Overland Content Feedback Thread

Vulkunne

Chilly-McFreeze wrote: »

Sylvermynx wrote: »

Ditronus wrote: »

I have to add my vote here with many others: the overland content *is* the best aspect to this game, yet it is severely diminished by the lack of challenge. Without any bit of challenge or difficulty, there's no reason to level up your CP, get better gear, create new builds, etc. While I think the combat is the worst aspect of the game, as rotations are extremely static and rely just on applying buffs, stacking dots, and spamming one move, it feels lackluster to never have to use any ability beyond one or two in a given fight. While having a couple sets active, I often 1-2 shot groups of mobs. There's so much story content that builds up into a dire climax, that always ends up being a trivial 5-second or less "boss" fight.

The game is no fun on handicap mode as it trivializes other aspects and mechanics of why we play a RPG: getting progressively stronger. Yes, there are vet dungeons and trials (I wish there was a LFR feature for trials so we could experience them), but the majority of the content in the game, and increasingly so, comes in the form of overland content. Make it more enjoyable and deadly.

As long as "more enjoyable and deadly" is optional.

Does really anyone wanted to force vet overland on everyone? Everything I read was a plea for giving options.

Correct.

Vulkunne

tonyblack wrote: »

AvalonRanger wrote: »

tonyblack wrote: »

AvalonRanger wrote: »

I know this schematics is too much exaggerated. But. just I wanted to tell my feeling of this game instantly.
Dear ZoS. Please keep hold on green zone. Do not underestimate importance of "A" line.

PS. I love design and animation of new huge caterpillar creature of dead-land.
I want statue of that thing.

Funny, but if I have to make a connection between eso and this picture than the difficulty would be way below average. As a brand new player in any game on normal difficulty i tend to die occasionally to big boss, overwhelming wave of mobs or confusing mechanics. In eso none of those things pose a challenge in content balanced for solo player: bosses deal low damage and have extremely low hp, mobs do as much damage as your health recovery restore and you encounter 3 of them at best, all mechanics very obvious if not trivial and forgiving to every mistake. I haven’t die or failed anything quest related (so i have to google a solution for example) back when i was a new player and it’s much worse now. Nothing was learned, memorized or made me exited about my experience. The whole premise of the complaints is that a considerable number of players unsatisfied with such balancing and find it way too easy. If you happy to one-shot those poor 30k hp mobs with 400 dps or 100k hp bosses with 1500 dps, it’s fine but not everyone feels the same.

-->> difficulty would be way below average

Sorry, maybe my explanation was lack of precise. That's my fault.
Exactly say...

Too much easy= It's too much predictable game, so it's boring. Always it's same.

Too much hard= Most of people can't understand game concept or something game gimmick.

-->> <for example>
When I've been farming at the G-dungeon the "Cradle of the Shadow" for the "Sicith of the Gaze".
Our two DPS had fallen instantly by the sudden death spike from ground. I checked Youtube guide
before play it. So, I could avoid it. But it's a nonsense game design at all.

ZoS is amateur game designer. I have huge confidence saying like that.

Each time I met those type of game design or unreasonable balance. I lost passion to play this game.

Huh? I’ve been running this dungeon multiple times as random normal being dps with taunt and I haven’t encountered anything like that. The only dangerous mechanic on normal is interrupt on dark elf assassin boss and probably killing his shades in reasonable amount of time. Other than that it is simply combat awareness and don’t stay in red. The final boss hp is so low on normal so I never saw her doing “don’t move a muscle” move but I assume it’s forgiving on normal and not one shot as on vet. And if it was trash mobs I don’t remember anything dangerous either. On vet ogrim mob put huge dot, but only if you failed dps check and stood in red but on normal it’s little damage. On vet, yes, all bosses barring spider one become far more dangerous you need carefully position yourself as dd, same as for all other vet dlc dungeons, but that is the point of veteran mode it isn’t supposed to be a cakewalk and fun part is to try to figure out optimal strategy and combat mechanics of each boss and there are always guides if you need them.
Personally, I think devs done a good job designing dungeons mechanics and they fairly balanced between normal and veteran. Something i wish was relevant for at least portion of the questing. And the best part is if you pressured to watch for guides or videos for group content to not drag others behind, in solo you can do it at your own pace and figure out everything yourself.
Unfortunately, I can point out same loss of passion for overland content for how trivial and boring it is combat wise. If it weren’t for dungeons and trials I wouldn’t have a reason to log in at all.

Also Correct

spartaxoxo

Vulkunne wrote: »

Chilly-McFreeze wrote: »

Sylvermynx wrote: »

Ditronus wrote: »

I have to add my vote here with many others: the overland content *is* the best aspect to this game, yet it is severely diminished by the lack of challenge. Without any bit of challenge or difficulty, there's no reason to level up your CP, get better gear, create new builds, etc. While I think the combat is the worst aspect of the game, as rotations are extremely static and rely just on applying buffs, stacking dots, and spamming one move, it feels lackluster to never have to use any ability beyond one or two in a given fight. While having a couple sets active, I often 1-2 shot groups of mobs. There's so much story content that builds up into a dire climax, that always ends up being a trivial 5-second or less "boss" fight.

The game is no fun on handicap mode as it trivializes other aspects and mechanics of why we play a RPG: getting progressively stronger. Yes, there are vet dungeons and trials (I wish there was a LFR feature for trials so we could experience them), but the majority of the content in the game, and increasingly so, comes in the form of overland content. Make it more enjoyable and deadly.

As long as "more enjoyable and deadly" is optional.

Does really anyone wanted to force vet overland on everyone? Everything I read was a plea for giving options.

Correct.

It is incorrect. You can see an example on page 44, as stated earlier, there are people who would prefer a forced vet overland.

Ermiq wrote: »

PS: actually, none of the "optional" solutions proposed here would work for me personally. I strongly believe that it has to be the overall difficulty increase for everyone.

This person wanted this because they felt it would increase the overall skill of the playerbase. Said post also received 4 likes, which is a relatively big amount of likes 49 pages in. Currently, the most liked stuff for the past several pages are generally 4-5 likes.

While I do not agree with that opinion, it does indicate there's a portion of the people who are still reading this thread that want it to be forced.

mickeyx

Harvokaan wrote: »

mickeyx wrote: »

Harvokaan wrote: »

mickeyx wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

And Harrowstorms illustrate the lack of value for most doing veteran overland content. I rarely see anyone doing these except during an event. I jumped in with 2 others the other day and spent 20-30 minutes trying to work it, but the pillars kept getting back to full health almost immediately, meaning we had absolutely NO PROGRESS after all that effort. This is "fun"?

At least less powerful players can do something to Dolmans. They can do nothing here because the towers are constantly healed with the spirits while masses of mobs spawn to kill you.

I am sure we will get some to jump on here that say "I solo those!" and I am sure they do. But how much of their time do they spend doing that? They most likely have gotten bored and moved on.

That is exactly what would happen to veteran overland. Lots of time making things very hard that the target audience would not stick with.

