Overland Content Feedback Thread

CP5

ACamaroGuy wrote: »

How do you suggest they change the difficulty of the game for some and not for others? Sliders, option menu, etc.? How will the game programming separate your difficulty setting for the player next to you? The game at times has a hard timing keeping up with it's current play style. Now you all want to add a more complex option setting into the mix. Yeah, don't think it'll be a good idea at all.

Instancing. Literally the same tool they use to create vet and normal dungeons, trials, and every different cyrodiil, imperial city, battleground, and so on. When an instance is created to let players enter the area there are rules applied to it. For dungeons these rules determine mob health and damage levels, or in battlegrounds it lets the map know what objectives need to be enabled to run the given game mode.

Before one tamriel ESO had this in overland as well, with each zone having 3 different rule sets to go off of, chosen by the player indirectly by picking their faction. All it needs to be is a toggle, that then puts you into an instance of your current zone for that rule set, and the biggest hurdle would be defining what these rules are. It is something ZOS uses everywhere and has, to this extent even, already used in overland. They've done things far beyond this in terms of implementation before, and is why I feel instances are the best option for this.

LalMirchi

To me this is the an important topic as I try to read and digest all posts in this forum. There is a need for the producers to take different play-styles into account and TRY to incorporate them in this very enjoyable game.

Lysette

LalMirchi wrote: »

To me this is the an important topic as I try to read and digest all posts in this forum. There is a need for the producers to take different play-styles into account and TRY to incorporate them in this very enjoyable game.

Yeah, I see that now as well - but it should not be just normal and vet (the two extremes) - we need a middle ground as well, which is less of a shock to players new to level 50 and beyond - otherwise the gap between normal (casual) and veteran is just too wide for good. Something with some challenge but not insane challenge - something to grow into the veteran role.

I have no level 50 characters yet, but I have experienced that on the PTS - the transition is brutal - and that shocked me so much, that I did no longer want to ever get there - so the gap is there and should be bridged in a way.

SilverBride

Lysette wrote: »

LalMirchi wrote: »

To me this is the an important topic as I try to read and digest all posts in this forum. There is a need for the producers to take different play-styles into account and TRY to incorporate them in this very enjoyable game.

Yeah, I see that now as well - but it should not be just normal and vet (the two extremes) - we need a middle ground as well, which is less of a shock to players new to level 50 and beyond - otherwise the gap between normal (casual) and veteran is just too wide for good. Something with some challenge but not insane challenge - something to grow into the veteran role.

I have no level 50 characters yet, but I have experienced that on the PTS - the transition is brutal - and that shocked me so much, that I did no longer want to ever get there - so the gap is there and should be bridged in a way.

Having separate normal and veteran overland would already divide the playerbase in half. Adding another level of difficulty between these would divide it into 3rds again, just like it was before One Tamriel.

However there could be multiple difficulties with debuff foods and potions which would give a lot more flexibility to the player and not negatively affect anyone else or the game in general.

Parasaurolophus

SilverBride wrote: »

Lysette wrote: »

LalMirchi wrote: »

To me this is the an important topic as I try to read and digest all posts in this forum. There is a need for the producers to take different play-styles into account and TRY to incorporate them in this very enjoyable game.

Yeah, I see that now as well - but it should not be just normal and vet (the two extremes) - we need a middle ground as well, which is less of a shock to players new to level 50 and beyond - otherwise the gap between normal (casual) and veteran is just too wide for good. Something with some challenge but not insane challenge - something to grow into the veteran role.

I have no level 50 characters yet, but I have experienced that on the PTS - the transition is brutal - and that shocked me so much, that I did no longer want to ever get there - so the gap is there and should be bridged in a way.

Having separate normal and veteran overland would already divide the playerbase in half. Adding another level of difficulty between these would divide it into 3rds again, just like it was before One Tamriel.

However there could be multiple difficulties with debuff foods and potions which would give a lot more flexibility to the player and not negatively affect anyone else or the game in general.

After all, we have already found out that purely technically, this will not affect anything at all, since the zones are separated anyway. Why do you keep being so worried about this?

CP5

SilverBride wrote: »

Lysette wrote: »

LalMirchi wrote: »

To me this is the an important topic as I try to read and digest all posts in this forum. There is a need for the producers to take different play-styles into account and TRY to incorporate them in this very enjoyable game.

