Overland Content Feedback Thread

spartaxoxo

They usually have something for vet players in all the updates, though the story dlc updates are pretty dicey. They didn't have anything in Dragonhold or Deadlands, but did in Murkmire (arena), Markarth (arena), Thieves Guild (trial), Clockwork City(arena), and Imperial City (pvp and vet dungeons). Kinda debatable how Dark Brotherhood shakes out, as that's when they removed vet levels in favor of cp and gave vet modes to Sanctum Ophidia. But the zone itself is just story.

Casuals get the bulk of the story but the repeatable content is largely aimed at vets these days with even the normal mode dungeon dlc and arenas being harder than a lot of casuals would like to do, as evidenced by the costant complaints about how eso+ members are punished by having dlc in their RND.

SilverBride

spartaxoxo wrote: »

They usually have something for vet players in all the updates, though the story dlc updates are pretty dicey. They didn't have anything in Dragonhold or Deadlands, but did in Murkmire (arena), Markarth (arena), Thieves Guild (trial), Clockwork City(arena), and Imperial City (pvp and vet dungeons). Kinda debatable how Dark Brotherhood shakes out, as that's when they removed vet levels in favor of cp and gave vet modes to Sanctum Ophidia. But the zone itself is just story.

Casuals get the bulk of the story but the repeatable content is largely aimed at vets these days with even the normal mode dungeon dlc and arenas being harder than a lot of casuals would like to do, as evidenced by the costant complaints about how eso+ members are punished by having dlc in their RND.

That is the sole reason I don't queue for dungeons. I hate the DLC ones.

spartaxoxo

SilverBride wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

They usually have something for vet players in all the updates, though the story dlc updates are pretty dicey. They didn't have anything in Dragonhold or Deadlands, but did in Murkmire (arena), Markarth (arena), Thieves Guild (trial), Clockwork City(arena), and Imperial City (pvp and vet dungeons). Kinda debatable how Dark Brotherhood shakes out, as that's when they removed vet levels in favor of cp and gave vet modes to Sanctum Ophidia. But the zone itself is just story.

Casuals get the bulk of the story but the repeatable content is largely aimed at vets these days with even the normal mode dungeon dlc and arenas being harder than a lot of casuals would like to do, as evidenced by the costant complaints about how eso+ members are punished by having dlc in their RND.

That is the sole reason I don't queue for dungeons. I hate the DLC ones.

You can just queue for the ones you'd like. You wouldn't get the transmutes but at least you'd have fun doing base game dungeons.

spartaxoxo

https://youtu.be/OllNm7RqYp0

Anyway I took a run around greenshade. Does this place look packed to you guys because it's as busy as this zone gets. About half of the characters I did manage to find were not vet cp (160+) and half of them were with one even flexing their vma title. The popular zones are relatively busy though. The other day I saw as many people at the Alikr dolmen as I saw this whole zone.

Harvokaan

spartaxoxo wrote: »

They usually have something for vet players in all the updates, though the story dlc updates are pretty dicey. They didn't have anything in Dragonhold or Deadlands, but did in Murkmire (arena), Markarth (arena), Thieves Guild (trial), Clockwork City(arena), and Imperial City (pvp and vet dungeons). Kinda debatable how Dark Brotherhood shakes out, as that's when they removed vet levels in favor of cp and gave vet modes to Sanctum Ophidia. But the zone itself is just story.

Casuals get the bulk of the story but the repeatable content is largely aimed at vets these days with even the normal mode dungeon dlc and arenas being harder than a lot of casuals would like to do, as evidenced by the costant complaints about how eso+ members are punished by having dlc in their RND.

Compalains about vet dlc dungs are mostly for RVD, not RND. Also they make dlc dungeons easier each year for normal and veteran and harder for hard modes so you cannot say that it is aimed mainly at vets, truth be told the new dungeons are more casual friendly then ever with additional buffs, secrets, etc. I like that system as new dungeons on normal and vet are more accessible to more players but hms still can provide a challenge. New trials were pretty bad for many different reasons.

Remember that most your examples are content that have more then 3 years now. We have one trial and 4 dungeons (usually two easy ones, one hard and one challenging [at this point after 3 years, it is like their pattern]). Other mmos provide much more content for end game players, not only raids and dungeons tbh

spartaxoxo

Harvokaan wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

They usually have something for vet players in all the updates, though the story dlc updates are pretty dicey. They didn't have anything in Dragonhold or Deadlands, but did in Murkmire (arena), Markarth (arena), Thieves Guild (trial), Clockwork City(arena), and Imperial City (pvp and vet dungeons). Kinda debatable how Dark Brotherhood shakes out, as that's when they removed vet levels in favor of cp and gave vet modes to Sanctum Ophidia. But the zone itself is just story.

Casuals get the bulk of the story but the repeatable content is largely aimed at vets these days with even the normal mode dungeon dlc and arenas being harder than a lot of casuals would like to do, as evidenced by the costant complaints about how eso+ members are punished by having dlc in their RND.

Compalains about vet dlc dungs are mostly for RVD, not RND.

That's untrue. I have seen many threads specifically complaining about RND.

Edit

MakoRuu wrote: »

We got to the first boss, which is the sisters, and the team wiped over and over again. The others kept saying "WE CAN DO IT, IT'S ONLY NORMAL." Myself, and only one other person over a thousand Champion Ranks.

I was DPS, doing 80% of the group damage (CombatMetrics.)

I finally gave up and just left, which I absolutely hate doing.

For example here's a snippet of the opening post on the latest big thread on fakes.

Here's another the last one about removing dlc from rnd I myself bothered to participate in

Muttsmutt wrote: »

the reason i don't have my sub on auto-renew is that this is not a feature that is actually implemented in the game:


-snip-

the "random is random" argument becomes unreasonable in my opinion, when you consider that the amount of variance within the randomized outcomes is very, very significant. within the same bracket of randomized dungeons (as in, all of them), you have wildly different tiers of difficulty, correlating with upwards of a half-hour difference between potential RNG outcomes (the dungeon you get). this would be equivalent to having non-set items added to the loot drop tables of bosses- it would create a massive disparity between the potential rewards you get for your time investment.