I couldn't agree more.

We already had veteran overland zones an no one played them. That and the split playerbase are two of the biggest reasons why One Tamriel was introduced. If anything ESO has gotten more casual over time and is doing better now than it ever has.

I believe it would be a huge step backward to split the playerbase again, and would cause a lot of casual players to leave, especially if a veteran overland offered better rewards.

this has been mentioned many times before. Harrowstorm and Craglorn. Ignored by players. Other than Skyreach which is a grinding spot and people charge you gold to level you there. The rest of the Craglorn is deserted. That's why i can't take 'make overland hard pls' crowd seriously. We already know how hard overland is being ignored by the majority of the player base.

Many times before ppl also described why Craglorn was a failure and why proposed vet overland is different (main Craglorn problem was that i t forced ppl to group to do quests, allowing ppl to group for quests and forcing it are two different things).
On PC EU Craglorn is one of the most populated zones from base game (pre Orsinium) if you not counting major trade hubs.
It isn't hard to find comments about craglorn, it design flaws and differences in what is proposed in this very thread.

You mean only vet players with 2k cp and gold armor and weapons would solo new vet zones while everyone else will be 'forced' to group for it? i dont see any difference then because vet players are still soloing Craglorn. The problem is for players who are causals. They have no other option but to be 'forced' to group. And yet no one wants to group with them. I see many requests for group content by new players being ignored in Craglorn on daily basis.

1. No, I don't mean 2k cp players with best gear. You can solo craglorn stuff with purple gear and 300 cp (even lower) if you know what you are doing.
2. If only our propositions for vet content would include something like "optional" choice so players can decide if they want to do harder content solo/with group or go to easier mode where you can kill everything just by looking at it... My god, why nobody in this entire thread thought about it... /s
3. I see a lot of ppl grouping up for craglorn. Not so much for dragons or harrowstorms but mainly because ppl did a ton of them during release/events and it is repetable content that gets boring quickly (do 30 harrowstorms at one day and you will quickly learn what i mean by that) + rewards from this activities are mediocre at best. Why comparing repetable activity that is already in the game for a long time to quests where this two activities are completely different?
4. How exactly optional vet overland hurt csuals when they can just stay at normal? Why more options for ppl who are not happy with current overland is a bad thing?
5. You basically prove my point of craglorn being bad design and you highlighted that optional vet overland is something much better because it removes your main concerns about craglorn so thanks i guess?

'If you know what you are doing'

Yes many new players dont know that and thats why they want to group in Craglorn and yet no one wants to do group content. Listen i am in Craglorn every single day looking for trial groups. Prime time. Every single day. Dont lie to me yeah? no new players are able to get help for world bosses and group quests in Craglorn. its only vet players with their 1K+ cp alts running around solo. I see players new to zone asking for help and its crickets except for lf trials announcement in zone chat. I ran couple of new players few days ago through sky reach. And they told me how frustrating it is to complete Craglorn as solo player with low CP

Yes i and pretty much everyone knows you are 'asking for optional vet content'. If it was a viable and good use of resources you would have gotten in already. Moreover, my comment was to show the general attitude of players in ESO when it comes to group content in overland zones. People love to solo in this game and that's what the majority of the player base wants. Option or forced group content wont make a difference.

Harvokaan

mickeyx wrote: »

Harvokaan wrote: »

mickeyx wrote: »

Harvokaan wrote: »

mickeyx wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

And Harrowstorms illustrate the lack of value for most doing veteran overland content. I rarely see anyone doing these except during an event. I jumped in with 2 others the other day and spent 20-30 minutes trying to work it, but the pillars kept getting back to full health almost immediately, meaning we had absolutely NO PROGRESS after all that effort. This is "fun"?

At least less powerful players can do something to Dolmans. They can do nothing here because the towers are constantly healed with the spirits while masses of mobs spawn to kill you.

I am sure we will get some to jump on here that say "I solo those!" and I am sure they do. But how much of their time do they spend doing that? They most likely have gotten bored and moved on.

That is exactly what would happen to veteran overland. Lots of time making things very hard that the target audience would not stick with.

I couldn't agree more.

We already had veteran overland zones an no one played them. That and the split playerbase are two of the biggest reasons why One Tamriel was introduced. If anything ESO has gotten more casual over time and is doing better now than it ever has.

I believe it would be a huge step backward to split the playerbase again, and would cause a lot of casual players to leave, especially if a veteran overland offered better rewards.

this has been mentioned many times before. Harrowstorm and Craglorn. Ignored by players. Other than Skyreach which is a grinding spot and people charge you gold to level you there. The rest of the Craglorn is deserted. That's why i can't take 'make overland hard pls' crowd seriously. We already know how hard overland is being ignored by the majority of the player base.

Many times before ppl also described why Craglorn was a failure and why proposed vet overland is different (main Craglorn problem was that i t forced ppl to group to do quests, allowing ppl to group for quests and forcing it are two different things).
On PC EU Craglorn is one of the most populated zones from base game (pre Orsinium) if you not counting major trade hubs.
It isn't hard to find comments about craglorn, it design flaws and differences in what is proposed in this very thread.

You mean only vet players with 2k cp and gold armor and weapons would solo new vet zones while everyone else will be 'forced' to group for it? i dont see any difference then because vet players are still soloing Craglorn. The problem is for players who are causals. They have no other option but to be 'forced' to group. And yet no one wants to group with them. I see many requests for group content by new players being ignored in Craglorn on daily basis.

1. No, I don't mean 2k cp players with best gear. You can solo craglorn stuff with purple gear and 300 cp (even lower) if you know what you are doing.
2. If only our propositions for vet content would include something like "optional" choice so players can decide if they want to do harder content solo/with group or go to easier mode where you can kill everything just by looking at it... My god, why nobody in this entire thread thought about it... /s
3. I see a lot of ppl grouping up for craglorn. Not so much for dragons or harrowstorms but mainly because ppl did a ton of them during release/events and it is repetable content that gets boring quickly (do 30 harrowstorms at one day and you will quickly learn what i mean by that) + rewards from this activities are mediocre at best. Why comparing repetable activity that is already in the game for a long time to quests where this two activities are completely different?
4. How exactly optional vet overland hurt csuals when they can just stay at normal? Why more options for ppl who are not happy with current overland is a bad thing?
5. You basically prove my point of craglorn being bad design and you highlighted that optional vet overland is something much better because it removes your main concerns about craglorn so thanks i guess?

'If you know what you are doing'

Yes many new players dont know that and thats why they want to group in Craglorn and yet no one wants to do group content. Listen i am in Craglorn every single day looking for trial groups. Prime time. Every single day. Dont lie to me yeah? no new players are able to get help for world bosses and group quests in Craglorn. its only vet players with their 1K+ cp alts running around solo. I see players new to zone asking for help and its crickets except for lf trials announcement in zone chat. I ran couple of new players few days ago through sky reach. And they told me how frustrating it is to complete Craglorn as solo player with low CP

Yes i and pretty much everyone knows you are 'asking for optional vet content'. If it was a viable and good use of resources you would have gotten in already. Moreover, my comment was to show the general attitude of players in ESO when it comes to group content in overland zones. People love to solo in this game and that's what the majority of the player base wants. Option or forced group content wont make a difference.