Yeah, I see that now as well - but it should not be just normal and vet (the two extremes) - we need a middle ground as well, which is less of a shock to players new to level 50 and beyond - otherwise the gap between normal (casual) and veteran is just too wide for good. Something with some challenge but not insane challenge - something to grow into the veteran role.

I have no level 50 characters yet, but I have experienced that on the PTS - the transition is brutal - and that shocked me so much, that I did no longer want to ever get there - so the gap is there and should be bridged in a way.

Having separate normal and veteran overland would already divide the playerbase in half. Adding another level of difficulty between these would divide it into 3rds again, just like it was before One Tamriel.

However there could be multiple difficulties with debuff foods and potions which would give a lot more flexibility to the player and not negatively affect anyone else or the game in general.

If it would divide the player base in half, then half the player base would be interested. And again, as for my pool example, do you understand how zones are already subdivided, and how curating the population between instances wouldn't hurt population numbers?

On top of that, how many times does it need to be said that self nerfs don't solve the problem, since the enemies we fight are incapable of putting up any sort of fight. We can self nerf ourselves already, if that was a solution we wouldn't be having this discussion.

tomofhyrule

I feel like one of the arguments about the number of instances is that there aren't automatically 5 (or however many) instances of every zone anyway. Nobody's arguing that somewhere like Deshaan doesn't have several instances for everyone hanging out at the Guild traders/Undaunted enclave/Master writ vendor/etc. Most of the major hub cities will have large populations and naturally have many instances. It's easy to consider a 'normal' and a 'vet' instance not affecting the playerbase in the slightest.

But that does fall apart when we consider smaller zones, particularly small, old DLC zones outside of events or the 3rd or 4th Alliance zone for the basegames. I can't imagine there are lots of active instances of places like Hew's Bane or Malabal Tor at any given time. In this case, adding an extra instance would split the few players there.

SilverBride

Parasaurolophus wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Lysette wrote: »

LalMirchi wrote: »

To me this is the an important topic as I try to read and digest all posts in this forum. There is a need for the producers to take different play-styles into account and TRY to incorporate them in this very enjoyable game.

Yeah, I see that now as well - but it should not be just normal and vet (the two extremes) - we need a middle ground as well, which is less of a shock to players new to level 50 and beyond - otherwise the gap between normal (casual) and veteran is just too wide for good. Something with some challenge but not insane challenge - something to grow into the veteran role.

I have no level 50 characters yet, but I have experienced that on the PTS - the transition is brutal - and that shocked me so much, that I did no longer want to ever get there - so the gap is there and should be bridged in a way.

Having separate normal and veteran overland would already divide the playerbase in half. Adding another level of difficulty between these would divide it into 3rds again, just like it was before One Tamriel.

However there could be multiple difficulties with debuff foods and potions which would give a lot more flexibility to the player and not negatively affect anyone else or the game in general.

After all, we have already found out that purely technically, this will not affect anything at all, since the zones are separated anyway. Why do you keep being so worried about this?

We are not separated now. We are in identical instances of the same megaserver. That is not the same thing a veteran overland would be.

And I am not worried. I am just defending against suggestions that I feel would be bad for the game.

CP5 wrote: »

On top of that, how many times does it need to be said that self nerfs don't solve the problem, since the enemies we fight are incapable of putting up any sort of fight. We can self nerf ourselves already, if that was a solution we wouldn't be having this discussion.

I believe self nerfs are a very reasonable solution and have yet to hear a convincing arguement against them.

ShalidorsHeir

This wont divide community since it is already divided in player that play overland and player sthat dont. Addressing the needs to bring more players for overland would, if anything, unite them no matter of which solution in particular.
Other than that: Did you realize how prices for consumables and enhancing materials increased? Why do you think it is like that by now? Because many players that once started as "newbies" progressed to a point where they seek for harder challenges where they need this stuff to compete. Because character progression as "What people want to do" is that one thing we can indeed label with the term "majority". The same amount of people going for these resources or even more but less to be sold and more people that are buying this stuff which changes the market to this point. Thats just one thing you can observe these days next to fact the more and more threads came up before this one about overland being to easy. This so-called "majority" (god i hate this word for it being just a fake argument people come up with to validate their points ...) of the playerbase is switching sites and ZOS is realizing it as well which is the reason why this thread came up and is observed so closely. It is easier to generate statistics out that one thread instead of single opinions spread in all of the forums.

