Overland Content Feedback Thread

SilverBride

Sylvermynx wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Sylvermynx wrote: »

Actually, none of us (players) have any idea at all how many other players are on each "side". People need to stop saying anything except about themselves in regard to this.

"I get there’s a lot of people that do like the harder difficulty, but a HUGE portion of our player base just wants to do story, and they don’t want to have to struggle with difficult things." - Rich Lambert

That's not numbers, that's a non-substantive statement from someone who (apparently) didn't really want to get into detail. Regardless, this is NOT an "argument" thread - it's a discussion thread.

That is a direct quote from Rich Lambert, Creative Director, that backs up my view that even an optional veteran overland would not be cost effective for the small amount of players who would even use it.

Kwoung

Sylvermynx wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Sylvermynx wrote: »

Actually, none of us (players) have any idea at all how many other players are on each "side". People need to stop saying anything except about themselves in regard to this.

"I get there’s a lot of people that do like the harder difficulty, but a HUGE portion of our player base just wants to do story, and they don’t want to have to struggle with difficult things." - Rich Lambert

That's not numbers, that's a non-substantive statement from someone who (apparently) didn't really want to get into detail. Regardless, this is NOT an "argument" thread - it's a discussion thread.

Well actually, he also said they have the data, which of course they do. We don't, but you can bet they have active Tableau charts on a big screen in some room at HQ, and even their desktops, showing what content the players are consuming at any given point in time, how long they stay engaged with it, percentage of players that complete it, etc, etc, etc.... These are standard business tools & practices nowadays and no matter how any group of players feel about something, the charts don't lie.

spartaxoxo

SilverBride wrote: »

Sylvermynx wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Sylvermynx wrote: »

Actually, none of us (players) have any idea at all how many other players are on each "side". People need to stop saying anything except about themselves in regard to this.

"I get there’s a lot of people that do like the harder difficulty, but a HUGE portion of our player base just wants to do story, and they don’t want to have to struggle with difficult things." - Rich Lambert

That's not numbers, that's a non-substantive statement from someone who (apparently) didn't really want to get into detail. Regardless, this is NOT an "argument" thread - it's a discussion thread.

That is a direct quote from Rich Lambert, Creative Director, that backs up my view that even an optional veteran overland would not be cost effective for the small amount of players who would even use it.

Yeah I don't think an entirely new zone is gonna happen.

I did see another new idea in this thread though that would help.

Those random daedric mini incursions that spawn sometimes on the map could be beefed up to summon something really hard. That would actually be pretty cool.

Kwoung

spartaxoxo wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Sylvermynx wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Sylvermynx wrote: »

Actually, none of us (players) have any idea at all how many other players are on each "side". People need to stop saying anything except about themselves in regard to this.

"I get there’s a lot of people that do like the harder difficulty, but a HUGE portion of our player base just wants to do story, and they don’t want to have to struggle with difficult things." - Rich Lambert

That's not numbers, that's a non-substantive statement from someone who (apparently) didn't really want to get into detail. Regardless, this is NOT an "argument" thread - it's a discussion thread.

That is a direct quote from Rich Lambert, Creative Director, that backs up my view that even an optional veteran overland would not be cost effective for the small amount of players who would even use it.

Yeah I don't think an entirely new zone is gonna happen.

I did see another new idea in this thread though that would help.

Those random daedric mini incursions that spawn sometimes on the map could be beefed up to summon something really hard. That would actually be pretty cool.

Well actually I was talking more about big hour+ long events that could include the whole server, like attacks on main cities and having to defend them such. Could be out in the zone too... like some crazy Daedric and his 1000 minions trying to activate a dormant volcano and we need to stop them before Stonefalls or Vardenfell is buried under lava. Literally limitless possibilities that would be amazingly fun to participate in!

Blackbird_V

CP5 wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Blackbird_V wrote: »

I wouldn't call 2 shotting quest bosses and overland mobs succeeding. I'd call that absolutely laughable and boring. Not even close to being fun.

I find that completely fun and satisfying. I love that I can actually feel like the hero. And this is where the problem lies. These are our opinions, which do carry some weight to a degree. But do enough players want a veteran overland to justify the huge amount of work it would take to implement?

@ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_Kevin Do the developers have any feedback they are willing to share at this point?

EDIT: I want to add, as I've stated before, I am all for a debuff for general overland mobs and the option for veteran level story bosses for those who would like that.

Silver, you say this all the time, but "fun is subjective." It is great that you can enjoy clearing any threat away with a constant power fantasy in your game, but for many players that is almost insulting. As others have said, even seeing what our enemies can do is a rarity because they die so fast, so what point is there in suspense in a year-long story when you know full well the big bad at the end will just die without issue, that the dangerous locations we visit will only be a danger if we look away from our screens and ride off a cliff? Fun is subjective, yet every piece of pve content in the game has an optional harder mode, except for overland, and no matter how much we self nerf our enemies being so inept will continue to lead to this.

Legit a friend and i unequipped all gear, wore absolutely trash weapons and got rid of our cps.... Overland mobs still died in like 2 abilities, and barely tickled us. It's insulting and a joke. I mean I have top-end gear, and I'd love to use that for overland (overland mobs, delves, public dungeons, quests etc) and put it to good use there, and not just dungeons and trials. Sure, I can put it to use in overland, but what is the point? You can still legit 1 shot things in Julianos/Hundings rage and New Moon Acolye, which you can get dirt cheap. Overland is accessible to everyone, yeah sure....... But it's just so boring and stale. I agree with your point. The only real danger is falling off a cliff if you're not paying attention (but it's ok we have breakfall cp now to reduce that damage).