I have different craglorn experience, I see ppl grouping for some of craglorn activities (not every day but often enough to see it is not dead). Mind that a lot of leads can be earned in craglorn so content is still important.
- They introduced email split to system/player after 6 years.
- They introduce multicraft 4-5 years after launch
- Better rng for item drops after 7 years.
- Ability bar timers in blackwood (something that was requested by consoles since begining)
- outfit system in dragon bones, something that also was request for a very long time
And much more. Why I'm mentioning this? Because your [snip] argument that it would be in the game already if it was viable. They have their schedule. They plan which changes should go into the game. This thread is for devs to finally acknowledge that vet overland is something that should be put into that schedule so we could finally one day not be treated as second class citizens here (vet players).
[snip] in almost 50 pages here ppl are asking for vet overland that would be harder so more experienced players could enjoy the overland content. Almost nobody here is talking about group content, forced or not. We want to solo the quests (majority of us) with difficulty that is not trivial. Or invite friends to quest together without feeling that it is meaningless to group (because why to do so if i can two shot everything?).
Vet overland != forced group content
vet overland == harder, optional content that can be done solo by more experienced players. Of course if you strugle in vet overland, switch to normal or go with friends, noone is forcing you to choose certain way
Edit for typos

[edited for rude/insulting comments]

Vulkunne

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Vulkunne wrote: »

Chilly-McFreeze wrote: »

Sylvermynx wrote: »

Ditronus wrote: »

I have to add my vote here with many others: the overland content *is* the best aspect to this game, yet it is severely diminished by the lack of challenge. Without any bit of challenge or difficulty, there's no reason to level up your CP, get better gear, create new builds, etc. While I think the combat is the worst aspect of the game, as rotations are extremely static and rely just on applying buffs, stacking dots, and spamming one move, it feels lackluster to never have to use any ability beyond one or two in a given fight. While having a couple sets active, I often 1-2 shot groups of mobs. There's so much story content that builds up into a dire climax, that always ends up being a trivial 5-second or less "boss" fight.

The game is no fun on handicap mode as it trivializes other aspects and mechanics of why we play a RPG: getting progressively stronger. Yes, there are vet dungeons and trials (I wish there was a LFR feature for trials so we could experience them), but the majority of the content in the game, and increasingly so, comes in the form of overland content. Make it more enjoyable and deadly.

As long as "more enjoyable and deadly" is optional.

Does really anyone wanted to force vet overland on everyone? Everything I read was a plea for giving options.

Correct.

It is incorrect. You can see an example on page 44, as stated earlier, there are people who would prefer a forced vet overland.

Ermiq wrote: »

PS: actually, none of the "optional" solutions proposed here would work for me personally. I strongly believe that it has to be the overall difficulty increase for everyone.

This person wanted this because they felt it would increase the overall skill of the playerbase. Said post also received 4 likes, which is a relatively big amount of likes 49 pages in. Currently, the most liked stuff for the past several pages are generally 4-5 likes.

While I do not agree with that opinion, it does indicate there's a portion of the people who are still reading this thread that want it to be forced.

I certainly can not and would never try to speak for everyone but all of us are not trying to force this. That is what matters the most. There will always be exceptions. We're just asking for more options.

Vulkunne

mickeyx wrote: »

Harvokaan wrote: »

mickeyx wrote: »

Harvokaan wrote: »

mickeyx wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

And Harrowstorms illustrate the lack of value for most doing veteran overland content. I rarely see anyone doing these except during an event. I jumped in with 2 others the other day and spent 20-30 minutes trying to work it, but the pillars kept getting back to full health almost immediately, meaning we had absolutely NO PROGRESS after all that effort. This is "fun"?

At least less powerful players can do something to Dolmans. They can do nothing here because the towers are constantly healed with the spirits while masses of mobs spawn to kill you.

I am sure we will get some to jump on here that say "I solo those!" and I am sure they do. But how much of their time do they spend doing that? They most likely have gotten bored and moved on.

That is exactly what would happen to veteran overland. Lots of time making things very hard that the target audience would not stick with.

I couldn't agree more.

We already had veteran overland zones an no one played them. That and the split playerbase are two of the biggest reasons why One Tamriel was introduced. If anything ESO has gotten more casual over time and is doing better now than it ever has.

I believe it would be a huge step backward to split the playerbase again, and would cause a lot of casual players to leave, especially if a veteran overland offered better rewards.

this has been mentioned many times before. Harrowstorm and Craglorn. Ignored by players. Other than Skyreach which is a grinding spot and people charge you gold to level you there. The rest of the Craglorn is deserted. That's why i can't take 'make overland hard pls' crowd seriously. We already know how hard overland is being ignored by the majority of the player base.

Many times before ppl also described why Craglorn was a failure and why proposed vet overland is different (main Craglorn problem was that i t forced ppl to group to do quests, allowing ppl to group for quests and forcing it are two different things).
On PC EU Craglorn is one of the most populated zones from base game (pre Orsinium) if you not counting major trade hubs.
It isn't hard to find comments about craglorn, it design flaws and differences in what is proposed in this very thread.

You mean only vet players with 2k cp and gold armor and weapons would solo new vet zones while everyone else will be 'forced' to group for it? i dont see any difference then because vet players are still soloing Craglorn. The problem is for players who are causals. They have no other option but to be 'forced' to group. And yet no one wants to group with them. I see many requests for group content by new players being ignored in Craglorn on daily basis.

1. No, I don't mean 2k cp players with best gear. You can solo craglorn stuff with purple gear and 300 cp (even lower) if you know what you are doing.
2. If only our propositions for vet content would include something like "optional" choice so players can decide if they want to do harder content solo/with group or go to easier mode where you can kill everything just by looking at it... My god, why nobody in this entire thread thought about it... /s
3. I see a lot of ppl grouping up for craglorn. Not so much for dragons or harrowstorms but mainly because ppl did a ton of them during release/events and it is repetable content that gets boring quickly (do 30 harrowstorms at one day and you will quickly learn what i mean by that) + rewards from this activities are mediocre at best. Why comparing repetable activity that is already in the game for a long time to quests where this two activities are completely different?
4. How exactly optional vet overland hurt csuals when they can just stay at normal? Why more options for ppl who are not happy with current overland is a bad thing?
5. You basically prove my point of craglorn being bad design and you highlighted that optional vet overland is something much better because it removes your main concerns about craglorn so thanks i guess?