And btw: Again: i removed all CP, mundus, buff food and potions - wearing just craftable sets on purple and did craglorn content, which is considered "group" content. It was a bit more enjoyable, yes, but still far to easy. basic changes must be applied to appeal to competive players. At least craglorn had more immersive quests and lore references and also quest design than the usual stuff sometimes, even in chapters. But i am disgressing.. that also might be just a personal opinion. Anyways, some more health, damage and high attack frequence would be help which can be easily done by simply scaling. Today i might trying to go naked and fist fighting quest bosses for research purposes...
Other than that: a debuff will not help at all as far as i am concerned because it absolutely contradicts the goal of character progress which is basically the number one reason why people play MMOs and not just a bunch of single player games.

CP5

SilverBride wrote: »

Parasaurolophus wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Lysette wrote: »

LalMirchi wrote: »

To me this is the an important topic as I try to read and digest all posts in this forum. There is a need for the producers to take different play-styles into account and TRY to incorporate them in this very enjoyable game.

Yeah, I see that now as well - but it should not be just normal and vet (the two extremes) - we need a middle ground as well, which is less of a shock to players new to level 50 and beyond - otherwise the gap between normal (casual) and veteran is just too wide for good. Something with some challenge but not insane challenge - something to grow into the veteran role.

I have no level 50 characters yet, but I have experienced that on the PTS - the transition is brutal - and that shocked me so much, that I did no longer want to ever get there - so the gap is there and should be bridged in a way.

Having separate normal and veteran overland would already divide the playerbase in half. Adding another level of difficulty between these would divide it into 3rds again, just like it was before One Tamriel.

However there could be multiple difficulties with debuff foods and potions which would give a lot more flexibility to the player and not negatively affect anyone else or the game in general.

After all, we have already found out that purely technically, this will not affect anything at all, since the zones are separated anyway. Why do you keep being so worried about this?

We are not separated now. We are in identical instances of the same megaserver. That is not the same thing a veteran overland would be.

And I am not worried. I am just defending against suggestions that I feel would be bad for the game.

CP5 wrote: »

On top of that, how many times does it need to be said that self nerfs don't solve the problem, since the enemies we fight are incapable of putting up any sort of fight. We can self nerf ourselves already, if that was a solution we wouldn't be having this discussion.

I believe self nerfs are a very reasonable solution and have yet to hear a convincing arguement against them.

"We're in identical instances." So are all the different groups running the same dungeon. They aren't together, they're separated, just like people between zone instances are. What does it bother you that the people in another instance have different encounters than you?

And, how would self nerfs fix the issue of "enemy x spends literally the entire fight shooting arrows into the ground accomplishing nothing." Or, "enemy y literally summons bubbles to fight and does bugger all." Or, "enemy z spends the entire fight backing up to throw knives."

I mentioned this ages ago, but it doesn't matter if the knife thrower dies before they can get off a single knife, or if they can get off a hundred, it doesn't change the fact that they are one dimensional, incapable, and forgettable. Which, is funny, since those against the idea of making the enemies more capable cite that all it would do is make fights take longer, yet that is exactly what this would do.

So, you're already divided between instances, and enemies are not threatening enough to even be worth mentally registering for some players. Having instances you aren't even in with different rule sets doesn't impact you, and self nerfing doesn't fix enemies who are, by design, made to stall themselves for the players' behalf.

spartaxoxo

CP5 wrote: »

I mentioned this ages ago, but it doesn't matter if the knife thrower dies before they can get off a single knife, or if they can get off a hundred, it doesn't change the fact that they are one dimensional, incapable, and forgettable.

So basically you wouldn't be satisfied with just a vet mode with buffed enemies, but also want them all to have new abilities and change the timimg of the old ones too?

NeeScrolls

LalMirchi wrote: »

There is a need for the producers to take different play-styles into account and TRY to incorporate them in this very enjoyable game.

They already did that with 'one Tamriel' , no?

Lysette wrote: »

I have no level 50 characters yet, .

Wait, i might be mis-understanding your post ( my mistake if i did ) but how is it possible to be here since 2015 and have 10 forum *stars* , yet don't have ANY 'CP' characters leveled?

Is that by choice or just by having too many ALTs to manage or XP grind or whatever?

---

More on-topic: I have another "radical" idea to propose which could be OPT-IN (aka toggleable) for those who wanted more challenge + slightly better XP & rewards ... Instead of debuffing/nerfing PLAYERS (because since when do rational human gamers ever consciously choose to self-nerf ) give the PVE mobs target areas of greater/lesser vulnerability (aka 'hit boxes' ) depending upon their size & severity.