I don't wanna get/have a power fantasy where I get happy 1 shotting things. It's genuinely boring and insulting to vet players' skill-set.

People keep bringing up "Rich said this and that", but in fairness the data is so old it comes from the 2013-late 2016 era. They have NO data on how we would like, or would contend with veteran overland in today's state of the game. Hell people in-game and don't use forums will definitely give it a try, even a minority. And who knows? Maybe they'll be vocal and say give it a try, and may enjoy it.

How anyone can be happy killing overland mobs and quest bosses before you even think about casting a 2nd or 3rd ability is beyond me, but hey to each their own. I'd prefer to opt into a more difficult scenario. It will make some of us players play longer as these vet zones will be harder, so we're playing more and longer.

jasonhunter

I would find it interesting to have the option to make overland harder. I used to play Guild Wars 1, and they listened to the people who asked for a 'Hard Mode' of the overland. It was instanced, mind you, not open world like ESO. But seeing how the game mechanics work in ESO, it should be possible to implement something like that. With better rewards and loot.

That would give the game and its content a big boost when it comes to replay value.

Blackbird_V

jasonhunter wrote: »

I would find it interesting to have the option to make overland harder. I used to play Guild Wars 1, and they listened to the people who asked for a 'Hard Mode' of the overland. It was instanced, mind you, not open world like ESO. But seeing how the game mechanics work in ESO, it should be possible to implement something like that. With better rewards and loot.

That would give the game and its content a big boost when it comes to replay value.

Fully agree to replay value. I'd definitely do overland content again on another character. Actually get to experience a good boss fight, or farm some public dungeons that give some difficulty. I'd enjoy that. So much overland, but to me and other players it's wasted since, well, it's so easy to us lol.

As for Guild Wars: GW2 has great overland content and it's dubbed a "casual" MMO. I mean I love seeing 80+ players do Octovine, Tequatl, Claw of Jormag etc. And love seeing people ask for help to get some things like mastery/hero points, bounties (summonable-ish world bosses, that is hard unless you have a group) , groups that do world events like Dragonfall, Mordremoth etc.

spartaxoxo

Kwoung wrote: »

Sylvermynx wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Sylvermynx wrote: »

Actually, none of us (players) have any idea at all how many other players are on each "side". People need to stop saying anything except about themselves in regard to this.

"I get there’s a lot of people that do like the harder difficulty, but a HUGE portion of our player base just wants to do story, and they don’t want to have to struggle with difficult things." - Rich Lambert

That's not numbers, that's a non-substantive statement from someone who (apparently) didn't really want to get into detail. Regardless, this is NOT an "argument" thread - it's a discussion thread.

Well actually, he also said they have the data, which of course they do. We don't, but you can bet they have active Tableau charts on a big screen in some room at HQ, and even their desktops, showing what content the players are consuming at any given point in time, how long they stay engaged with it, percentage of players that complete it, etc, etc, etc.... These are standard business tools & practices nowadays and no matter how any group of players feel about something, the charts don't lie.

The way I see it there are two groups of players in games these days

The looky lous and the Core users.

Looky lous are casual users that do not spend much time playing any given game. They will maybe play through the story real quick and then quit til the next expansion. They'll play a couple of hours a week. They spend a lot of money to shortcut their experience and only engage on a surface level. They are the vast majority of players in most games nowadays and developers have to put in some content that caters to them survive. Not only because most new players start off as this kind of player even they transition to core users, but because they bring in most of the income that keeps a game running.

Then there is the core users. They don't spend as much money because they earn a lot of stuff through playing. They devote a lot of time into the game. They post on forums or social media, tell their friends about games (word of mouth advertisement) and consume as much of the content as they like and are able to do. They run the gamut of skill level and content they do from casual to hardcore, but what they have in common is they have a lot of playtime and are vocal about their interests. They may be the minority of players, but they are an important demographic to the health of any game because they are the main ones truly playing it.

Games need both types of users to survive. And I don't think overcatering to either core (especially hardcore) or looky lous is sound strategy.

That's why I think ZOS does need to do something to please their core users who have been dissatisfied with Overland for years now, regardless if they are in the minority. I think an entire separate server is a bad idea for many reasons, so don't support a full vet overland. But something needs to be done.

Blackbird_V

SilverBride wrote: »

Sylvermynx wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Sylvermynx wrote: »

Actually, none of us (players) have any idea at all how many other players are on each "side". People need to stop saying anything except about themselves in regard to this.

"I get there’s a lot of people that do like the harder difficulty, but a HUGE portion of our player base just wants to do story, and they don’t want to have to struggle with difficult things." - Rich Lambert

That's not numbers, that's a non-substantive statement from someone who (apparently) didn't really want to get into detail. Regardless, this is NOT an "argument" thread - it's a discussion thread.

That is a direct quote from Rich Lambert, Creative Director, that backs up my view that even an optional veteran overland would not be cost effective for the small amount of players who would even use it.

To me it's a prediction he is making. We've not had any level of veteran overland for over 5 years now, and back then it was a totally different ball game. You do understand that alliance locking was a massive issue for players right? We have been vocal about that. We have had great success since then, I will concede to that, but you cannot say that success is PURELY because of removal of vet overland. It may well have been, sure, but again in today's times it might be totally different. We have players that play for story, but has he personally asked these players? No. He's reading numbers. Numbers don't lie, but they can be misconstrued. They have no idea why these players only quest. Maybe they're not confident/have anxiety in doing dungeons, or cannot find a group for them. Maybe they want a challenge and can't for those reasons, and only can do overland which is easy (and there's no choice in that as it stands). Maybe with vet overland it'll teach them to get better at the game, and may give them confidence to do dungeons and trials and actually enjoy the game for what it can offer, and potentially more.