'If you know what you are doing'

Yes many new players dont know that and thats why they want to group in Craglorn and yet no one wants to do group content. Listen i am in Craglorn every single day looking for trial groups. Prime time. Every single day. Dont lie to me yeah? no new players are able to get help for world bosses and group quests in Craglorn. its only vet players with their 1K+ cp alts running around solo. I see players new to zone asking for help and its crickets except for lf trials announcement in zone chat. I ran couple of new players few days ago through sky reach. And they told me how frustrating it is to complete Craglorn as solo player with low CP

Yes i and pretty much everyone knows you are 'asking for optional vet content'. If it was a viable and good use of resources you would have gotten in already. Moreover, my comment was to show the general attitude of players in ESO when it comes to group content in overland zones. People love to solo in this game and that's what the majority of the player base wants. Option or forced group content wont make a difference.

Over my time in ESO I've seen perhaps the most groups being run in places like Alik'r, Auridon and Craglorn. So I'm not sure what has changed.

I have seen and been a part of groups running Overland content frequently in Craglorn. This could be running between those Temples or running between Delves to get Skyshards. It's the tediousness of there being so many different types of Delves to get all the Skyshards that is exhausting, not the content. However with so much to do, it causes one to not pay as much attention to the individual delves themselves which is unfortunate. Also, if this is an MMO, which groups are driving force with any MMO, then the game simply must be designed with groups in mind and that means the difficulty MUST be there to challenge the group. As far as Trials go, I have no control over that hah.

In fairness though, patience quickly wears thin for someone who comes unprepared and the more I read thru the forums the thinner it seems to get these days because alot of ppl want to be carried. There are distinctions that need to be made here. Some want to run group content, some need to, others will abuse it and some will go solo but groups are there regardless as a choice.

I'm sure everyone on this thread knows this already but it really goes without saying, sometimes in order to find a group you have to start one. Same goes for Trials too, which is why by and large I only run with people I know however this has never been a barrier to inviting people I don't know. But you have to start from somewhere and it's easier to invite people waiting for a group if I have a group with a couple people I know already because I know they're at least as strong as me so we can make up for differences in strength or lack of rather.

Chilly-McFreeze

This thread moves too fast for me to answer everyone individually as I can only jump in here from time to time. So I rehash and sum up the propositions I have seen and add what I think are some pros and cons. Please correct me if I am wrong and add what I have overlooked.

1) STRICT DENIAL OF VET OPTIONS

Pros:

• not a single bit of investment needed
• doesn't split up player base (see cons)

Cons:

• quest content makes up an hughe amount of overall content, with no difficulty options it turns away more experienced players as they see unengaging bosses/ content as anti-climatic and not fun
• player base is already split up because of several instances of each zone depending on server load and quest advancement

2) FORCED VET OVERLAND CONTENT ON EVERYONE

Pros:

• enganging content for experienced players
• makes sure players develope skills as they progress (depending how steep the difficulty curve between zones is or if there is any at all)
• sense of archievement when completing content
• prevents ghost towns after initial hype because there is no other option (won't split up player base)

Cons:

• could turn away players who just want to follow the story or that can't live up to the requirements
• with difficulty curves (between zones) it would go against the idea of One Tamriel
• makes grinding more of a slog
• binds developement resources but doesn't please everybody

3) DEBUFFING OPTION BUT ONLY ONE INSTANCE

Pros:

• easy way out as it binds little dev ressources (see cons)
• "makes gameplay wise no difference" in comparison to running across a more developed player
• doesn't split up player base (see cons)

Cons:

• still doesn't please the inital plea for vet overland content as bosses potentially still can be face rolled
• still binds dev ressources, yet doesn't provide awaited outcome for vet-demanders (amount varies depending on how it's implemented: see #141o/ page 47 by @Harvokaan )
• player base is already split up because of several instances of each zone depending on server load and quest advancement

4) SEPARATE VET INTANCE

Pros:

• pleases long-time demand of experienced players for engaging content
• option to change difficulty on the fly is already in the game (see dungeons, esp. hard mode optional)
• player base is already split up because of several instances of each zone depending on server load and quest advancement

Cons:

• binds dev ressources (amount varies depending on how it's implemented: see post #1410 /page 47 by Harvokaan )
• could become a ghost town after initial hype
• splits up player base (see pros)

CONCLUSION

The current situation doesn't make everyone happy. Reoccurring complaints about overland difficulty make that rather clear. The idea is to please more people.

Option 1 cements statues quo, so a large part would remain unsatisfied.
Option 2 only shifts the appeal from one group to another, it wouldn't lead to overall more happy customers yet binds dev time.
Therefore I think we could rule out Option 2 (forced vet content).

Option 3 and 4 gives some kind of difficulty sliders for an unknown amount of investment. Varying on that amount one would be favorable over the other.
We don't know how for sure how time consuming this would be. If it's like Harvokaan wrote, it shouldn't amount to too much of an effort. Question is, if even that investment would be worth it?
See the discussions about texture updates for original zones - it consumes time/money yet the generated income wouldn't outweigh this. But can more engaging overland content lead to happier (-> paying) customers? Or will ZOS continue to rely on new op items as single source of attraction?

On the other hand, implementing a new debuff is an effort as well. So if ZOS is going to invest anything at all, wouldn't it be a waste if the outcome is below expectations? Keep in mind that overland mobs don't have to be perfect. Dungeon mobs aren't either and the biggest culprits in this whole vet-debate are the quest bosses that drop like flies.
Sooo when they're gonna do it, they could as well make it right, right?

Since I can't gauge the investment it would take for either I cannot rule out any of those. If the required effort for separate instances is just a bit more than crunching a few numbers I'd really, really opt for this. It's literally what people are asking for. BUT if the only choice would be "debuff or nothing", then I'd vote for the debuff.

A FEW THOUGHTS ON COMMON ARGUMENTS

Seperate instances split up the player base OR vet instances will become ghost towns:
This argument doesn't hold water as we currently already have multiple instances of zones in this game. Be it due to too much player in the same zone (mind the hovering health bars of team mates) or for because some quest stages.
Even if both concerns would come true they'd exclude one another and are self-solving. If vet instances become empty after being completed the players would have to go somewhere to farm. And that would be the normal instance.

On already instanced boss fights:
Those are few and far between. Most of which I remember are the final bosses the quartly DLCs or yearly chapters. It's nice but it leaves much to be desired. Those bosses already put a good fight (but of course could be harder for some). Side-bosses aren't instanced, yet they carry the stories.

Why can't you just enjoy the story?:
From a my PoV a good story thrives on tension, a sense of urgency/ danger (among others) + a difficulty to overcome that results in the feeling of having archieved something by succeding. Blowing over side/ quest/ plot bosses suppresses the sense of any threat, therefor the story-perception suffers.

No difference between being debuffed while others arent and just running across someone better:
You can't plow through vet-dungeon bosses like you can plow through the same bosses on normal difficulty. Same should (/could) hold true to potential vet quest bosses.
Gameplay wise there is little sense in throwing together those who go out of their way to enjoy a challenge with those who want to 2-hit everything. It only leads to more frustration on the ones that long for vet quests.