Example: A large 'Ash Dragon' would have 3 'target areas' : head, body, legs ...which players must try to aim attacks toward using target-reticle to yield a different effect. (more crits for head hits, more bleed chance for body hits, more snares for leg hits, etc. etc. ) . But the smaller/weaker "trash" type mobs, say 'Rats' or 'Wolves' , would still only keep ONE target area.

Could even add a new Achievement for 'aim skill' or even some type of in-game perpetual 'accuracy counter' to encourage more tactics and less button-mashing, thereby potentially reducing server-load-stress from all the procs & stuff.

CP5

spartaxoxo wrote: »

CP5 wrote: »

I mentioned this ages ago, but it doesn't matter if the knife thrower dies before they can get off a single knife, or if they can get off a hundred, it doesn't change the fact that they are one dimensional, incapable, and forgettable.

So basically you wouldn't be satisfied with just a vet mode with buffed enemies, but also want them all to have new abilities and change the timimg of the old ones too?

As I've explained, ZOS can do more than tweak stats between instances, and even in the same instance the hard mode banners act as a good example of them being able to tweak abilities as well. Many mobs have abilities, including bosses, that do nothing but waste their own time. Self nerf us to do 1 damage per attack to make things more 'challenging' but it doesn't solve the issue with tank mobs leaping from the battlefield, leaving their allies to die, or mender mobs having such a weak heal that is on such a long cooldown that their only meaningful contributions to a fight are their few weak attacks. For the same reasons why the old gold and silver zones aren't an adequate "we already tried it" example, is because those locations only used stat padding and didn't create a more meaningful experience for it.

SilverBride

CP5 wrote: »

"We're in identical instances." So are all the different groups running the same dungeon. They aren't together, they're separated, just like people between zone instances are. What does it bother you that the people in another instance have different encounters than you?

Players in dungeons do not freely move between them like they can in overland. Overland instances are determined by how many players are on at the time. The number of them fluctuates with player population and players are moved between them as necessary.

The instances of dungeons are determined by how many groups are using them at the time, but players are not moved between them to accommodate for groups losing members. And dungeon groups are all identical so all the players in them do have the same encounters.

CP5 wrote: »

And, how would self nerfs fix the issue of "enemy x spends literally the entire fight shooting arrows into the ground accomplishing nothing." Or, "enemy y literally summons bubbles to fight and does bugger all." Or, "enemy z spends the entire fight backing up to throw knives."

I don't expect the mobs in the base game to have extensive mechanics. But if they did decide to take on this task and add mechanics to all the mobs in overland, of which there are many, it would not be a quick and simple task. Especially now when they are doing extensive work to fix the long standing PvP issues.

CP5

"players are moved between them as necessary."

So you wouldn't need to worry about having low populated zones of your preferred take, unless the zone was so unpopulated to begin with that there weren't enough players to sustain a single instance. How then would you be worried about people in another instance enjoying the content differently than you? Just like with dungeons, some people are in normal instances, some in vet, and people on neither side are impacted by others in another instance enjoying the content differently than them.

And I've said many times, it isn't a small task to make the plethora of mobs in the world not worthless, but any effort is more than none. But again, the points I'm trying to make are cherry-picked around so the actual questions I'm asking are avoided.

How do you feel an opt-in self nerf system would be any different from what we can already do? Why is it that everyone has to be in the same type of instance as you, even though you can't even begin to interact with all of them, what harm is there in people enjoying overland content rather than just logging out of the game? Is it better for people to stand around in town doing nothing or log out just so you can be content that they're all 'experiencing the same content as you', rather than efforts be made to allow them to actually enjoy the largest piece of content ESO has, the entire world of tamriel?

Lysette

SilverBride wrote: »

Parasaurolophus wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Lysette wrote: »

LalMirchi wrote: »

To me this is the an important topic as I try to read and digest all posts in this forum. There is a need for the producers to take different play-styles into account and TRY to incorporate them in this very enjoyable game.

Yeah, I see that now as well - but it should not be just normal and vet (the two extremes) - we need a middle ground as well, which is less of a shock to players new to level 50 and beyond - otherwise the gap between normal (casual) and veteran is just too wide for good. Something with some challenge but not insane challenge - something to grow into the veteran role.

I have no level 50 characters yet, but I have experienced that on the PTS - the transition is brutal - and that shocked me so much, that I did no longer want to ever get there - so the gap is there and should be bridged in a way.