For ANY data to be made on this topic, I highly suggest an experiment where some zones (be it non-DLC + DLC) have a toggle. Places that are popular like Deshaan, Stonefalls, Auridon, Daggerfall, Vvardenfell.. A few zones to test it, and if any data shows people are opting in for it, extend the experiment. Give it half a year or a year on the experiment then see the data, and gather feedback during and after it. Then we will get hard data on this topic.

SilverBride

spartaxoxo wrote: »

That's why I think ZOS does need to do something to please their core users who have been dissatisfied with Overland for years now. I think an entire separate server is a bad idea for many reasons, so don't support a full vet overland. But something needs to be done.

I consider myself what you refer to as a core user. I play every day, I subscribe and have bought crowns, I have brought friends over to the game, and I am completely satisfied with the current overland.

I, and many others, have suggested debuffs and optional veteran story bosses... things I would never use myself but have no problem with because they would only affect the user and would be much more cost effective so as not to take away from the rest of the game... but those have been tossed aside as unacceptable.

So I don't know what the answer is. All I know is there needs to be room for compromise and I haven't see that yet.

SimonThesis

Kwoung wrote: »

]hour+ long events that could include the whole server, like attacks on main cities and having to defend them such. Could be out in the zone too... like some crazy Daedric and his 1000 minions trying to activate a dormant volcano and we need to stop them before Stonefalls or Vardenfell is buried under lava. Literally limitless possibilities that would be amazingly fun to participate in!

I think this would be a really good idea! Implement an invasion system like New World has. Make the community defend Alinor or Vivec from literal armies of monsters led by Molag Bal or Dagon whoever. If the community fails the crafting stations are set on cold fire and unusable for 5 days.

Kwoung

Blackbird_V wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Sylvermynx wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Sylvermynx wrote: »

Actually, none of us (players) have any idea at all how many other players are on each "side". People need to stop saying anything except about themselves in regard to this.

"I get there’s a lot of people that do like the harder difficulty, but a HUGE portion of our player base just wants to do story, and they don’t want to have to struggle with difficult things." - Rich Lambert

That's not numbers, that's a non-substantive statement from someone who (apparently) didn't really want to get into detail. Regardless, this is NOT an "argument" thread - it's a discussion thread.

That is a direct quote from Rich Lambert, Creative Director, that backs up my view that even an optional veteran overland would not be cost effective for the small amount of players who would even use it.

To me it's a prediction he is making. We've not had any level of veteran overland for over 5 years now, and back then it was a totally different ball game. You do understand that alliance locking was a massive issue for players right? We have been vocal about that. We have had great success since then, I will concede to that, but you cannot say that success is PURELY because of removal of vet overland. It may well have been, sure, but again in today's times it might be totally different. We have players that play for story, but has he personally asked these players? No. He's reading numbers. Numbers don't lie, but they can be misconstrued. They have no idea why these players only quest. Maybe they're not confident/have anxiety in doing dungeons, or cannot find a group for them. Maybe they want a challenge and can't for those reasons, and only can do overland which is easy. Maybe it'll give them confidence to do dungeons and trials, and get better at the game, at surviving etc. and actually enjoy the game for what it can offer, and potentially more.

For ANY data to be made on this topic, I highly suggest an experiment where some zones (be it non-DLC + DLC) have a toggle. Places that are popular like Deshaan, Stonefalls, Auridon, Daggerfall, Vvardenfell.. A few zones to test it, and if any data shows people are opting in for it, extend the experiment. Give it half a year or a year on the experiment then see the data, and gather feedback during and after it. Then we will get hard data on this topic.

There are plenty of zones in this game that are highly underused, one of them would work. This would be a good test, as currently no one uses them, so make it more challenging and see if that brings in the crowds and keeps them there. Grab the data on how long players stay there, return there, or leave and don't return there. This would give decent data from which to make a decision on how long it would delay folks from leaving the game, because lets face it, most wanting this have at least one foot out the door already and are just looking for a reason to stay... judging by what I have read here.

jle30303

Most of overland SHOULD be easy. I am the Hero, wolves and common bandits should not bother me. Running around in the open air should not be a danger. It's not a thing in itself, it's what you do *between* things, when you're getting from one thing to another. Things like wolves, bandits (other than bosses) and skeevers... SHOULD be monsters that a high level, or experienced character, can blow through without breaking a sweat. Even ogres, minotaurs and trolls, eventually. Wrothgar's ogres are significantly tougher than those of the vanilla game, and its trolls have learned to throw rocks, but they're still not really that much harder as a solo.

Now, delves and separate discrete quest dungeon areas, like "inside the Wyrd Tree" or "inside Cath Bedraud Catacombs" in Glenumbra, or even "inside that house in Daggerfall where a named Worm Cult Agent lives, and he's the only monster in there and you can only go in on there while on the quest"... those, it might be possible to have a veteran version of. Now imagine just how many of those kinds of zones there actually are, and just how much work it would be to actually beef every one of the mini-boss-types up from tier 1 to tier 2, or if there are trash packs, beef those up to veteran levels - there might just be a way to automate it for trash (that works like, say, the trash in Veteran versus Normal dungeons: even the skeevers in Wayrest Sewers are tougher in vet), but just imagine the work involved in needing to separately veteran-ize EVERY unique, every delve boss (up from tier 1 to tier 2 elite level, for starters), every quest mini-boss...