Big NO to vet options because someone on page 44 wants forced difficutly and recieved 4 likes:
To single out one extreme end of the spectrum and projecting this pov onto the whole group isn't good discussion etiquette. Same as I wouldn't say that your opinion is worthless because it recieved less likes. The forum doesn't attract the majority of players so we don't know how popular any of these ideas really are. Just as a reminder: this goes in both ways.

Past Craglorn and Cadwell's Silver/ Gold showed that harder overland is undersired:
Old Craglorn forced you to group. Old cadwell's s/g forced you to keep grinding levels as mob level advancement was too steep. In other words: both directly contradicted the later introduced concept of One Tamriel: doing everyhing at every time.
A new edition of vet OL content could unite the best of both aspects: letting you solo content without a forced order but still remaining a challenge for more advanced players.

One way or the other, have a merry christmas folks.

Sylvermynx

@Chilly-McFreeze:

Very evenhanded. I've never been a "big no" on overland (other than if it wasn't optional). And personally, after much reading and rereading - I've come to think that separate vet instances would be the best - as instances are spun up all the time as needed, therefore spinning them up with something like battlespirit for more difficulty shouldn't be a big issue.

The issue with that is, whose version of "more difficulty" would be used? Which brings us right back around to either make it all more difficult for everyone, or come up with some way for each vet overland proponent to get exactly the extra amount of difficulty s/he is looking for.

Caveat: I don't care about the whole "splitting the playerbase" argument - I don't group with anyone as my ping is so high that's not fair to others, and I absolutely don't care how many people I see in a zone - or don't see as the case may be.

SilverBride

Vulkunne wrote: »

Also, if this is an MMO, which groups are driving force with any MMO, then the game simply must be designed with groups in mind and that means the difficulty MUST be there to challenge the group.

MMO only means that multiple people are playing at the same time. It does not mean grouping. There could be an MMO that didn't even allow groups to be formed and it would still be an MMO if multiple players could be in game at the same time.

Groups are part of ESO but are not the driving force. Craglorn used to be a forced grouping zone, which did not go over well at all and had to be changed.

Veteran dungeons, trials and arenas provide the difficulty for groups.

Vulkunne

SilverBride wrote: »

Vulkunne wrote: »

Also, if this is an MMO, which groups are driving force with any MMO, then the game simply must be designed with groups in mind and that means the difficulty MUST be there to challenge the group.

MMO only means that multiple people are playing at the same time. It does not mean grouping. There could be an MMO that didn't even allow groups to be formed and it would still be an MMO if multiple players could be in game at the same time.

Groups are part of ESO but are not the driving force. Craglorn used to be a forced grouping zone, which did not go over well at all and had to be changed.

Veteran dungeons, trials and arenas provide the difficulty for groups.

Not going to argue any different on this one. Things change over time I guess.

I'm old school all the way. I remember a time when grouping was like a feature or an attraction to MMOs, including ESO. How the times have changed. 'Shrugs' and walks away muttering something in orcish.

spartaxoxo

Chilly-McFreeze wrote: »

This thread moves too fast for me to answer everyone individually as I can only jump in here from time to time. So I rehash and sum up the propositions I have seen and add what I think are some pros and cons. Please correct me if I am wrong and add what I have overlooked.

1) STRICT DENIAL OF VET OPTIONS

Pros:

• not a single bit of investment needed
• doesn't split up player base (see cons)

Cons:

• quest content makes up an hughe amount of overall content, with no difficulty options it turns away more experienced players as they see unengaging bosses/ content as anti-climatic and not fun
• player base is already split up because of several instances of each zone depending on server load and quest advancement

2) FORCED VET OVERLAND CONTENT ON EVERYONE

Pros:

• enganging content for experienced players
• makes sure players develope skills as they progress (depending how steep the difficulty curve between zones is or if there is any at all)
• sense of archievement when completing content
• prevents ghost towns after initial hype because there is no other option (won't split up player base)

Cons:

• could turn away players who just want to follow the story or that can't live up to the requirements
• with difficulty curves (between zones) it would go against the idea of One Tamriel
• makes grinding more of a slog
• binds developement resources but doesn't please everybody

3) DEBUFFING OPTION BUT ONLY ONE INSTANCE

Pros:

• easy way out as it binds little dev ressources (see cons)
• "makes gameplay wise no difference" in comparison to running across a more developed player
• doesn't split up player base (see cons)

Cons:

• still doesn't please the inital plea for vet overland content as bosses potentially still can be face rolled
• still binds dev ressources, yet doesn't provide awaited outcome for vet-demanders (amount varies depending on how it's implemented: see #141o/ page 47 by @Harvokaan )
• player base is already split up because of several instances of each zone depending on server load and quest advancement

4) SEPARATE VET INTANCE

Pros:

• pleases long-time demand of experienced players for engaging content
• option to change difficulty on the fly is already in the game (see dungeons, esp. hard mode optional)
• player base is already split up because of several instances of each zone depending on server load and quest advancement

Cons:

• binds dev ressources (amount varies depending on how it's implemented: see post #1410 /page 47 by Harvokaan )
• could become a ghost town after initial hype
• splits up player base (see pros)

CONCLUSION

The current situation doesn't make everyone happy. Reoccurring complaints about overland difficulty make that rather clear. The idea is to please more people.

Option 1 cements statues quo, so a large part would remain unsatisfied.
Option 2 only shifts the appeal from one group to another, it wouldn't lead to overall more happy customers yet binds dev time.
Therefore I think we could rule out Option 2 (forced vet content).

Option 3 and 4 gives some kind of difficulty sliders for an unknown amount of investment. Varying on that amount one would be favorable over the other.
We don't know how for sure how time consuming this would be. If it's like Harvokaan wrote, it shouldn't amount to too much of an effort. Question is, if even that investment would be worth it?
See the discussions about texture updates for original zones - it consumes time/money yet the generated income wouldn't outweigh this. But can more engaging overland content lead to happier (-> paying) customers? Or will ZOS continue to rely on new op items as single source of attraction?

On the other hand, implementing a new debuff is an effort as well. So if ZOS is going to invest anything at all, wouldn't it be a waste if the outcome is below expectations? Keep in mind that overland mobs don't have to be perfect. Dungeon mobs aren't either and the biggest culprits in this whole vet-debate are the quest bosses that drop like flies.
Sooo when they're gonna do it, they could as well make it right, right?

Since I can't gauge the investment it would take for either I cannot rule out any of those. If the required effort for separate instances is just a bit more than crunching a few numbers I'd really, really opt for this. It's literally what people are asking for. BUT if the only choice would be "debuff or nothing", then I'd vote for the debuff.

A FEW THOUGHTS ON COMMON ARGUMENTS

Seperate instances split up the player base OR vet instances will become ghost towns:
This argument doesn't hold water as we currently already have multiple instances of zones in this game. Be it due to too much player in the same zone (mind the hovering health bars of team mates) or for because some quest stages.
Even if both concerns would come true they'd exclude one another and are self-solving. If vet instances become empty after being completed the players would have to go somewhere to farm. And that would be the normal instance.