-snip-

All of these have been snipped to highlight the parts relevant to this thread. Go read the whole posts for these people's full arguments.

Harvokaan

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Harvokaan wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

They usually have something for vet players in all the updates, though the story dlc updates are pretty dicey. They didn't have anything in Dragonhold or Deadlands, but did in Murkmire (arena), Markarth (arena), Thieves Guild (trial), Clockwork City(arena), and Imperial City (pvp and vet dungeons). Kinda debatable how Dark Brotherhood shakes out, as that's when they removed vet levels in favor of cp and gave vet modes to Sanctum Ophidia. But the zone itself is just story.

Casuals get the bulk of the story but the repeatable content is largely aimed at vets these days with even the normal mode dungeon dlc and arenas being harder than a lot of casuals would like to do, as evidenced by the costant complaints about how eso+ members are punished by having dlc in their RND.

Compalains about vet dlc dungs are mostly for RVD, not RND.

That's untrue. I have seen many threads specifically complaining about RND.

Edit

MakoRuu wrote: »

We got to the first boss, which is the sisters, and the team wiped over and over again. The others kept saying "WE CAN DO IT, IT'S ONLY NORMAL." Myself, and only one other person over a thousand Champion Ranks.

I was DPS, doing 80% of the group damage (CombatMetrics.)

I finally gave up and just left, which I absolutely hate doing.

For example here's a snippet of the opening post on the latest big thread on fakes.

And how exactly one example proves your point? I said that complains are mostly about RVD, not that nobody complains about dlc dungs on RND. Also, like I said, new dungeons on normal are much easier then old dlc ones, even vets without hms are easier then before. Zos shifted where the challenge is to hard modes, not because they push this content mainly for vet but to make it enjoyable for more ppl, not only vets. It is a good approach and it should be done also for overland zones as currently they are mainly for casuals

spartaxoxo

Harvokaan wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Harvokaan wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

They usually have something for vet players in all the updates, though the story dlc updates are pretty dicey. They didn't have anything in Dragonhold or Deadlands, but did in Murkmire (arena), Markarth (arena), Thieves Guild (trial), Clockwork City(arena), and Imperial City (pvp and vet dungeons). Kinda debatable how Dark Brotherhood shakes out, as that's when they removed vet levels in favor of cp and gave vet modes to Sanctum Ophidia. But the zone itself is just story.

Casuals get the bulk of the story but the repeatable content is largely aimed at vets these days with even the normal mode dungeon dlc and arenas being harder than a lot of casuals would like to do, as evidenced by the costant complaints about how eso+ members are punished by having dlc in their RND.

Compalains about vet dlc dungs are mostly for RVD, not RND.

That's untrue. I have seen many threads specifically complaining about RND.

Edit

MakoRuu wrote: »

We got to the first boss, which is the sisters, and the team wiped over and over again. The others kept saying "WE CAN DO IT, IT'S ONLY NORMAL." Myself, and only one other person over a thousand Champion Ranks.

I was DPS, doing 80% of the group damage (CombatMetrics.)

I finally gave up and just left, which I absolutely hate doing.

For example here's a snippet of the opening post on the latest big thread on fakes.

And how exactly one example proves your point? I said that complains are mostly about RVD, not that nobody complains about dlc dungs on RND. Also, like I said, new dungeons on normal are much easier then old dlc ones, even vets without hms are easier then before. Zos shifted where the challenge is to hard modes, not because they push this content mainly for vet but to make it enjoyable for more ppl, not only vets. It is a good approach and it should be done also for overland zones as currently they are mainly for casuals

First of all there is different levels of vets and the dlc vet content is still aimed primarily at people firmly in the does vet content crowd. The complaints are not mostly about vrd and those are some examples. You make it out like it's only a small amount of people complaining but ZOS recently made a similar post to the one made in this thread because the normals not being easy enough is complained about a LOT. A mass ton.

Edit:

Here's another one with a full dev response because normals have been complained about almost as much as a lack of vet overland

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/595516/quest-mode-for-dungeons/p1

The problem is simple. The normals are too hard for many to solo (and some are impossible even you can like Direfrost due to forced multiplayer mechs) and they can't hear the story in groups because they have trouble finding groups that will help.

Edit 2




RND vs RVD results. 300+ for RND, RVD is 5.

Last edit




The phrase "random normal (3.7k" vs "random vet (1.6k)"

Now these aren't all complaints because it's impossible for us to know which it is mostly but we can say normals are by far the most discussed, so the most logical guess is also that they are the most complained about.

Many, many casuals do NOT like the dlc dungeons, they prefer the base game ones, and wanting them removed from RND has been a very popular topic for a long time. That content is primarily designed for vet players who enjoy difficult content. That devs have made them more accessible for mid tier vet players does not mean it's suddenly content for casuals.

The normal modes have even gotten harder as devs agreed with the feedback that normal should do a better job of preparing people for vet.

Harvokaan

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Harvokaan wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Harvokaan wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

They usually have something for vet players in all the updates, though the story dlc updates are pretty dicey. They didn't have anything in Dragonhold or Deadlands, but did in Murkmire (arena), Markarth (arena), Thieves Guild (trial), Clockwork City(arena), and Imperial City (pvp and vet dungeons). Kinda debatable how Dark Brotherhood shakes out, as that's when they removed vet levels in favor of cp and gave vet modes to Sanctum Ophidia. But the zone itself is just story.

Casuals get the bulk of the story but the repeatable content is largely aimed at vets these days with even the normal mode dungeon dlc and arenas being harder than a lot of casuals would like to do, as evidenced by the costant complaints about how eso+ members are punished by having dlc in their RND.