The only question is just how many different ways of saying "not. gonna. happen" are there.

Sylvermynx

@Blackbird_V - I can tell you why I only quest, craft, and explore: I had enough of hard crap in two other MMOs, chasing gear and raiding with family and friends. That started in 2006 and ended in 2016. I'm 15 years older than when I started in WoW, and ALL I want to do now is putz around questing, crafting, and exploring using a multitude of alts.

For me to be happy, I need to not have to do combat every time I turn around. I don't care if it's a wolf or a giant - I'm not interested in having to kill it. I hate that the only real way to get XP in games is by killing mobs, but it is what it is, and there are no games of this sort without combat.

So a much harder vet-type overland isn't going to work for me. But I'm only one person so really, my opinion doesn't honestly matter. I've played ESO for nearly 3.5 years and have CP ranging from almost 350 to almost 800 (across two accounts, both PC megaservers) - but I still die quite often to more than 3 mobs anywhere. I'm not young, my reflexes are crap compared to 15 years back playing WoW, but I love this game and I don't want to get pushed out by non-optional harder overland. Also, I don't want to "get better". I want to play my putz-along way.

And that's about all I'm going to say. That's my bottom line reasoning, and I'm not really interested in arguing.

Blackbird_V

SilverBride wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

That's why I think ZOS does need to do something to please their core users who have been dissatisfied with Overland for years now. I think an entire separate server is a bad idea for many reasons, so don't support a full vet overland. But something needs to be done.

I consider myself what you refer to as a core user. I play every day, I subscribe and have bought crowns, I have brought friends over to the game, and I am completely satisfied with the current overland.

I, and many others, have suggested debuffs and optional veteran story bosses... things I would never use myself but have no problem with because they would only affect the user and would be much more cost effective so as not to take away from the rest of the game... but those have been tossed aside as unacceptable.

So I don't know what the answer is. All I know is there needs to be room for compromise and I haven't see that yet.

To me a good compromise is this: ZoS work (on the side so it won't affect future releases) veteran overland toggle. This includes, but not limited to:

1. Quests
2. Delves
3. Group Delves (since group delves are so easy there's no reason for grouping)
4. Public Dungeons
5. Overland - Monsters/enemies/even harder world bosses
6. Anything else I've missed or not thought of

---

And for you: you get a choice. Toggle on veteran or toggle off veteran so the game you know and love as it is now, can stay that way.

Idc if veteran overland release takes a year or 2, but I'm sorry I will not take a quest boss having an optional vet mode, or debuffs on the player. That's a blanket solution, boring, and makes no sense in context with anything since there are other "scary" mobs out that that can be legit tickled to death and it will just look tacky and would not sit right with me.

spartaxoxo

SimonThesis wrote: »

Kwoung wrote: »

]hour+ long events that could include the whole server, like attacks on main cities and having to defend them such. Could be out in the zone too... like some crazy Daedric and his 1000 minions trying to activate a dormant volcano and we need to stop them before Stonefalls or Vardenfell is buried under lava. Literally limitless possibilities that would be amazingly fun to participate in!

I think this would be a really good idea! Implement an invasion system like New World has. Make the community defend Alinor or Vivec from literal armies of monsters led by Molag Bal or Dagon whoever. If the community fails the crafting stations are set on cold fire and unusable for 5 days.

I don't like the crafting station part. I don't think the vet stuff should impede the casual experience. I think cool prizes going out would be enough.

Blackbird_V

Sylvermynx wrote: »

@Blackbird_V - I can tell you why I only quest, craft, and explore: I had enough of hard crap in two other MMOs, chasing gear and raiding with family and friends. That started in 2006 and ended in 2016. I'm 15 years older than when I started in WoW, and ALL I want to do now is putz around questing, crafting, and exploring using a multitude of alts.

For me to be happy, I need to not have to do combat every time I turn around. I don't care if it's a wolf or a giant - I'm not interested in having to kill it. I hate that the only real way to get XP in games is by killing mobs, but it is what it is, and there are no games of this sort without combat.

So a much harder vet-type overland isn't going to work for me. But I'm only one person so really, my opinion doesn't honestly matter. I've played ESO for nearly 3.5 years and have CP ranging from almost 350 to almost 800 (across two accounts, both PC megaservers) - but I still die quite often to more than 3 mobs anywhere. I'm not young, my reflexes are crap compared to 15 years back playing WoW, but I love this game and I don't want to get pushed out by non-optional harder overland. Also, I don't want to "get better". I want to play my putz-along way.

And that's about all I'm going to say. That's my bottom line reasoning, and I'm not really interested in arguing.

We keep saying that this will be optional though. We've said so many times, you DON'T have to do it, at all. You can stay in normal overland as it stands now.

---

Kwoung wrote: »

Blackbird_V wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Sylvermynx wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Sylvermynx wrote: »

Actually, none of us (players) have any idea at all how many other players are on each "side". People need to stop saying anything except about themselves in regard to this.

"I get there’s a lot of people that do like the harder difficulty, but a HUGE portion of our player base just wants to do story, and they don’t want to have to struggle with difficult things." - Rich Lambert

That's not numbers, that's a non-substantive statement from someone who (apparently) didn't really want to get into detail. Regardless, this is NOT an "argument" thread - it's a discussion thread.

That is a direct quote from Rich Lambert, Creative Director, that backs up my view that even an optional veteran overland would not be cost effective for the small amount of players who would even use it.