Having separate normal and veteran overland would already divide the playerbase in half. Adding another level of difficulty between these would divide it into 3rds again, just like it was before One Tamriel.

However there could be multiple difficulties with debuff foods and potions which would give a lot more flexibility to the player and not negatively affect anyone else or the game in general.

After all, we have already found out that purely technically, this will not affect anything at all, since the zones are separated anyway. Why do you keep being so worried about this?

We are not separated now. We are in identical instances of the same megaserver. That is not the same thing a veteran overland would be.

And I am not worried. I am just defending against suggestions that I feel would be bad for the game.

CP5 wrote: »

On top of that, how many times does it need to be said that self nerfs don't solve the problem, since the enemies we fight are incapable of putting up any sort of fight. We can self nerf ourselves already, if that was a solution we wouldn't be having this discussion.

I believe self nerfs are a very reasonable solution and have yet to hear a convincing arguement against them.

I'll give you one - if I want to learn to adapt to veteran content one day, I have to learn that at my abilities - with a self-nerf I would learn nothing at all. And I really think, we need a middle ground - the gap from casual to vet is just too wide - one cannot learn anything when dead in seconds.

SilverBride

CP5 wrote: »

How then would you be worried about people in another instance enjoying the content differently than you?

Because it divides the playerbase.

CP5 wrote: »

Just like with dungeons, some people are in normal instances, some in vet, and people on neither side are impacted by others in another instance enjoying the content differently than them.

Dungeons and trials etc. are end game content. They are created specifically as an option for end game players who want the challenge.

Overland is the base game. It is not created to be end game content but rather is for everyone.

CP5 wrote: »

How do you feel an opt-in self nerf system would be any different from what we can already do? Why is it that everyone has to be in the same type of instance as you, even though you can't even begin to interact with all of them, what harm is there in people enjoying overland content rather than just logging out of the game? Is it better for people to stand around in town doing nothing or log out just so you can be content that they're all 'experiencing the same content as you', rather than efforts be made to allow them to actually enjoy the largest piece of content ESO has, the entire world of tamriel?

It would give players the flexibility to choose how much of a challenge they want and a very easy way to accomplish it. And it keeps us all in the same world.

Overland is not end game content and it shouldn't be turned into an end game alternative for players who choose not to participate in the end game content already provided.

Lysette

NeeScrolls wrote: »

Lysette wrote: »

I have no level 50 characters yet, .

Wait, i might be mis-understanding your post ( my mistake if i did ) but how is it possible to be here since 2015 and have 10 forum *stars* , yet don't have ANY 'CP' characters leveled?

Is that by choice or just by having too many ALTs to manage or XP grind or whatever?
.

By choice - I try to just gain around 5 levels per character per year (if above level 20), but this is not going to last unfortunately - the content I'm doing now will get me to 50 eventually even this year already - and then what?- I experienced level 50 with some CP on the PTS - I was not thrilled about it at all and felt, that I'm much better off never to get to level 50 - that is the reason and as well why I would want some middle ground - otherwise end game would mean "end of game" and I would be done with that character.

And I'm not grinding anything - I am not in ESO to work - but to enjoy myself with whatever is fun to me - a lot is fun to me what doesn't grant lots of XP - so I progress at snail pace and I am content with it - I was never interested in "end game" - everything before end game is my game - that what most of you skip or rush through - that is my game.

SilverBride

Lysette wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

I believe self nerfs are a very reasonable solution and have yet to hear a convincing arguement against them.

I'll give you one - if I want to learn to adapt to veteran content one day, I have to learn that at my abilities - with a self-nerf I would learn nothing at all. And I really think, we need a middle ground - the gap from casual to vet is just too wide - one cannot learn anything when dead in seconds.

A player who is not currently a veteran probably wouldn't be using a self nerf. They would continue to level and learn as they are now.

Lysette

SilverBride wrote: »

Lysette wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

I believe self nerfs are a very reasonable solution and have yet to hear a convincing arguement against them.

I'll give you one - if I want to learn to adapt to veteran content one day, I have to learn that at my abilities - with a self-nerf I would learn nothing at all. And I really think, we need a middle ground - the gap from casual to vet is just too wide - one cannot learn anything when dead in seconds.

A player who is not currently a veteran probably wouldn't be using a self nerf. They would continue to level and learn as they are now.

But what content is there for me with my ping issue - when I will have arrived at level 50, I will most likely be hopelessly overpowered for overland, and too weak for other content - this is how I experienced that on the PTS - too powerful for overland, too weak for everything else - terrible, why would I want to get there?