Compalains about vet dlc dungs are mostly for RVD, not RND.

That's untrue. I have seen many threads specifically complaining about RND.

Edit

MakoRuu wrote: »

We got to the first boss, which is the sisters, and the team wiped over and over again. The others kept saying "WE CAN DO IT, IT'S ONLY NORMAL." Myself, and only one other person over a thousand Champion Ranks.

I was DPS, doing 80% of the group damage (CombatMetrics.)

I finally gave up and just left, which I absolutely hate doing.

For example here's a snippet of the opening post on the latest big thread on fakes.

And how exactly one example proves your point? I said that complains are mostly about RVD, not that nobody complains about dlc dungs on RND. Also, like I said, new dungeons on normal are much easier then old dlc ones, even vets without hms are easier then before. Zos shifted where the challenge is to hard modes, not because they push this content mainly for vet but to make it enjoyable for more ppl, not only vets. It is a good approach and it should be done also for overland zones as currently they are mainly for casuals

First of all there is different levels of vets and the dlc vet content is still aimed primarily at people firmly in the does vet content crowd. The complaints are not mostly about nrnd and those are some examples. You make it out like it's only a small amount of people complaining but ZOS recently made a similar post to the one made in this thread because the normals not being easy enough is complained about a LOT. A mass ton.

I will answer with the same logic as many players who are against vet overland used in this thread: If it would be such a big problem then zos would already solve it by creating multiple queries with and without dlc dungs. ppl complain about it for years and they didn't do anything, maybe this change is supported only by vocal minority.
Also don't treat vet crowd as monolith as the ppl who enjoy vet content from time to time have much more numbers then ppl who are end game vet players. I would even dare to say it is huge part of eso playerbase as they still produce vet content after all these years. DLC dungeons are for everyone. Ppl who enjoy easy mode, ppl who sometimes wants to play something more difficult, ppl who enjoy the real challenges like hard trifectas.
Also, i will use ant vet overland crowd logic again: it is complained a mass ton on forums. I don't see many complains in game, no matter if we are talking about guild chats or zone chats. Of course I'm a member of end game pve guilds so it would be hard to me to notice a problems of the most casual eso community but i read in this topic so many times that "because i don't see many complains in game, it must be a vocal minority on forums that want to implement this change" that i don't feel bad using the same arguments here anymore.
Who knows, maybe zos will pin the thread about dlc dungeon in randoms one day but for now they apparently treat it as something that they dont need to fix as majority of the playerbase doesn't share your feelings on this topic

spartaxoxo

Harvokaan wrote: »

I will answer with the same logic as many players who are against vet overland used in this thread: If it would be such a big problem then zos would already solve it by creating multiple queries with and without dlc dungs. ppl complain about it for years and they didn't do anything, maybe this change is supported only by vocal minority.

ZOS is the one that said that people who like difficult content are in the minority. If they thought that they could split those players out of the queue and still have a healthy population, they would have. That's not the same logic, it's just a parrot. In order for it to be the same logic, you'd have to have actually pulled that statement from a source. Which you didn't.

Also don't treat vet crowd as monolith as the ppl who enjoy vet content from time to time have much more numbers then ppl who are end game vet players.

Yes. I treated them as a monolith by saying dlc dungeons are aimed at vet players of different skill levels. And you treated it as a spectrum by claiming they weren't and citing how they have gotten easier so it's not for vets...

Hmm. Oh wait that's actually the other way around. LOL.

I would even dare to say it is huge part of eso playerbase as they still produce vet content after all these years. DLC dungeons are for everyone. Ppl who enjoy easy mode, ppl who sometimes wants to play something more difficult, ppl who enjoy the real challenges like hard trifectas.

YOU are the one that argued that casuals get something every DLC. When I argued that Vets do too, you are the one that disagreed. I have never once argued that there are not a lot of vet players. I have argued this entire time they are a sizable minority. Strawman.

Also, i will use ant vet overland crowd logic again: it is complained a mass ton on forums. I don't see many complains in game, no matter if we are talking about guild chats or zone chats. Of course I'm a member of end game pve guilds so it would be hard to me to notice a problems of the most casual eso community but i read in this topic so many times that "because i don't see many complains in game, it must be a vocal minority on forums that want to implement this change" that i don't feel bad using the same arguments here anymore.

I am getting really really really fed up with people claiming I am anti-vet, which is utterly false. And attributing someone else's argument to my own.

I have argued exhaustively that ZOS knows who is in the minority, but that being in the minority doesn't mean it is not a sizable crowd that needs this change and that something must change. It is Rich Lambert that declared you guys were in the minority, and he'd be the one that knows as he is the only one with player data. A biased sample of your guild is not the same as an authoritative source with the actual player data of the entire playerbase.

It shouldn't even matter, being a minority doesn't mean that a group should be neglected. I have argued that constantly and I am utterly sick of equating not liking ONE plan with not wanting a vet option at all.

Who knows, maybe zos will pin the thread about dlc dungeon in randoms one day but for now they apparently treat it as something that they dont need to fix as majority of the playerbase doesn't share your feelings on this topic

They already did give story mode this treatment. The only reason this one is pinned is because they wanted to keep this topic clean from the rest of the forums as it was creating a negative atmosphere.

CP5

spartaxoxo, some good points you made about your ideas around a debuff system. Amplifying different damage types, in your example with heavy attacks, but could also work for things such as aoe's would actually be easy to add, I imagine that they all have unique flags on them that could simply have an 'and deal additional damage when target has x debuff' attached to them. You could even flip it to make it so tank mobs take considerably less damage from players to fix the issue of 'every enemy deals the same damage and has the same health' standard that makes current enemy design feel flat and uninspired.

The environmental one would be amazing, but as someone whose had to troubleshoot my own Skyrim load order to fix issues with mods that implemented a similar system, it's a lot of work with a lot of edge cases that would need constant attention until they're all fixed.