On already instanced boss fights:
Those are few and far between. Most of which I remember are the final bosses the quartly DLCs or yearly chapters. It's nice but it leaves much to be desired. Those bosses already put a good fight (but of course could be harder for some). Side-bosses aren't instanced, yet they carry the stories.

Why can't you just enjoy the story?:
From a my PoV a good story thrives on tension, a sense of urgency/ danger (among others) + a difficulty to overcome that results in the feeling of having archieved something by succeding. Blowing over side/ quest/ plot bosses suppresses the sense of any threat, therefor the story-perception suffers.

No difference between being debuffed while others arent and just running across someone better:
You can't plow through vet-dungeon bosses like you can plow through the same bosses on normal difficulty. Same should (/could) hold true to potential vet quest bosses.
Gameplay wise there is little sense in throwing together those who go out of their way to enjoy a challenge with those who want to 2-hit everything. It only leads to more frustration on the ones that long for vet quests.

Big NO to vet options because someone on page 44 wants forced difficutly and recieved 4 likes:
To single out one extreme end of the spectrum and projecting this pov onto the whole group isn't good discussion etiquette. Same as I wouldn't say that your opinion is worthless because it recieved less likes. The forum doesn't attract the majority of players so we don't know how popular any of these ideas really are. Just as a reminder: this goes in both ways.

Past Craglorn and Cadwell's Silver/ Gold showed that harder overland is undersired:
Old Craglorn forced you to group. Old cadwell's s/g forced you to keep grinding levels as mob level advancement was too steep. In other words: both directly contradicted the later introduced concept of One Tamriel: doing everyhing at every time.
A new edition of vet OL content could unite the best of both aspects: letting you solo content without a forced order but still remaining a challenge for more advanced players.

One way or the other, have a merry christmas folks.

1) I don't think anyone has said strictly no to vet Overland in the last like 20 pages

2)agree

3) Your next two are very biased. The bosses wouldn't be any more of a face roll than a separate vet overland. In terms of numbers this is not different than a vet overland. Player are also not "already split up" because they all have the same settings and devs merge all of the players together when there aren't enough people doing the zone.

The main cons of debuffs is some would find it unimmersive and they would need to be micromanaged.

4) you didn't even really address the cons of vet overland and instead listed one of the cons as (see pros)

The cons of vet overland is it would cost a ton of resources as stated by the developers themselves and it would split the playerbase as different difficulty settings means the players could NOT be merged into single server instances when population is low. This can and will lead to a ghost town effect and the new players may be unable to find help.


The fact of the matter is that both debuffs and a separate instance can and would stop bosses be a faceroll and stop trash mobs from being one shot. Either is a solution from a gameplay perspective but everyone's taste will differ as to which one they would like.

Arthtur

There were some ppl who said no to vet overland. But that's minority just like forced vet overland for everyone.
Also there were other options like banners, sliders, random encounters etc.

Cons for any vet overland - making rewards. If there is no reward then the content is dead. If rewards are too good or there is no option for weaker players to get them then ppl will complain like always.

The biggest problem would be to balance difficult im my opinion. How hard it should be... Everyone would like diffrent difficulty.

spartaxoxo

Here I will do my own one of these

1) No Vet Overland options at all

Pros
Costs literally nothing
Cons
Doesn't address any current concerns

2) Forced Vet Overland

Pros
The players that stick around will have to become better at the game, increasing the quality of groups.

Cons
When Arenanet did this a lot of their players quit and this game would probably also see a large exodus

3) Debuffs

Pros
Unified playerbase
Cheap to implement
Difficulty is customizable to the individual player's needs

Cons
Doesn't leave room for new mechs
Requires micromanagement
Many would find it immersion breaking
No incentives

4) Separate instance

Pros
You can adjust how often mobs attack or create new mechanics
It is highly immersive
More popular
You can push it to a higher difficulty

Cons
Splits the playerbase
Costly time wise for devs
Incentive issue

Edit

5) Challenge Banners

Pros
Makes the big bad of the story an actual threat
Can give new mechanics
Has no impact on anyone that doesn't want to use it
Cons
Only works on bosses and does no address trash packs or non-instanced minibosses

6) Brand New Standalone Zones
Pros
These can be tuned to any vet difficulty
new mechs
Will have the shiny new content feel each year
Can give incentives without the incentive problem of other two main solution

Cons
Few will be able to do it
Significantly less content impacted
Takes away a dungeon
Ton of work

SilverBride

Arthtur wrote: »

There were some ppl who said no to vet overland.

I am one of those. The cons way outnumber the pros and there is no agreement among the advocates of just exactly what would be an acceptable difficulty. Unless there is a set difficulty that everyone who wants this would be happy with it would be a folly to do all the work just to find out some are still unsatisfied and nothing has been gained.

Edit: To clarify, I'm only against a separate veteran overland, but supportive of a debuff and challenge banners.

spartaxoxo

SilverBride wrote: »

Arthtur wrote: »

There were some ppl who said no to vet overland.

I am one of those. The cons way outnumber the pros and there is no agreement among the advocates of just exactly what would be an acceptable difficulty. Unless there is a set difficulty that everyone who wants this would be happy with it would be a folly to do all the work just to find out some are still unsatisfied and nothing has been gained.

Didn't you say yes to debuffs though? The context of that no is no to everything even stuff like debuffs and challenge banners

SilverBride

spartaxoxo wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Arthtur wrote: »

There were some ppl who said no to vet overland.

I am one of those. The cons way outnumber the pros and there is no agreement among the advocates of just exactly what would be an acceptable difficulty. Unless there is a set difficulty that everyone who wants this would be happy with it would be a folly to do all the work just to find out some are still unsatisfied and nothing has been gained.

Didn't you say yes to debuffs though? The context of that no is no to everything even stuff like debuffs and challenge banners

Yes I totally agree with debuffs and challenge banners... just not a separate veteran overland. I thought the poster was just referring to that specifically.

I edited that post to clarify this.

spartaxoxo

SilverBride wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Arthtur wrote: »

There were some ppl who said no to vet overland.

I am one of those. The cons way outnumber the pros and there is no agreement among the advocates of just exactly what would be an acceptable difficulty. Unless there is a set difficulty that everyone who wants this would be happy with it would be a folly to do all the work just to find out some are still unsatisfied and nothing has been gained.

Didn't you say yes to debuffs though? The context of that no is no to everything even stuff like debuffs and challenge banners

Yes I totally agree with debuffs and challenge banners... just not a separate veteran overland. I thought the poster was just referring to that specifically.

Ah I see. I think this is a response to Chilly's list about what the pros and cons are to each idea, and he has listed "no to doing anything at all" as one option to try and be fair about listing all the options.