And I am averse to grinding - so going for special armor sets is a no go, if it involves griding. Well, and I don't want to play with others, they are too fast and stress me out - I want a relaxed time in Tamriel, I am totally incompatible to play with them.

Lysette

SilverBride wrote: »

Overland is not end game content and it shouldn't be turned into an end game alternative for players who choose not to participate in the end game content already provided.

So, if ZOS is of the same opinion like you in this matter, they will loose us as customers when we get there - because those of us, who do not want end game like it is - especially not with the type of players who love end game or for whom end game is the game and not the role play aspect of the game - for us is nothing left worth doing - so we will seek for other games.

SilverBride

Lysette wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Lysette wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

I believe self nerfs are a very reasonable solution and have yet to hear a convincing arguement against them.

I'll give you one - if I want to learn to adapt to veteran content one day, I have to learn that at my abilities - with a self-nerf I would learn nothing at all. And I really think, we need a middle ground - the gap from casual to vet is just too wide - one cannot learn anything when dead in seconds.

A player who is not currently a veteran probably wouldn't be using a self nerf. They would continue to level and learn as they are now.

But what content is there for me with my ping issue - when I will have arrived at level 50, I will most likely be hopelessly overpowered for overland, and too weak for other content - this is how I experienced that on the PTS - too powerful for overland, too weak for everything else - terrible, why would I want to get there?

And I am averse to grinding - so going for special armor sets is a no go, if it involves griding. Well, and I don't want to play with others, they are too fast and stress me out - I want a relaxed time in Tamriel, I am totally incompatible to play with them.

If a player is too weak for everything else, which I assume is referring to end game content, then they would be too weak for veteran ovlerand.

Lysette

SilverBride wrote: »

Lysette wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Lysette wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

I believe self nerfs are a very reasonable solution and have yet to hear a convincing arguement against them.

I'll give you one - if I want to learn to adapt to veteran content one day, I have to learn that at my abilities - with a self-nerf I would learn nothing at all. And I really think, we need a middle ground - the gap from casual to vet is just too wide - one cannot learn anything when dead in seconds.

A player who is not currently a veteran probably wouldn't be using a self nerf. They would continue to level and learn as they are now.

But what content is there for me with my ping issue - when I will have arrived at level 50, I will most likely be hopelessly overpowered for overland, and too weak for other content - this is how I experienced that on the PTS - too powerful for overland, too weak for everything else - terrible, why would I want to get there?

And I am averse to grinding - so going for special armor sets is a no go, if it involves griding. Well, and I don't want to play with others, they are too fast and stress me out - I want a relaxed time in Tamriel, I am totally incompatible to play with them.

If a player is too weak for everything else, which I assume is referring to end game content, then they would be too weak for veteran ovlerand.

Now, guess why I suggested a middle ground?

Parasaurolophus

SilverBride wrote: »

CP5 wrote: »

How then would you be worried about people in another instance enjoying the content differently than you?

Because it divides the playerbase.

CP5 wrote: »

Just like with dungeons, some people are in normal instances, some in vet, and people on neither side are impacted by others in another instance enjoying the content differently than them.

Dungeons and trials etc. are end game content. They are created specifically as an option for end game players who want the challenge.

Overland is the base game. It is not created to be end game content but rather is for everyone.

CP5 wrote: »

How do you feel an opt-in self nerf system would be any different from what we can already do? Why is it that everyone has to be in the same type of instance as you, even though you can't even begin to interact with all of them, what harm is there in people enjoying overland content rather than just logging out of the game? Is it better for people to stand around in town doing nothing or log out just so you can be content that they're all 'experiencing the same content as you', rather than efforts be made to allow them to actually enjoy the largest piece of content ESO has, the entire world of tamriel?

It would give players the flexibility to choose how much of a challenge they want and a very easy way to accomplish it. And it keeps us all in the same world.

Overland is not end game content and it shouldn't be turned into an end game alternative for players who choose not to participate in the end game content already provided.

However, any high-end content has a normal version, for casuals or beginners.

I seem to understand what you mean. Are you saying that the overland will be divided into essentially two different games? But what's the point? Different versions of dungeons don't give anyone the feel of different games. And they differ, as a rule, not much. Cases when the vet. and numberal. different mechanics are minimal.

Parasaurolophus

SilverBride wrote: »

CP5 wrote: »

How then would you be worried about people in another instance enjoying the content differently than you?