A bigger pain point for me personally is how many enemies are designed to waste their own time. This included a lot of bosses who have lengthy speeches that they can be killed during, and if they're undamagable during them, then it mostly acts as a chance for players to prep damage again. But a lot of basic enemies suffer this, and even with more engaging sources of difficulty it wouldn't be able to fix these behaviors. Things like tanks leaping from the fight, knife throwers taking an age and a half to throw, archers taking aim until they die of old age, and so on.

The more I write this, the more sensible it seems it could be, but the fact that these kinds of rules are used so rarely in game makes me feel like it would be more prone to issues, and I'm not sure if it would result in more or less work because of it.

spartaxoxo

CP5 wrote: »

spartaxoxo, some good points you made about your ideas around a debuff system. Amplifying different damage types, in your example with heavy attacks, but could also work for things such as aoe's would actually be easy to add, I imagine that they all have unique flags on them that could simply have an 'and deal additional damage when target has x debuff' attached to them. You could even flip it to make it so tank mobs take considerably less damage from players to fix the issue of 'every enemy deals the same damage and has the same health' standard that makes current enemy design feel flat and uninspired.

The environmental one would be amazing, but as someone whose had to troubleshoot my own Skyrim load order to fix issues with mods that implemented a similar system, it's a lot of work with a lot of edge cases that would need constant attention until they're all fixed.

A bigger pain point for me personally is how many enemies are designed to waste their own time. This included a lot of bosses who have lengthy speeches that they can be killed during, and if they're undamagable during them, then it mostly acts as a chance for players to prep damage again. But a lot of basic enemies suffer this, and even with more engaging sources of difficulty it wouldn't be able to fix these behaviors. Things like tanks leaping from the fight, knife throwers taking an age and a half to throw, archers taking aim until they die of old age, and so on.

The more I write this, the more sensible it seems it could be, but the fact that these kinds of rules are used so rarely in game makes me feel like it would be more prone to issues, and I'm not sure if it would result in more or less work because of it.

Yeah. I just don't see how they could work around that bigger pain point without just overhauling the whole base game encounter, in which case I don't see why they wouldn't also just make it pretty hard and then give it's own mode.

If they do go that route, I won't be mad. I just also wouldn't expect much if any new content either as that seems like a really ambitious project. And that PVP is also getting a mass project at the momemt. I know they told me that just reducing the lag between waiting around for all the dialogue in DSA would take an estimated 3 months for example and that was enough to impact other stuff they could offer alone. So I can see such a project killing some other piece of content.

Which is why I think debuffs could be a good workaround. There's just so many interesting things you can do with them and they only require changing the player.

It's funny the LOTRO devs actually implemented that slider and scrapped a new server that seemed to be about increasing difficulty from the article I read, guessing because it ended up too ambitious a project. This game is a lot bigger than that one though, so maybe it's not as infeasible as the devs have made it seem in their statements. I dunno.

If they go your route, I still hope it would be as hard as VMA because I'd be stoked for more of a challenge.

Harvokaan

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Harvokaan wrote: »

I will answer with the same logic as many players who are against vet overland used in this thread: If it would be such a big problem then zos would already solve it by creating multiple queries with and without dlc dungs. ppl complain about it for years and they didn't do anything, maybe this change is supported only by vocal minority.

ZOS is the one that said that people who like difficult content are in the minority. If they thought that they could split those players out of the queue and still have a healthy population, they would have. That's not the same logic, it's just a parrot. In order for it to be the same logic, you'd have to have actually pulled that statement from a source. Which you didn't.

Also don't treat vet crowd as monolith as the ppl who enjoy vet content from time to time have much more numbers then ppl who are end game vet players.

Yes. I treated them as a monolith by saying dlc dungeons are aimed at vet players of different skill levels. And you treated it as a spectrum by claiming they weren't and citing how they have gotten easier so it's not for vets...

Hmm. Oh wait that's actually the other way around. LOL.

I would even dare to say it is huge part of eso playerbase as they still produce vet content after all these years. DLC dungeons are for everyone. Ppl who enjoy easy mode, ppl who sometimes wants to play something more difficult, ppl who enjoy the real challenges like hard trifectas.

YOU are the one that argued that casuals get something every DLC. When I argued that Vets do too, you are the one that disagreed. I have never once argued that there are not a lot of vet players. I have argued this entire time they are a sizable minority. Strawman.

Also, i will use ant vet overland crowd logic again: it is complained a mass ton on forums. I don't see many complains in game, no matter if we are talking about guild chats or zone chats. Of course I'm a member of end game pve guilds so it would be hard to me to notice a problems of the most casual eso community but i read in this topic so many times that "because i don't see many complains in game, it must be a vocal minority on forums that want to implement this change" that i don't feel bad using the same arguments here anymore.

I am getting really really really fed up with people claiming I am anti-vet, which is utterly false. And attributing someone else's argument to my own.

I have argued exhaustively that ZOS knows who is in the minority, but that being in the minority doesn't mean it is not a sizable crowd that needs this change and that something must change. It is Rich Lambert that declared you guys were in the minority, and he'd be the one that knows as he is the only one with player data. A biased sample of your guild is not the same as an authoritative source with the actual player data of the entire playerbase.

It shouldn't even matter, being a minority doesn't mean that a group should be neglected. I have argued that constantly and I am utterly sick of equating not liking ONE plan with not wanting a vet option at all.

Who knows, maybe zos will pin the thread about dlc dungeon in randoms one day but for now they apparently treat it as something that they dont need to fix as majority of the playerbase doesn't share your feelings on this topic

They already did give that topic this treatment. The only reason this one is pinned is because they wanted to keep this topic clean from the rest of the forums as it was creating a negative atmosphere.