Vulkunne

1) Opt Out Vet Overland : (Meaning No Planned Developmental Changes to Overland from the way it is today)

Pros:
- Focus Team(s) resources on other Projects, this includes: (however may not actually be limited to) Management, Developers, QA and PR.
- No Additional Cost to Company (In terms of Time, Money & currently Allocated Assets)
- No Additional Reputational Risk to Company and/or Team(s) (as described above)
- Company will not need to seek buy-in from related Stakeholders
- Company may (at its discretion) completely ignore all feedback from the fanbase regarding this topic
Cons:
- Overland Content will no longer be further developed (regardless of direction) and will remain as a dead end on the game's Development Plan, but all the same staying with the game
- Overland Content will not receive the latest updates (unlike other content in game), nor will it receive any opportunity for a share of the budget (for production value) as opposed to other goals for the game's direction
- This will leave Overland content either under-developed or no longer in development, resulting in a *gap* in game still in development (for all other areas)
- Gaps can create additional cost and risk over time
- Content no longer being developed can lead to same content getting cut resulting in Overland eventually becoming more or less junk and removed from the game in part or whole over time, in favor of suiting other purposes
- Gaps in development as well as junk content can be exploited by Competition in a number of ways, whether this be thru online advertising, streamers, influencers, used to guide development & production in a rival media
- Gaps and noticeably under-developed content can lead to QA Findings and can get a project shut down
- The appearance of poor-quality (as seen by the consumer) can lead to a loss of confidence in the Company's Rep or Product.

2) Forced Vet Overland

No Pros or Cons, this has been tried before and was not successful. Plan around having this situation.

3) Debuffs

Bad idea as this is not really fixing anything. Again, the problem here is also a lack of balance. This issue has never exclusively been about difficulty itself. Although yes, difficulty is part of it. This may also create issues in unlikely places. Bad idea.

4) Separate Instance

100% in favor and the only way I can see this issue ever getting resolved. Note I am also saying that in promoting this I DO NOT want to see the current difficulty setup to go away. I think we're grown enough here and people should be free to choose what is right for themselves. And to that end I respectfully request to set up some form of foundation for the current difficulty (if you can call it that) to remain but please allow us to have a separate instance or difficulty adjusting mechanic so we can experience this game in greater depth and a more balanced Overland PvE combat experience.

And the rest we already know unless someone else wants to post

I'm outtie, gn all

Amottica

LashanW wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

The value I see in a debuff is it solves what many have stated that their issue is... that mobs die too fast, which they find boring and immersion breaking. What difference does it make why the mobs no longer die fast as long as the stated issue is resolved?

Self debuffs work fine for offline games, I've used them in several single player games. But they are not great in online games.

• Normal players and debuffed players are in same overland instance and might be fighting same enemies. Makes no sense unless the debuff has some other benefits. (A lot of debuffs I've used in other games has other benefits attached so that players don't find it pointless. Small benefits like 10% more xp gain, or 5% more gold gain, slightly higher drop rate for loot etc. No exclusive rewards tho)
• Debuffs will solve the problem where mobs have too low health and do negligible damage. But it doesn't solve the problem where overland mobs have the behavior of sloths (as in they waste a lot of time doing nothing in between their attacks)

So I'm not a fan of debuffs (with no benefits) as an end solution, but will take it as it will at least improve the instanced stories a bit.

It does not matter if it is a "debuff" or a different instance where NPCs are stronger and have more health. You have basically laid into part of why Rich indicated this is not so simple. Outside of Rich explaining that they have made other areas of the game with difficulty, namely WBs but there are also arenas, dungeons, and trials, and that their data from the game shows few players are interested in a more challenging overland, Rich explained people will want something more for doing something more difficult. Here you indicate you want benefits for dealing with more of a challenge which supports Rich's claims.

Also, a debuff system works just fine. Besides that, the player with a debuff will have to pay more attention since they will take more damage when they mess up, when there are other players involved it is really irrelevant what your damage is anyhow since in overland there is not a limit to how many can join in.

In fact, the only MMORPG I have played with a difficulty setting that was meaningful used solo instances for those quests which essentially made it a single-player game. The design failed and was abandoned. When there is grouping or shared instances it is very irrelevent what the difficulty is.

SilverBride

Vulkunne wrote: »

1) Opt Out Vet Overland : (Meaning No Planned Developmental Changes to Overland from the way it is today)

If they were to change the overland zones from they way they are today what would happen to the story? MMOs don't change old content (with the exception of WoW's Cataclysm expansion that was a disaster). They add to it with new expansions, chapters and DLCs. ESO isn't going to fail if they don't continually rework older content.

LashanW

Amottica wrote: »

Here you indicate you want benefits for dealing with more of a challenge which supports Rich's claims.

Please don't take my words out of context and try to give it a different meaning. My post you quoted was only about self debuff systems. I don't care about benefits/rewards in a separate veteran overland instance. Because in a vet instance, everyone is in the same boat, unlike self debuffs.

Amottica wrote: »

Also, a debuff system works just fine. Besides that, the player with a debuff will have to pay more attention since they will take more damage when they mess up, when there are other players involved it is really irrelevant what your damage is anyhow since in overland there is not a limit to how many can join in.

I have never seen or used self-debuff systems with zero benefits that people actually bothered to use. Please provide examples if you know any. If ZoS implemented something like that then it would see little use and they will come to the conclusion that nobody cares about a vet overland.

LashanW wrote: »

• Normal players and debuffed players are in same overland instance and might be fighting same enemies. Makes no sense unless the debuff has some other benefits. (A lot of debuffs I've used in other games has other benefits attached so that players don't find it pointless. Small benefits like 10% more xp gain, or 5% more gold gain, slightly higher drop rate for loot etc. No exclusive rewards tho)
• Debuffs will solve the problem where mobs have too low health and do negligible damage. But it doesn't solve the problem where overland mobs have the behavior of sloths (as in they waste a lot of time doing nothing in between their attacks)

But I will still use such a debuff because come to think of it, I can actually get rid of the first problem. I play in PC-EU from Asia so I can play at a time when most of the server is sleeping. For the second problem I guess I will roleplay as someone who passively slows down all enemies nearby...

Also. I don't care about comparisons between ESO and other MMORPGs. People say "ESO is a MMO" and some say "Nah it's just multiple people happen to be online at the same time" and twist the term in whatever form they wish to fit their point of view.

Chilly-McFreeze

Sylvermynx wrote: »

The issue with that is, whose version of "more difficulty" would be used? Which brings us right back around to either make it all more difficult for everyone, or come up with some way for each vet overland proponent to get exactly the extra amount of difficulty s/he is looking for.

Caveat: I don't care about the whole "splitting the playerbase" argument - I don't group with anyone as my ping is so high that's not fair to others, and I absolutely don't care how many people I see in a zone - or don't see as the case may be.

Fair points. That's up for debate. But just like Vet Dungeons don't scale to everyone individually but simply give a higher difficulty, this could be done on Overland as well. The gap between normal and vet dungeons could be used as measurement between normal and vet OL as well (of course while minding that OL isn't designed for 4 player teams etc.).