Overland is not end game content and it shouldn't be turned into an end game alternative for players who choose not to participate in the end game content already provided.

There are a lot of them. He could give us much more impressions than now. Overland is not only not content for the end game, in principle, due to triviality, it does not look like a video game. It's completely unlike an RPG, and even more so completely unlike a classic TES game (not just because of the difficulty). It's more like a visual novel wrapped in a 3D game. But this is a visual novel. You just wander from one marker to another, reading the dialogue. That's all.

SilverBride

Lysette wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Lysette wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Lysette wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

I believe self nerfs are a very reasonable solution and have yet to hear a convincing arguement against them.

I'll give you one - if I want to learn to adapt to veteran content one day, I have to learn that at my abilities - with a self-nerf I would learn nothing at all. And I really think, we need a middle ground - the gap from casual to vet is just too wide - one cannot learn anything when dead in seconds.

A player who is not currently a veteran probably wouldn't be using a self nerf. They would continue to level and learn as they are now.

But what content is there for me with my ping issue - when I will have arrived at level 50, I will most likely be hopelessly overpowered for overland, and too weak for other content - this is how I experienced that on the PTS - too powerful for overland, too weak for everything else - terrible, why would I want to get there?

And I am averse to grinding - so going for special armor sets is a no go, if it involves griding. Well, and I don't want to play with others, they are too fast and stress me out - I want a relaxed time in Tamriel, I am totally incompatible to play with them.

If a player is too weak for everything else, which I assume is referring to end game content, then they would be too weak for veteran ovlerand.

Now, guess why I suggested a middle ground?

A middle ground would attract a very small and specific type of player. And as I have mentioned before, overland is not end game content nor should it be, especially when there is already a lot of end game content in game.

I understand why you may not choose to participate in the current end game content because I don't either. But that doesn't mean we should expect the base game be altered to fit our playstyles. We should rather choose to participate in those parts of the game that do fit what we are looking for and enjoy.

Lysette

That end game content is incompatible to my rpg characters - they are neither DD, nor healer, nor tank - they are a bit of everything, because they have to sustain themselves and on their own and no one will help them fighting either, so they have to do that by themselves as well - and if one has to do both, the result is that one is specialized in nothing - incompatible to the whole concept used in end game and groups - so where are we role players then, who might play a mediocre character, who is not a hero type - where is the content for us to play - is it too weird to expect being able to role play in a role playing game?

Ok, SilverBride, I see you don't want any changes to the game as it is basically - correct me if I'm wrong.

For me this basically means, when I arrive at level 50 - I can decide to delete those characters and free a character slot - or what is much more likely, I go and play NMS or EVE or whatever and say good bye to ESO.

Lysette

I mean, ZOS is rewriting part of the server-code - they could account for more instances and design it to be better scalable - and add new levels of challenge - from slightly more to really hard - currently it is just two extremes - that is not enough.

CP5

SilverBride wrote: »

CP5 wrote: »

How then would you be worried about people in another instance enjoying the content differently than you?

Because it divides the playerbase.

CP5 wrote: »

Just like with dungeons, some people are in normal instances, some in vet, and people on neither side are impacted by others in another instance enjoying the content differently than them.

Dungeons and trials etc. are end game content. They are created specifically as an option for end game players who want the challenge.

Overland is the base game. It is not created to be end game content but rather is for everyone.

CP5 wrote: »

How do you feel an opt-in self nerf system would be any different from what we can already do? Why is it that everyone has to be in the same type of instance as you, even though you can't even begin to interact with all of them, what harm is there in people enjoying overland content rather than just logging out of the game? Is it better for people to stand around in town doing nothing or log out just so you can be content that they're all 'experiencing the same content as you', rather than efforts be made to allow them to actually enjoy the largest piece of content ESO has, the entire world of tamriel?

It would give players the flexibility to choose how much of a challenge they want and a very easy way to accomplish it. And it keeps us all in the same world.

Overland is not end game content and it shouldn't be turned into an end game alternative for players who choose not to participate in the end game content already provided.

"Because it divides the playerbase." Again, silver, you project this mentality of "people have to play with me my way or else leave." That divides people. When my trial group's raid ends, most of them leave until we run again the next week, because they don't feel like there is anything worth their time to do in the game. How does willfully pushing people away from the game help unify the community?