1. 5% of entire playerbase is the minority, 49% of entire playerbase is also a minority. What is the % of players who participate in vet content? I don't know, we don't know, only zos knows. Fact that they still push some vet content indicates that it must a large %, at least large enough to support it. I never said ppl who enjoy vet content (no matter if in more casual or hardcore way) are majority, just that they are not so small group as some ppl like to present.
2. I never said the new dungeons are not for vets, i said they [new dlc] are suited more for casuals then the first ones which is true. You don't need to put your words in my mouth, I can speak for myself.
3. I never said that vets are not getting new content (which in case of some dlcs are true like the latest one for example) but that the casuals are getting much more content then vets and in my opinion zos should show some love for other communities too. Maybe throw one or two bones more at us. You really seems to intentionaly change what i said so you can prove me wrong but you proved nothing here.
4. If someone is antagonizing pro vet players, argue against vet solutions and agree mostly with anti vet players and solutions that are in favor by mostly anti vet crowd then I think it is only natural to assume that this someone is anti-vet. But maybe I'm wrong. You know if someone is claiming you are anti vet maybe they missunderstood you. If two ppl slaims that, maybe there is some language barrier. If you are tired because so many ppl claims you are anti-vet, maybe, just maybe, they have some valid points to support that claim.
5. I said that apparently ppl who claims there is a problem with random dlcs are the minority. Ask Rich, maybe he will confirm. not sure why you rant that ppl who are in favor of vet overland are the minority here, I think we all know we are. We just disagree that because of that fact our opinion matter less.
6. I think topics about fake roles are also creating negative atmosphere, enough that some devs even comments on that at their twitters (like Gilliam who post couple tweets about whole fake role debate). Fact that they gather the feedback from here and put some light on the topic indicates that maybe one day something will change (as i strongly believe something should change). You looked like discussion about random dungeons is a pretty important topic for you and maybe one day they will change something in that regard. But as for now it looks like they treat it like too small problem to care or not even the problem (well, the problem for minority on forum for sure). But hey, don't give up, I will encourage you to fight for this as i believe we all have the rights to ask for changes that are supported by our (minority) communities

Parasaurolophus

Thanks for your post @tomofhyrule. There aren't enough posts like this in this thread.

tomofhyrule wrote: »

The overland is easy. It's relaxing. It's nice to go flower picking when you're not running from pre-OT Craglorn wasps. It's not where to go if you want to be challenged. There are parts of the game that challenge exists, and many of those aren't used very much. But the overland and story bosses are made for casuals. It's good to have some content for people for whom dungeons like nFG1 is too intense (and there are people that can't do those).

But here I would like to express my point of view. People relax when they do what they like and what they want to do. Someone draws, dances, sits in cafes or plays sports. Rest is not only relaxation. For many people, gaming is a hobby. Especially if it's online games. Online games are valued primarily for their replay value, and this is where eso has a problem.
ESO is exciting, but often leaves veterans without content. You go to trials only according to the schedule in order to try achievements. And this experience brings a lot of fun to many people. Of course, you can go to trials with random groups, but only to farm the gear. And it will hardly be interesting after 10-15 runs. Doing dungeons is actually quite rare. Again, it rarely happens with friends, mostly just farming for some rewards. As a rule, after several completions, the dungeon becomes boring.
I do not have many friends in the game, and those whom I can call at any time do not exist at all. At the same time, playing with pugs does not represent any valuable experience for me.
Many players used to go to pvp. But now this almost never happens, for obvious reasons.
See how many players in Craglorn are willing to just go anywhere.
I would be happy if the existing veteran content had more relevance. For example, pledges could contain better rewards and encourage players to improve and run hm dungeons more often.

spartaxoxo

Harvokaan wrote: »

I never said the new dungeons are not for vets, i said they [new dlc] are suited more for casuals then the first ones which is true. You don't need to put your words in my mouth, I can speak for myself.

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Casuals get the bulk of the story but the repeatable content is largely aimed at vets these days

Harvokaan wrote: »

Also they make dlc dungeons easier each year for normal and veteran and harder for hard modes so you cannot say that it is aimed mainly at vets,

No. You stated explicitly that they are not mainly aimed vets, which implies they are instead mainly aimed at casuals as that is the exhaustive list of what two groups we were discussing.

Again I said they were mainly aimed at vets and you disagreed with that assessment. I'm not gonna bother discussing the rest of this post. You keep putting words in my mouth for example you stated there was casuals get something each update. It was ME who pointed out that vets do too except that story dlcs are dicey.

I never made the claim that you think vets don't get content. I simply pointed out that vets get content too as a counterpoint to you saying casuals get it each time.

spartaxoxo wrote: »

They usually have something for vet players in all the updates, though the story dlc updates are pretty dicey. They didn't have anything in Dragonhold or Deadlands, but did in Murkmire (arena), Markarth (arena), Thieves Guild (trial), Clockwork City(arena), and Imperial City (pvp and vet dungeons). Kinda debatable how Dark Brotherhood shakes out, as that's when they removed vet levels in favor of cp and gave vet modes to Sanctum Ophidia. But the zone itself is just story.

Harvokaan

Parasaurolophus wrote: »

Thanks for your post @tomofhyrule. There aren't enough posts like this in this thread.

tomofhyrule wrote: »

The overland is easy. It's relaxing. It's nice to go flower picking when you're not running from pre-OT Craglorn wasps. It's not where to go if you want to be challenged. There are parts of the game that challenge exists, and many of those aren't used very much. But the overland and story bosses are made for casuals. It's good to have some content for people for whom dungeons like nFG1 is too intense (and there are people that can't do those).

But here I would like to express my point of view. People relax when they do what they like and what they want to do. Someone draws, dances, sits in cafes or plays sports. Rest is not only relaxation. For many people, gaming is a hobby. Especially if it's online games. Online games are valued primarily for their replay value, and this is where eso has a big problem.
ESO is exciting, but often leaves veterans without content. You go to trials only according to the schedule in order to try achievements. And this experience brings a lot of fun to many people. Of course, you can go to trials with random groups, but only to farm the gear. And it will hardly be interesting after 10-15 runs. Doing dungeons is actually quite rare. Again, it rarely happens with friends, mostly just farming for some rewards. As a rule, after several completions, the dungeon becomes boring.
Many players used to go to pvp. But now this almost never happens, for obvious reasons.
See how many players in Craglorn are willing to just go anywhere.