To me it's a prediction he is making. We've not had any level of veteran overland for over 5 years now, and back then it was a totally different ball game. You do understand that alliance locking was a massive issue for players right? We have been vocal about that. We have had great success since then, I will concede to that, but you cannot say that success is PURELY because of removal of vet overland. It may well have been, sure, but again in today's times it might be totally different. We have players that play for story, but has he personally asked these players? No. He's reading numbers. Numbers don't lie, but they can be misconstrued. They have no idea why these players only quest. Maybe they're not confident/have anxiety in doing dungeons, or cannot find a group for them. Maybe they want a challenge and can't for those reasons, and only can do overland which is easy. Maybe it'll give them confidence to do dungeons and trials, and get better at the game, at surviving etc. and actually enjoy the game for what it can offer, and potentially more.

For ANY data to be made on this topic, I highly suggest an experiment where some zones (be it non-DLC + DLC) have a toggle. Places that are popular like Deshaan, Stonefalls, Auridon, Daggerfall, Vvardenfell.. A few zones to test it, and if any data shows people are opting in for it, extend the experiment. Give it half a year or a year on the experiment then see the data, and gather feedback during and after it. Then we will get hard data on this topic.

There are plenty of zones in this game that are highly underused, one of them would work. This would be a good test, as currently no one uses them, so make it more challenging and see if that brings in the crowds and keeps them there. Grab the data on how long players stay there, return there, or leave and don't return there. This would give decent data from which to make a decision on how long it would delay folks from leaving the game, because lets face it, most wanting this have at least one foot out the door already and are just looking for a reason to stay... judging by what I have read here.

A lot of zones are "dead" because it has nothing to offer. A lot of a reason a zone is alive is convenience: Dolmen to wayshrine placements, for experience farming - alik'r for example; Deshaan offers close crafting stations & guild stores to wayshrine, good looking zone and not hard to navigate, and a public dungeon people farm for mother's sorrow; craglorn offers a PUG lfm/lfg experience, best guild stores in-game, somewhat decent crafting station placements and material farming (nirncrux).

They need to experiment with a few dead zones that offer literally nothing but story, and a few really alive zones like alikr for vet overland exp rates, deshaan for harder farming for sets and decent-ish questline and whatnot. They need data from a variety. It should not be biased.

Seminolegirl1992

SilverBride wrote: »

Faulgor wrote: »

I have heard the same complaints from all my friends who have quit, all of which by no means min-maxers or as occupied with creating builds as I am.
That the majority of the content is unengaging at endgame is a big issue for them.

The only time I ever heard overland difficulty being discussed in game was before One Tamriel. Players were complaining and leaving because it was too much of a struggle to be fun. That is the reason I left, too.

Since I returned a couple of years ago I have not heard a single player complain that overland is too easy. Not in zone chat, not in guild chat, not in groups, not among my friends... not one single player ever, and I play every day.

Overland difficulty isn't a game issue at all... it's a forum issue.

That's probably because you're not around the folks that find it too easy. The folks you hang around are probably more tailored to the way you like to play. Soo many of my friends (real life friends and in game) have quit because it's so easy it's boring. I miss playing with them. They don't bother coming back because the game offers little in challenge. An optional harder overland would likely increase a lottt of player interest that have given up on the stories being engaging combat-wise.

Sylvermynx

@Blackbird_V - yes, I understand that. For the most part, most of you ARE saying "optional". And I should have acknowledged that in my post (as I have in other posts in this topic). My fear is that ZOS won't be able to figure out "optional", and will simply do what they have already sometimes done: make a "one size WILL fit all" change.... which won't really fit.

But still, I should have acknowledged that most (not all) of you are asking for optional harder overland, and for that lack in my post, I apologize.

Amottica

Ravensilver wrote: »

I am still missing the long-term sustainability of the idea here.

So we get the vet upgrade. You go do your quest, you bang on the quest endboss for half an hour, you die, you finally manage to kill him/her/it. You feel accomplished. The quest is finished.

Now what?

You can't do the quest again. You can't repeat the fight. Where is the sustainability here?

The bigger issue is how vague this discussion is.

What one finds challenging another finds impossible yet a third finds to easy. That is the glaring reality that is not being discussed but is likely one major reason Zenimax is hesitant to approach this.

Heck, a person commented that they want more challenging overland but when they replied to me they edited out my question asking if they had cleared vMA. It shows how some are asking for a challenge that is not too challenging.

Kwoung

Blackbird_V wrote: »

Sylvermynx wrote: »

@Blackbird_V - I can tell you why I only quest, craft, and explore: I had enough of hard crap in two other MMOs, chasing gear and raiding with family and friends. That started in 2006 and ended in 2016. I'm 15 years older than when I started in WoW, and ALL I want to do now is putz around questing, crafting, and exploring using a multitude of alts.

For me to be happy, I need to not have to do combat every time I turn around. I don't care if it's a wolf or a giant - I'm not interested in having to kill it. I hate that the only real way to get XP in games is by killing mobs, but it is what it is, and there are no games of this sort without combat.

So a much harder vet-type overland isn't going to work for me. But I'm only one person so really, my opinion doesn't honestly matter. I've played ESO for nearly 3.5 years and have CP ranging from almost 350 to almost 800 (across two accounts, both PC megaservers) - but I still die quite often to more than 3 mobs anywhere. I'm not young, my reflexes are crap compared to 15 years back playing WoW, but I love this game and I don't want to get pushed out by non-optional harder overland. Also, I don't want to "get better". I want to play my putz-along way.

And that's about all I'm going to say. That's my bottom line reasoning, and I'm not really interested in arguing.

We keep saying that this will be optional though. We've said so many times, you DON'T have to do it, at all. You can stay in normal overland as it stands now.

