time exist. That people can’t just snap their fingers and more content just magically appears for free.
That zos is a business and they make content that will make the most money for them and they design content accordingly.
And finally the reason there is not a vet version already is because they realize it is not a wise investment.

Iccotak

SilverBride wrote: »

Sanguinor2 wrote: »

Where does the idea that people want vet overland because they dont want to do challenging content come from?

I'm not going to search back through the multiple threads on this subject, but some players who want veteran overland have mentioned they no longer participate in, or have never been interested in, vet end game content.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, you may have seen that.
In my experience I have not seen that - what I have seen is:

1. People say that overland is too easy to the point that they no longer play it.
2. People don't want to have to always go to endgame group content to get more engaging combat and want Overland to have better combat. They don't want two extremes and want the story to not be mind numbing in combat

Iccotak

BlueRaven wrote: »

Iccotak wrote: »

What Facts? I have seen many claims and opinions, but no facts.

That budget and time exist. That people can’t just snap their fingers and more content just magically appears for free.
That zos is a business and they make content that will make the most money for them and they design content accordingly.
And finally the reason there is not a vet version already is because they realize it is not a wise investment.

That is a claim - Not a fact. Do you work at ZOS or Bethesda? Have they specifically said this in posts or interviews?

No one said they can snap their fingers and *boom* its there. What people have said, including myself, is that we think this is a glaring flaw that should be worked on.

You claim it won't make money - while other people say it could actually get more people interested in playing, seeing as how in our admittedly anecdotal experiences we have never seen anyone leave the game for being too hard. Whenever one of my friends stopped playing it came down to overland & questing being too easy and thus boring, not engaging in terms of gameplay made the overall experience boring.

So maybe - just maybe - it is a feature worth looking into, since ZOS already admitted to working on it at one point and even that they liked the idea

The "Veteran Overland" that ZOS did in the past is not what people are generally asking for - like someone else said above:

Whether it's a majority or not, you have to admit considering how often this issue comes up that it would at least benefit a fair number of players. So I don't believe they would be empty (quite the contrary). But I'll admit it's theoretical at this point, if you can do me the deference of admitting past attempts at constructing veteran landscapes were not done in an identical fashion to what we are asking for now, so they aren't adequate comparisons.

WeerW3ir

For what exactly? Tell me one reason why should the veteran zones work now?
They were not working before. Now what would be different?

BlueRaven

Iccotak wrote: »

BlueRaven wrote: »

Iccotak wrote: »

What Facts? I have seen many claims and opinions, but no facts.

That budget and time exist. That people can’t just snap their fingers and more content just magically appears for free.
That zos is a business and they make content that will make the most money for them and they design content accordingly.
And finally the reason there is not a vet version already is because they realize it is not a wise investment.

That is a claim - Not a fact. Do you work at ZOS or Bethesda? Have they specifically said this in posts or interviews?

Maybe I have been approaching this all wrong. [snip]

I am just going to go ahead with this assumption because you seem to think that what ever you are suggesting can just happen if Zos clicks a button with no additional cost to them at all. Or that everyone at zos somehow volunteers their time and that there is a near infinite amount of people working there to make this content for you.

Zos is a business. "Business is the activity of making one's living or making money by producing or buying and selling products (such as goods and services). Simply put, it is "any activity or enterprise entered into for profit." That is how games in the United States are made. It is not some guy in a garage doing something they think is "cool". They have market researchers, analysts, layers of financial management looking over how every penny is spent. They don't make ANY content that they don't feel is a wise investment of their time and money.

The amount of capitol they would have to invest to make vet versions of all the overland AND make vet version of all future overland would be MONUMENTAL. And for what? The "maybe" they might get more people? And how much more are they going to get? Lets pretend it raises the population by 20%. Would it have been worth it (Even though it has been shown that harder content alienates a wider audience)?

https://mmosworld.com/5-reasons-why-wildstar-failed/

No. Why? Because "the reason there is not a vet version already is because they realize it is not a wise investment."

With that money they could just make "ESO Part 2" or perhaps a "Starfeild Online", so why put a ton of money into something that most players would not want? They can use the same money and make a new game that is still casual friendly and bring in A LOT more people.

And please, please don't say they are magically flush with cash because Microsoft bought them. [snip] The former owners of Zos has that money now, not Zos itself nor Microsoft. It is more reasonable to believe they are looking into cost cutting at the moment. That stuff usually happens after a corporate buy out.

[Edited for real world politics]

ParaViking

[snip]

Who would really ever know what ZOS can afford, or what they can, or can't do... With the introduction of the "Champion" they may be thinking of doing the upgrade to overland content. We will have to see how it evolves as time goes on.

I for one would support an instance where the content, health & damage, was scaled. I don't think they would need to add a bunch of additional mechanics... I would not need better rewards, but also would not oppose maybe a chance upgrade to item quality. No monster items...if you want that run the dungeons...

Maybe they are about to do something with Cadwell's silver and gold. That would be cool to! They did just upgrade Maelstrom Arena and some other content.

It seems to me that it would make since. There is so much content to the game that could be really intriguing if it was somewhat more challenging... Nothing crazy just hard enough to be engaging...

[snip]

[Edited for real world politics and misinformation]