Great summary. As a vet I just want to enjoy this game in more ways, I think this desire perfectly matches their "play as you want" philosophy. I just think some optional changes are needed so ppl like me can play the game the way we want

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Harvokaan wrote: »

I never said the new dungeons are not for vets, i said they [new dlc] are suited more for casuals then the first ones which is true. You don't need to put your words in my mouth, I can speak for myself.

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Casuals get the bulk of the story but the repeatable content is largely aimed at vets these days

Harvokaan wrote: »

Also they make dlc dungeons easier each year for normal and veteran and harder for hard modes so you cannot say that it is aimed mainly at vets,

No. You stated explicitly that they are not mainly aimed vets, which implies they are instead mainly aimed at casuals as that is the exhaustive list of what two groups we were discussing.

Again I said they were mainly aimed at vets and you disagreed with that assessment. I'm not gonna bother discussing the rest of this post.

I said that new dungeons cannot be described as "aimed mainly at vets". I even expand that thought by saying that dung are now more accessible to everyone, super casuals, ppl who enjoy normal group content and vet from time to time, mid level vets and super hardcore players, not only the best 10%. I see that they try to aim this content to wider playebase and I think that is a good thing.
You, deribately or not, misrepresent my word by falsely stating that "not aimed mainly at vets" == "must be aimed mainly at casuals". I never said that. If you see eso community as only two factions, casuals and vets and not as a spectrum of different playstyles where some are more casual or hardcore then others then it is your problem.
I will repeat, devs gave a lot of love to more casual playerbase and it is good, happy that you like the content zos is preparing for you. I just think that more hardcore oriented players deserve a little bit more then what we currently get.

spartaxoxo

You know what? No. I am going to respond to one more thing.

I am sick and tired of being labelled as anti-vet just because I don't want a separate instance.

There is no singular solution to how to increase overland difficulty. It is a complex topic with a variety of potential solutions that have been proposed in this thread.

Nobody should claim that their idea is the ONLY idea to increasing difficulty and that everyone who doesn't like that idea is secretly against increasing difficulty at all. None of us are the arbiter of what vet overland looks like, and criticism should be of ideas not "crowds."

I have personally contributed probably like 20% of this threads replies all on my own. I have fought tirelessly for a difficulty increase. It matters to me. I haven't spent weeks of my time to keep the status quo, I have done so because I want the developers to seriously consider my ideas same as anyone else here.

That I want the solution that works best for MY family and friends, does NOT change that.

The ONLY reason I keep getting labeled as anti-vet is because I like debuffs and don't want a separate instance. That is not okay. A vet overland does not mean anybody's particular idea, unless it's the idea the developers ultimately implement.

LOTRO has a difficulty slider that people are paying monthly to use. Games have used debuffs to modify difficulty in all types of games for decades. It is a perfectly legitimate way to increase difficulty. It's okay to not like the idea, it is valid if it would break your personal immersion, but it not okay to say anyone who likes them doesn't actually want difficulty to increase.

I DO want an optional difficulty increase. I have advocated multiple solutions for them and not only debuffs. Stop changing my position.

spartaxoxo

Harvokaan wrote: »

You, deribately or not, misrepresent my word by falsely stating that "not aimed mainly at vets" == "must be aimed mainly at casuals". I never said that.

A mid level vet is a vet players. It is not my fault if what you meant by a "not mainly aimed at vets" is not "only aimed at endgame vets."

You used the term vets, which is inclusive term incorporating all kinds of vets. [snip]

[edited for baiting]

Ronin37

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Harvokaan wrote: »

I will answer with the same logic as many players who are against vet overland used in this thread: If it would be such a big problem then zos would already solve it by creating multiple queries with and without dlc dungs. ppl complain about it for years and they didn't do anything, maybe this change is supported only by vocal minority.

ZOS is the one that said that people who like difficult content are in the minority. If they thought that they could split those players out of the queue and still have a healthy population, they would have. That's not the same logic, it's just a parrot. In order for it to be the same logic, you'd have to have actually pulled that statement from a source. Which you didn't.

Also don't treat vet crowd as monolith as the ppl who enjoy vet content from time to time have much more numbers then ppl who are end game vet players.

Yes. I treated them as a monolith by saying dlc dungeons are aimed at vet players of different skill levels. And you treated it as a spectrum by claiming they weren't and citing how they have gotten easier so it's not for vets...

Hmm. Oh wait that's actually the other way around. LOL.

I would even dare to say it is huge part of eso playerbase as they still produce vet content after all these years. DLC dungeons are for everyone. Ppl who enjoy easy mode, ppl who sometimes wants to play something more difficult, ppl who enjoy the real challenges like hard trifectas.

YOU are the one that argued that casuals get something every DLC. When I argued that Vets do too, you are the one that disagreed. I have never once argued that there are not a lot of vet players. I have argued this entire time they are a sizable minority. Strawman.

Also, i will use ant vet overland crowd logic again: it is complained a mass ton on forums. I don't see many complains in game, no matter if we are talking about guild chats or zone chats. Of course I'm a member of end game pve guilds so it would be hard to me to notice a problems of the most casual eso community but i read in this topic so many times that "because i don't see many complains in game, it must be a vocal minority on forums that want to implement this change" that i don't feel bad using the same arguments here anymore.

I am getting really really really fed up with people claiming I am anti-vet, which is utterly false. And attributing someone else's argument to my own.

I have argued exhaustively that ZOS knows who is in the minority, but that being in the minority doesn't mean it is not a sizable crowd that needs this change and that something must change. It is Rich Lambert that declared you guys were in the minority, and he'd be the one that knows as he is the only one with player data. A biased sample of your guild is not the same as an authoritative source with the actual player data of the entire playerbase.