---

Kwoung wrote: »

Blackbird_V wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Sylvermynx wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Sylvermynx wrote: »

Actually, none of us (players) have any idea at all how many other players are on each "side". People need to stop saying anything except about themselves in regard to this.

"I get there’s a lot of people that do like the harder difficulty, but a HUGE portion of our player base just wants to do story, and they don’t want to have to struggle with difficult things." - Rich Lambert

That's not numbers, that's a non-substantive statement from someone who (apparently) didn't really want to get into detail. Regardless, this is NOT an "argument" thread - it's a discussion thread.

That is a direct quote from Rich Lambert, Creative Director, that backs up my view that even an optional veteran overland would not be cost effective for the small amount of players who would even use it.

To me it's a prediction he is making. We've not had any level of veteran overland for over 5 years now, and back then it was a totally different ball game. You do understand that alliance locking was a massive issue for players right? We have been vocal about that. We have had great success since then, I will concede to that, but you cannot say that success is PURELY because of removal of vet overland. It may well have been, sure, but again in today's times it might be totally different. We have players that play for story, but has he personally asked these players? No. He's reading numbers. Numbers don't lie, but they can be misconstrued. They have no idea why these players only quest. Maybe they're not confident/have anxiety in doing dungeons, or cannot find a group for them. Maybe they want a challenge and can't for those reasons, and only can do overland which is easy. Maybe it'll give them confidence to do dungeons and trials, and get better at the game, at surviving etc. and actually enjoy the game for what it can offer, and potentially more.

For ANY data to be made on this topic, I highly suggest an experiment where some zones (be it non-DLC + DLC) have a toggle. Places that are popular like Deshaan, Stonefalls, Auridon, Daggerfall, Vvardenfell.. A few zones to test it, and if any data shows people are opting in for it, extend the experiment. Give it half a year or a year on the experiment then see the data, and gather feedback during and after it. Then we will get hard data on this topic.

There are plenty of zones in this game that are highly underused, one of them would work. This would be a good test, as currently no one uses them, so make it more challenging and see if that brings in the crowds and keeps them there. Grab the data on how long players stay there, return there, or leave and don't return there. This would give decent data from which to make a decision on how long it would delay folks from leaving the game, because lets face it, most wanting this have at least one foot out the door already and are just looking for a reason to stay... judging by what I have read here.

A lot of zones are "dead" because it has nothing to offer. A lot of a reason a zone is alive is convenience: Dolmen to wayshrine placements, for experience farming - alik'r for example; Deshaan offers close crafting stations & guild stores to wayshrine, good looking zone and not hard to navigate, and a public dungeon people farm for mother's sorrow; craglorn offers a PUG lfm/lfg experience, best guild stores in-game, somewhat decent crafting station placements and material farming (nirncrux).

They need to experiment with a few dead zones that offer literally nothing but story, and a few really alive zones like alikr for vet overland exp rates, deshaan for harder farming for sets and decent-ish questline and whatnot. They need data from a variety. It should not be biased.

Using a dead zone, you know why new people are suddenly there, using a popular zone, you don't. Say Vivec or Mourhold, I could drop all my crafting alts there, ok now the zones packed, is anyone really there for the vet overland content, or are they simply there because it is a popular zone where it is easy to do X in and skewing the numbers? Al'kir, same deal, obviously people would go there to just get even better XP returns at the dolmens, which while awesome, doesn't actually support a vet overland argument or prove anyone would want it, it would simply prove what we already know, people migrate to the easiest fastest ways to earn XP, loot, etc...

Blackbird_V

Sylvermynx wrote: »

@Blackbird_V - yes, I understand that. For the most part, most of you ARE saying "optional". And I should have acknowledged that in my post (as I have in other posts in this topic). My fear is that ZOS won't be able to figure out "optional", and will simply do what they have already sometimes done: make a "one size WILL fit all" change.... which won't really fit.

But still, I should have acknowledged that most (not all) of you are asking for optional harder overland, and for that lack in my post, I apologize.

Totally understandable. ZoS will NEVER implement a change like that forced upon everyone. They're not stupid, they know there will be dire consequences and I will HARD oppose forced difficulty changes to overland without option, since this game is not tailored to that anymore.

I was actually supportive of one-tamriel, but that's mainly bringing everyone together instead of major major separation of a playerbase that was already low (back then it was nowhere near in popularity as it is now). Separating playerbase with a vet overland that's not separated in 3 as it was before would not be the end of the world imo. A lot of zones will be dead in overland, but that's the zone's design's fault. Quests however will be interesting.

---

I will say I am biased towards better rewards in veteran overland, but minor things as we see in dungeons (sorta): Chests in normal are simple - master. In veteran it should be same as dungeons: Intermediate - Master. A quest giving a satchel with some rewards like crafting materials (not op tho. NO gold materials at all).

If people say no to *slightly* better rewards in veteran then that is fine. But lets be real: vet players farming vet overland will not crash markets. And if it does, lets say, crash temper markets - then good. 16k PC EU dreugh wax & 200k Chromium plating is disgusting, but vet overland should not touch it massively at all.

Like an overland vet chest instead of giving palladium has a chance to give a master leatherworkers satchel: gives 5-7unrefined materials from silks to leather. That would not be awful. They could make it impossible to force lock chests so you'd have to spend the time unlocking it. Small, but it will stop a massive farming of that.
Normal overland rewards and drops need buffs too. Quest Gold is really bad, and experience could do with tweaks. Vet overland should give more as an incentive, and to give a reward for time.