Second one I heard a lot over the years so fair point as well. Many players are just in ESO for the TES experience.

spartaxoxo wrote: »

The cons of vet overland is it would cost a ton of resources as stated by the developers themselves

Hence why I stated that I don't know how much resources it would swallow. I literally have no idea. That a producer says "it takes a lot of resources" to add something that might doesn't produce enough cash seems semi-credible to me - somewhere between an excuse to not alinate players and being somewhat upright.
Harvokaans argument made sense to me too. But, like I said, I'm a bit ignorant on how much effort this is.

spartaxoxo wrote: »

it would split the playerbase as different difficulty settings means the players could NOT be merged into single server instances when population is low. This can and will lead to a ghost town effect and the new players may be unable to find help.

It's a hard to keep track of who said what around here. So what's about the arguments that:
a ) once the initial hype is through / story is complete, players would flock back to "normal" to farm equipment etc.
b ) biggest part of the community is fine with "normal instances"

Wouldn't both result in a not insignificant amount of players being available to newbies in their instances?

spartaxoxo wrote: »

The fact of the matter is that both debuffs and a separate instance can and would stop bosses be a faceroll and stop trash mobs from being one shot. Either is a solution from a gameplay perspective but everyone's taste will differ as to which one they would like.

Agree, especially on the last sentence.
Also looked over your pro/Con list and we don't seem too far off.

francesinhalover

just like a merchant it would be cool if some zones, dlc and not had a wondering boss,
This boss however has some nice hp and plenty of insta kills, so players need to learn how to fight him.

Sylvermynx

Chilly-McFreeze wrote: »

Sylvermynx wrote: »

The issue with that is, whose version of "more difficulty" would be used? Which brings us right back around to either make it all more difficult for everyone, or come up with some way for each vet overland proponent to get exactly the extra amount of difficulty s/he is looking for.

Caveat: I don't care about the whole "splitting the playerbase" argument - I don't group with anyone as my ping is so high that's not fair to others, and I absolutely don't care how many people I see in a zone - or don't see as the case may be.

Fair points. That's up for debate. But just like Vet Dungeons don't scale to everyone individually but simply give a higher difficulty, this could be done on Overland as well. The gap between normal and vet dungeons could be used as measurement between normal and vet OL as well (of course while minding that OL isn't designed for 4 player teams etc.).

Second one I heard a lot over the years so fair point as well. Many players are just in ESO for the TES experience.

Well, this isn't my first MMO, but it's the only one where I've not had friends and family playing - they knew about my 750+ ms ping (actually well over 1000 in WoW and RIFT on a much worse satellite system) and dealt with it so we could do instances together. Rest of my folks never have had any interest in TES, ditto ESO - and in fact, only my daughter plays anything much any more, and that's FFXIV (which is SO not my thing - except for WoW and RIFT, we have always been total "gaming opposites").

francesinhalover wrote: »

just like a merchant it would be cool if some zones, dlc and not had a wondering boss,
This boss however has some nice hp and plenty of insta kills, so players need to learn how to fight him.

Eh, one thing I really hated in WoW and RIFT was "wandering encounters". I never could do anything but die to them, because there was never anyone else around.... And in fact, a couple of people dragged one of the Deadlands wandering bosses right on top of me while I was trying to get to a wayshrine. Not fun.

Casdha

Ok while everyone at my household seems to be in a temporary food coma I got bored and decided to visit this site and saw this thread. I've not come close to reading every post in this thread but I can tell you that I haven't been here since finishing the chapter content back in the summer. I have ESO+ and have access to the content but I've not even updated the game since before the last group DLC patch much less the 7.2 Deadlands DLC and the only thing I care about is the story stuff.

My personal problem isn't necessarily the Overland per say, my problems stems from the fact that I know that things have inevitably changed again. If there is one thing that drives me away from this game it isn't the story writing, the combat, the easiness of overland or the difficulty of group content as all of this can be learned. It is the fact that I know everything has changed yet again.

If I had to boil it down for me personally, it is the anxiety of dealing with a game that can't leave well enough alone that will eventually stop me from playing ESO all together.

I tend to get sick of all of the "my character can't do this" or "that build is too powerful" and all the knee jerk reactions that come with it.

IMHO if this game worked as it should where every strength had a counter (rock, paper, scissors) there would be no need for things like battle spirit. Skills being equal, If that person beats you with build #1 counter them with build #2 yet build #3 can beat #2 but build #1 can beat build #3 etc. etc..... (skill and familiarity of a build should act as mitigation factor up to a point)

Same could be said for overland if it was set up to work the same.

AvalonRanger

IMAO, "ESO is the game which enjoy more story based quest or RPG aspect rather than intense combat.

I consider cancel ESO+ subscription next my payment termination at 2022 of June.
If ZoS can't release Whiterun area main quest until that timing.

Because, campaign main quest is only joyful contents for me. After said "farewell"
against Deadland NPC comrade party. I lost every purpose to play ESO again.

I really hate combat of this game regardless PVE or PVP. Each time when I engage combat,
my eyes become just like "dead fish eye". "Sigh, this again...". It's a unhealthy brain damage for me.
Because ESO combat is extremely shallow and stressful...and too much old game design sense.
None of ESO contents I want to repeat it without farming purpose.

////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Basically, I love action games. "FarCry", "Horizon Zero Dawn", "Ghost of Tsushima" is my favorite.
Especially, I love FarCry series. The enemy base capture of FarCry is extremely fun!! So cool!!.
Each time engage the base capture mission, player find new walkthrough.

"Wow, there's under ground intrude entrance here, If I intrude here, I can destroy alarm easily."

"That high ground will be good sniping nest. If I could fly from mountain by wing suit, I can use this field tactics."

"When I search the area structure by binocular from high ground. I find predator cage.
If I shoot it by sniper rifle, funny chaos will happen there!!"

People who know those AAA action game may agree my feeling.
Player is not so strong, can't defeat enemy without tactical plan. But, there're lot
of creative combat tactics. That makes the combat really fun.
That is the game has very suitable common sense in contemporary gaming experience.

////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

However in the ESO, player strength is everything. So everyone can't stop painful grinding and gear farming.
Sigh, what kind of torture is this?

SilverBride

AvalonRanger wrote: »

However in the ESO, player strength is everything. So everyone can't stop painful grinding and gear farming.
Sigh, what kind of torture is this?

You already explained it yourself:

AvalonRanger wrote: »

Basically, I love action games. "FarCry", "Horizon Zero Dawn", "Ghost of Tsushima" is my favorite.
Especially, I love FarCry series. The enemy base capture of FarCry is extremely fun!! So cool!!.
Each time engage the base capture mission, player find new walkthrough.

"Wow, there's under ground intrude entrance here, If I intrude here, I can destroy alarm easily."

"That high ground will be good sniping nest. If I could fly from mountain by wing suit, I can use this field tactics."

"When I search the area structure by binocular from high ground. I find predator cage.
If I shoot it by sniper rifle, funny chaos will happen there!!"

That is the kind of game you love. ESO isn't that kind of game.

Rudrani

I wonder if this will ever be more than a pinned thread.

spartaxoxo

Rudrani wrote: »

I wonder if this will ever be more than a pinned thread.

At the very least I wish we could get a new green post on it that wasn't just moderation.