It shouldn't even matter, being a minority doesn't mean that a group should be neglected. I have argued that constantly and I am utterly sick of equating not liking ONE plan with not wanting a vet option at all.

Who knows, maybe zos will pin the thread about dlc dungeon in randoms one day but for now they apparently treat it as something that they dont need to fix as majority of the playerbase doesn't share your feelings on this topic

They already did give story mode this treatment. The only reason this one is pinned is because they wanted to keep this topic clean from the rest of the forums as it was creating a negative atmosphere.

ZOS turning ESO into a cell phone game is what is going to bite them in the butt. There is no real alternative out there at the moment but as soon as that happens the people who actually play games are gone. Then I assume they will finish what they started and remove any other real game content and pretty much compete with telltale games. What a shame.

Harvokaan

spartaxoxo wrote: »

The ONLY reason I keep getting labeled as anti-vet is because I like debuffs and don't want a separate instance. That is not okay. A vet overland does not mean anybody's particular idea, unless it's the idea the developers ultimately implement.

It is okay for you to think that way but I can asure you, it is wrong. There are many players here who are against separate intance and are not called "anti-vet". There were multiple ppl here who are" pro-vet", but not for separate instance and for most of them the discussions were pretty civil.
I don't like many options proposed here, I have my clear favorite but I believe zos will manage to find a way that at least will be better then what we have currently. Time will tell

Lysette

Harvokaan wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

They usually have something for vet players in all the updates, though the story dlc updates are pretty dicey. They didn't have anything in Dragonhold or Deadlands, but did in Murkmire (arena), Markarth (arena), Thieves Guild (trial), Clockwork City(arena), and Imperial City (pvp and vet dungeons). Kinda debatable how Dark Brotherhood shakes out, as that's when they removed vet levels in favor of cp and gave vet modes to Sanctum Ophidia. But the zone itself is just story.

Casuals get the bulk of the story but the repeatable content is largely aimed at vets these days with even the normal mode dungeon dlc and arenas being harder than a lot of casuals would like to do, as evidenced by the costant complaints about how eso+ members are punished by having dlc in their RND.

Compalains about vet dlc dungs are mostly for RVD, not RND. Also they make dlc dungeons easier each year for normal and veteran and harder for hard modes so you cannot say that it is aimed mainly at vets, truth be told the new dungeons are more casual friendly then ever with additional buffs, secrets, etc. I like that system as new dungeons on normal and vet are more accessible to more players but hms still can provide a challenge. New trials were pretty bad for many different reasons.

Remember that most your examples are content that have more then 3 years now. We have one trial and 4 dungeons (usually two easy ones, one hard and one challenging [at this point after 3 years, it is like their pattern]). Other mmos provide much more content for end game players, not only raids and dungeons tbh

You cannot compare this to other MMOs like this - ESO is born out of a single player series and gets a lot of players who never played an MMO before - and I bet a lot wish, it would not be an MMO but just, what it was original requested a type of "Skyrim with a friend" - not mass amounts of friends, but a friend, spouse - the ring of Mara points at exactly that as well - one friend or spouse. So the MMO part was intended by ZOS for the mass battles in Cyro - and I guess those will return, once they have a new server architecture - Matt did not in vain say, he expects drastically better performance, I guess performance will return to Cyro and then what?- Will vet overland even be played anymore, if you have all the challenge you want in Cyro?

spartaxoxo

Harvokaan wrote: »

It is okay for you to think that way but I can asure you, it is wrong. There are many players here who are against separate intance and are not called "anti-vet".

No. There is not. Anyone who favors debuffs instead has been labeled as anti-vet except those who barely posted. There has been almost no posts in this thread at all in favor of doing nothing beyond the first couple of pages.

I am far from the only player falsely accused of not wanting difficulty changes. There is no crowd of people who don't want Overland to increase in difficulty.

Edit

SilverBride wrote: »

And to clarify, I fully support a debuff or toggle or slider and challenge banners. I also support a standalone adventure zone. I just don't support a separate veteran overland for reasons I've stated before.

Toxic_Hemlock wrote: »

And I'll say it one more time. Debuffs could be used as a measuring statistic, FOR NOW, to see if it is popular enough to warrant a large scale overland change. As adding NO CP voluntarily to overland would give the devs a more specific reading of just how popular a instance vet overland would be.

Here's another one that gets labeled that. What do they want done about difficulty? Nothing? Nope. They have both wanted debuffs instead of a separate instance.

There is no anti-vet overland crowd.

Lysette

.

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Harvokaan wrote: »

It is okay for you to think that way but I can asure you, it is wrong. There are many players here who are against separate intance and are not called "anti-vet".

No. There is not. Anyone who favors debuffs instead has been labeled as anti-vet except those who barely posted. There has been almost no posts in this thread at all in favor of doing nothing beyond the first couple of pages.

I am far from the only player falsely accused of not wanting difficulty changes. There is no crowd of people who don't want Overland to increase in difficulty.

Edit

SilverBride wrote: »

And to clarify, I fully support a debuff or toggle or slider and challenge banners. I also support a standalone adventure zone. I just don't support a separate veteran overland for reasons I've stated before.

Here's another one that gets labeled that. What do they want done about difficulty?

Whilst the latter is somewhat true, how much difficulty differs a whole lot - like 5-500% - there is absolutely no consent in how much more difficulty, if you include all those groups.

Harvokaan

Lysette wrote: »

Harvokaan wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

They usually have something for vet players in all the updates, though the story dlc updates are pretty dicey. They didn't have anything in Dragonhold or Deadlands, but did in Murkmire (arena), Markarth (arena), Thieves Guild (trial), Clockwork City(arena), and Imperial City (pvp and vet dungeons). Kinda debatable how Dark Brotherhood shakes out, as that's when they removed vet levels in favor of cp and gave vet modes to Sanctum Ophidia. But the zone itself is just story.