Sylvermynx

Blackbird_V wrote: »

Sylvermynx wrote: »

@Blackbird_V - yes, I understand that. For the most part, most of you ARE saying "optional". And I should have acknowledged that in my post (as I have in other posts in this topic). My fear is that ZOS won't be able to figure out "optional", and will simply do what they have already sometimes done: make a "one size WILL fit all" change.... which won't really fit.

But still, I should have acknowledged that most (not all) of you are asking for optional harder overland, and for that lack in my post, I apologize.

Totally understandable. ZoS will NEVER implement a change like that forced upon everyone. They're not stupid, they know there will be dire consequences and I will HARD oppose forced difficulty changes to overland without option, since this game is not tailored to that anymore.

I was actually supportive of one-tamriel, but that's mainly bringing everyone together instead of major major separation of a playerbase that was already low (back then it was nowhere near in popularity as it is now). Separating playerbase with a vet overland that's not separated in 3 as it was before would not be the end of the world imo. A lot of zones will be dead in overland, but that's the zone's design's fault. Quests however will be interesting.

I will say I am biased towards better rewards in veteran overland, but minor things as we see in dungeons (sorta): Chests in normal are simple - master. In veteran it should be same as dungeons: Intermediate - Master. A quest giving a satchel with some rewards like crafting materials (not op tho. NO gold materials at all).

If people say no to *slightly* better rewards in veteran then that is fine. But lets be real: vet players farming vet overland will not crash markets. And if it does, lets say, crash temper markets - then good. 16k PC EU dreugh wax & 200k Chromium plating is disgusting, but vet overland should not touch it massively at all.

Like an overland vet chest instead of giving palladium has a chance to give a master leatherworkers satchel: gives 5-7unrefined materials from silks to leather. That would not be awful. They could make it impossible to force lock chests so you'd have to spend the time unlocking it. Small, but it will stop a massive farming of that.

---

Normal overland rewards and drops need buffs too. Quest Gold is really bad, and experience could do with tweaks. Vet overland should give more as an incentive, and to give a reward for time.

Honestly, I don't really have an issue with rewards - I'm not doing the content that provides better rewards now, as I'm just not capable of that sort of effort and "git gud" at my age. So that's absolutely not an issue for me, though it obviously is for others. In fact, I'm not fussed about gear and rewards at all. My 50s are wearing crafted purples, not even gold except on weapons. It's - just not that important to me, because it's not necessary for what I find fun....

You know what I keep gold tempers for? Legendary Master Writs, so I can afford attunable stations for places I just do NOT want to go when I get writs (Clever Alchemist, I'm looking at you - not to mention the Cyrodiil stations)!

Toxic_Hemlock

I also believe be that the better content you do the better gear you acquire and as a result the easier overland becomes to you. This could have merit IMO as I keep hearing the phase to "one shot" the mobs, but honestly even my best built characters still take at least a couple shots to kill most things overland.

I, for example, only have a few monster sets as I go into the PvP zone use the golden vender there, now that I know he is there, when I see a good set I want. As of right now I only have maybe 5 helm types as I avoid most of the dungeons. Other than that I only use overland and crafted sets. Many sets such as those available only from trails and arenas I will never own, thus I am less prepared.

Seems to me to be I am caught in a loop, but I am fine with it. If I didn't do, or wasn't able to do, some content then I don't deserve the shiny new gear. The only problem I can see is that those that have this gear want there to be as much a challenge everywhere as there is in that content, and that is brutally unfair to those that just want to quests peacefully without the challenge.

I know this argument will not sway most wanting vet content world wide (non-optional), but I only hope that it may reach a few that are willing to see the other side of the story.

SimonThesis

Toxic_Hemlock wrote: »

The only problem I can see is that those that have this gear want there to be as much a challenge everywhere as there is in that content, and that is brutally unfair to those that just want to quests peacefully without the challenge.

We're not asking for overland to be as challenging as vet dungeons far from it. We just want to stop one-shotting everything we come across without having to take everything off and undo all of our CP.

Smarter scaling would make sense, maybe to the difficulty of your gear/pve achievements. Does that toon have perfected arena weapons on, vet trial trifectas and vMA achievements maybe the mobs will have more health and abilities for that toon. On the flip side if that toons never completed a single vet dungeon or even done nMA maybe the mobs will have less health.

SilverBride

Seminolegirl1992 wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

The only time I ever heard overland difficulty being discussed in game was before One Tamriel. Players were complaining and leaving because it was too much of a struggle to be fun. That is the reason I left, too.

Since I returned a couple of years ago I have not heard a single player complain that overland is too easy. Not in zone chat, not in guild chat, not in groups, not among my friends... not one single player ever, and I play every day.

Overland difficulty isn't a game issue at all... it's a forum issue.

That's probably because you're not around the folks that find it too easy. The folks you hang around are probably more tailored to the way you like to play. Soo many of my friends (real life friends and in game) have quit because it's so easy it's boring. I miss playing with them. They don't bother coming back because the game offers little in challenge. An optional harder overland would likely increase a lottt of player interest that have given up on the stories being engaging combat-wise.

This is an inaccurate assumption about how I play and who I associate with in game.

First of all, how would I know who I'm not compatible with unless I had actually met players who made it clear they thought overland was too easy and didn't play the way I do?

Second, how in years of playing and being in guilds and grouping with random (not hand picked) players for World Bosses and Harrowstorms and Dragons and daily quests and chatting in zone and an occasional pug dungeon, have I never even once heard anyone complain that overland was too easy?

If there were really a lot of players who feel that way I should have at least run into one now and then. The fact that I haven't tells me they are a very small minority.