"Overland is the base game." And every single major and minor dlc. Nothing says "Overland must be for beginners at all times." Nothing says "Trials must be for veteran players only." either. By virtue of having a normal and veteran option, dungeons and trials are allowed to accommodate different types of players. Why is this a bad thing if applied to overland? Better to let people leave dissatisfied than to give them an option, in an instance you weren't going to ever visit in the first place?

"It would give players the flexibility to choose how much of a challenge they want and a very easy way to accomplish it. And it keeps us all in the same world."

Ok, so how? I suggest ZOS uses pre-existing tech, that they've already used in this application, to do something they already do everywhere else. What's your solution? A slider, that, depended on where it's set, applies some buffs or debuffs to players to make the content easier or harder? How would that fix the issue of enemies intentionally holding back and refusing to put up a memorable fight, basic mobs and bosses alike? How would that avoid making every fight nothing but a stale bullet sponge fight, like people suggest my idea would?


And as for your back and forth with Lysette, think of it this way. ESO is a video game. Most video games teach players during gameplay. The original Mario would kill players in the first 5s if they didn't jump. Was that too hard core? No, that game depended on a players' ability to jump to succeed, and they weren't going to lull players into the sense that 'all I need to do to win is walk right.' It made people know that 'these are the tools you need to learn, and as we go we'll teach you more.' That is where some players find the engaging content, being given a challenge and either learning a new tool to overcome it or learning how to apply the skills they already have. Let's see how overland fails at this.

Tank mobs have the same health, armor, and damage as their dps mob counterparts. Do players ever learn about the importance of armor penetration prior to doing vet pve or pvp? Honestly, no, there is no way for them to because the whole armor system is just this abstract thing until it becomes critical to know.

How about interrupting enemies? Real important skill, but name one enemy in overland who demand you interrupt them. Practicing skills like quickly interrupting or breaking free are vital for survival in more challenging content, but the only place to practice is where you're punished heavily for not already knowing.

How about getting out of red aoes. Or participating in fights where you have to actively know how your own skills work, or even fights where you have to use skills at all. I was in cloudrest and watched a player recast volley on multiple targets, and this player didn't know either that volley only starts damaging a few seconds after cast, and that you can only have 1 version of each skill out at a time. This player literally accomplished nothing, and at no point prior were they in a situation where they actually needed to understand what their skills did.

Veteran overland wouldn't be a "super try hard experience where every enemy is a boss fight." It would be a place where tank mobs actually tank, healer mobs actually demand priority, archer mobs actually apply ranged pressure and require a response, and where players can actually enjoy eso's gameplay at the most engaging it can be without needing to be in a group. And ZOS has the tech needed to do this, all without compromising your experience of power fantasy and new player approachability.

Lysette

SilverBride wrote: »

Lysette wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Lysette wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Lysette wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

I believe self nerfs are a very reasonable solution and have yet to hear a convincing arguement against them.

I'll give you one - if I want to learn to adapt to veteran content one day, I have to learn that at my abilities - with a self-nerf I would learn nothing at all. And I really think, we need a middle ground - the gap from casual to vet is just too wide - one cannot learn anything when dead in seconds.

A player who is not currently a veteran probably wouldn't be using a self nerf. They would continue to level and learn as they are now.

But what content is there for me with my ping issue - when I will have arrived at level 50, I will most likely be hopelessly overpowered for overland, and too weak for other content - this is how I experienced that on the PTS - too powerful for overland, too weak for everything else - terrible, why would I want to get there?

And I am averse to grinding - so going for special armor sets is a no go, if it involves griding. Well, and I don't want to play with others, they are too fast and stress me out - I want a relaxed time in Tamriel, I am totally incompatible to play with them.

If a player is too weak for everything else, which I assume is referring to end game content, then they would be too weak for veteran ovlerand.

Now, guess why I suggested a middle ground?

A middle ground would attract a very small and specific type of player. And as I have mentioned before, overland is not end game content nor should it be, especially when there is already a lot of end game content in game.

I understand why you may not choose to participate in the current end game content because I don't either. But that doesn't mean we should expect the base game be altered to fit our playstyles. We should rather choose to participate in those parts of the game that do fit what we are looking for and enjoy.

The latter might be your approach but not mine - if I get really unhappy with a game, I dumb it for good - and play something else - a company who is not going to fix such issue doesn't deserve my money - that is my point of view on the matter.

This said, I can certainly not tell them how to design the game - it is their game and their choice - but so is mine to choose, what I want to play and where my money goes - I will not allow them to force me to a playstyle I dislike.