SimonThesis

SilverBride wrote: »

Seminolegirl1992 wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

The only time I ever heard overland difficulty being discussed in game was before One Tamriel. Players were complaining and leaving because it was too much of a struggle to be fun. That is the reason I left, too.

Since I returned a couple of years ago I have not heard a single player complain that overland is too easy. Not in zone chat, not in guild chat, not in groups, not among my friends... not one single player ever, and I play every day.

Overland difficulty isn't a game issue at all... it's a forum issue.

That's probably because you're not around the folks that find it too easy. The folks you hang around are probably more tailored to the way you like to play. Soo many of my friends (real life friends and in game) have quit because it's so easy it's boring. I miss playing with them. They don't bother coming back because the game offers little in challenge. An optional harder overland would likely increase a lottt of player interest that have given up on the stories being engaging combat-wise.

This is an inaccurate assumption about how I play and who I associate with in game.

First of all, how would I know who I not compatible with unless I had actually met players who made it clear they thought overland was too easy and didn't play the way I do?

Second, how in years of playing and being in guilds and grouping with random (not hand picked) players for World Bosses and Harrowstorms and Dragons and daily quests and chatting in zone and an occasional pug dungeon, have I never even once heard anyone complain that overland was too easy?

If there were really a lot of players who feel that way I should have at least run into one now and then. The fact that I haven't tells me they are a very small minority.

People in my Pve guilds complain about it constantly. Not everyone has the same experiences. There are a lot of players in this game just because you haven't run into them doesn't mean they are a minority and their voices shouldn't be heard.

Toxic_Hemlock

SimonThesis wrote: »

Toxic_Hemlock wrote: »

The only problem I can see is that those that have this gear want there to be as much a challenge everywhere as there is in that content, and that is brutally unfair to those that just want to quests peacefully without the challenge.

We're not asking for overland to be as challenging as vet dungeons far from it. We just want to stop one-shotting everything we come across without having to take everything off and undo all of our CP. Smarter scaling I think would make sense, maybe to the difficulty of your gear/pve achievements. Does that toon have perfected arena weapons on, vet trial trifectas and vMA achievements maybe the mobs will have more health for that toon.

This I could get behind. If all I have is crafting, overland achievements it might just mean that those areas of the game are all I care about. Once I have the achievement for vet areas then maybe I want to challenge myself. From a totally personal POV as I never plan on doing any of that content then it won't matter to me if those that have those achievements are having a harder time. They did after all want the challenge. I still think it should be optional as we all get older eventually and constant challenges are fun once, but grow weary sooner than you would think. Thanks for looking at it this way.

Edit: clarity

alberichtano

Wait, still with the "overland is too easy"? They just put in wandering group-bosses in the Deadlands. They should be a challange?

The idea to make random NPC mobs harder is rather unappealing to most people. When I quest, or harvest, or whatever, I usually want to get from point A to point B, preferrably without having to fight mobs that take minutes to take out. If I do want a challange, I do vet dungeons or raids. But maybe that is just me.

Kwoung

Toxic_Hemlock wrote: »

I also believe be that the better content you do the better gear you acquire and as a result the easier overland becomes to you. This could have merit IMO as I keep hearing the phase to "one shot" the mobs, but honestly even my best built characters still take at least a couple shots to kill most things overland.

I, for example, only have a few monster sets as I go into the PvP zone use the golden vender there, now that I know he is there, when I see a good set I want. As of right now I only have maybe 5 helm types as I avoid most of the dungeons. Other than that I only use overland and crafted sets. Many sets such as those available only from trails and arenas I will never own, thus I am less prepared.

Seems to me to be I am caught in a loop, but I am fine with it. If I didn't do, or wasn't able to do, some content then I don't deserve the shiny new gear. The only problem I can see is that those that have this gear want there to be as much a challenge everywhere as there is in that content, and that is brutally unfair to those that just want to quests peacefully without the challenge.

I know this argument will not sway most wanting vet content world wide (non-optional), but I only hope that it may reach a few that are willing to see the other side of the story.

Off topic, but hit me up in game if you want to give the harder content a try with no pressure and I will add you to our guild. We do training trials, vet training trials, monster helm hunts, some PVP to get folks their 50 transmutes and a lot of different stuff to help ease the transition to the harder content. I know I can be annoying here, but my officers and members are freaking amazing, a really nice group of folks, super patient and everyone helps each other... or we try to best we can! We also keep a little trader in the Vivec refuge to help with selling any stuff you want to as well.

Ok, back to our normal conversation....

SimonThesis wrote: »

Toxic_Hemlock wrote: »

The only problem I can see is that those that have this gear want there to be as much a challenge everywhere as there is in that content, and that is brutally unfair to those that just want to quests peacefully without the challenge.

We're not asking for overland to be as challenging as vet dungeons far from it. We just want to stop one-shotting everything we come across without having to take everything off and undo all of our CP.

Smarter scaling would make sense, maybe to the difficulty of your gear/pve achievements. Does that toon have perfected arena weapons on, vet trial trifectas and vMA achievements maybe the mobs will have more health and abilities for that toon. On the flip side if that toons never completed a single vet dungeon or even done nMA maybe the mobs will have less health.

A couple points, first being that is your take on the difficulty. Many posts here ask for mechanics and such other things, which does actually mean vet dungeon level mobs or close to it. As for dynamic scaling, kind of impossible to do, how can that be done, mob scales to the first person who hits it? I can see a whole lot of griefing coming from that in both directions. Run by a mob, tag it and watch it lay waste to all the newbies around.