Casuals get the bulk of the story but the repeatable content is largely aimed at vets these days with even the normal mode dungeon dlc and arenas being harder than a lot of casuals would like to do, as evidenced by the costant complaints about how eso+ members are punished by having dlc in their RND.

Compalains about vet dlc dungs are mostly for RVD, not RND. Also they make dlc dungeons easier each year for normal and veteran and harder for hard modes so you cannot say that it is aimed mainly at vets, truth be told the new dungeons are more casual friendly then ever with additional buffs, secrets, etc. I like that system as new dungeons on normal and vet are more accessible to more players but hms still can provide a challenge. New trials were pretty bad for many different reasons.

Remember that most your examples are content that have more then 3 years now. We have one trial and 4 dungeons (usually two easy ones, one hard and one challenging [at this point after 3 years, it is like their pattern]). Other mmos provide much more content for end game players, not only raids and dungeons tbh

You cannot compare this to other MMOs like this - ESO is born out of a single player series and gets a lot of players who never played an MMO before - and I bet a lot wish, it would not be an MMO but just, what it was original requested a type of "Skyrim with a friend" - not mass amounts of friends, but a friend, spouse - the ring of Mara points at exactly that as well - one friend or spouse. So the MMO part was intended by ZOS for the mass battles in Cyro - and I guess those will return, once they have a new server architecture - Matt did not in vain say, he expects drastically better performance, I guess performance will return to Cyro and then what?- Will vet overland than even be played anymore, if you have all the challenge you want in Cyro?

PvP challenges and PvE challenges are quite different and tbh, more options for ppl who seek those challenges, the better.
As for eso being born from single player series - WoW was created from Warcraft series that were played by a lot of solo players, multiplayer was popular but the main population played those games as single player rts titles.
Final fantasy XIV is the biggest mmo currently yet the roots are again, single player games. LOTRO was created based on IP that was mianly about great story and worldbuilding. If you check the most popular mmo's there aren't really that much highly popular titles that have clear, mmo roots.
And Ring of Mara only points at one thing, that you can be married in game and you have some benefits if you play with that special player. Not really sure how that ring would indicate anything more then that.
I advise you to check marketing materials from 2014 or quake con 2013, eso is often presented as a game with a large amount of players joining forces or 4 man party doing the dungeon, sounds pretty mmo to me. Yeah, it have strong single player IP base but they tried to show it as mmo from the beginning. Over the years things changed and now eso cannot be described only as a multiplayer game for tes fans as i believe that ppl who see it only as tes game they can play as skyrim already tried out the title (7 years to check elder scrolls title is a lot of time). Tbh i know a lot of players for who eso was the first elder scrolls game

Lysette

Harvokaan wrote: »

Lysette wrote: »

Harvokaan wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

They usually have something for vet players in all the updates, though the story dlc updates are pretty dicey. They didn't have anything in Dragonhold or Deadlands, but did in Murkmire (arena), Markarth (arena), Thieves Guild (trial), Clockwork City(arena), and Imperial City (pvp and vet dungeons). Kinda debatable how Dark Brotherhood shakes out, as that's when they removed vet levels in favor of cp and gave vet modes to Sanctum Ophidia. But the zone itself is just story.

Casuals get the bulk of the story but the repeatable content is largely aimed at vets these days with even the normal mode dungeon dlc and arenas being harder than a lot of casuals would like to do, as evidenced by the costant complaints about how eso+ members are punished by having dlc in their RND.

Compalains about vet dlc dungs are mostly for RVD, not RND. Also they make dlc dungeons easier each year for normal and veteran and harder for hard modes so you cannot say that it is aimed mainly at vets, truth be told the new dungeons are more casual friendly then ever with additional buffs, secrets, etc. I like that system as new dungeons on normal and vet are more accessible to more players but hms still can provide a challenge. New trials were pretty bad for many different reasons.

Remember that most your examples are content that have more then 3 years now. We have one trial and 4 dungeons (usually two easy ones, one hard and one challenging [at this point after 3 years, it is like their pattern]). Other mmos provide much more content for end game players, not only raids and dungeons tbh

You cannot compare this to other MMOs like this - ESO is born out of a single player series and gets a lot of players who never played an MMO before - and I bet a lot wish, it would not be an MMO but just, what it was original requested a type of "Skyrim with a friend" - not mass amounts of friends, but a friend, spouse - the ring of Mara points at exactly that as well - one friend or spouse. So the MMO part was intended by ZOS for the mass battles in Cyro - and I guess those will return, once they have a new server architecture - Matt did not in vain say, he expects drastically better performance, I guess performance will return to Cyro and then what?- Will vet overland than even be played anymore, if you have all the challenge you want in Cyro?

PvP challenges and PvE challenges are quite different and tbh, more options for ppl who seek those challenges, the better.
As for eso being born from single player series - WoW was created from Warcraft series that were played by a lot of solo players, multiplayer was popular but the main population played those games as single player rts titles.
Final fantasy XIV is the biggest mmo currently yet the roots are again, single player games. LOTRO was created based on IP that was mianly about great story and worldbuilding. If you check the most popular mmo's there aren't really that much highly popular titles that have clear, mmo roots.
And Ring of Mara only points at one thing, that you can be married in game and you have some benefits if you play with that special player. Not really sure how that ring would indicate anything more then that.
I advise you to check marketing materials from 2014 or quake con 2013, eso is often presented as a game with a large amount of players joining forces or 4 man party doing the dungeon, sounds pretty mmo to me. Yeah, it have strong single player IP base but they tried to show it as mmo from the beginning. Over the years things changed and now eso cannot be described only as a multiplayer game for tes fans as i believe that ppl who see it only as tes game they can play as skyrim already tried out the title (7 years to check elder scrolls title is a lot of time). Tbh i know a lot of players for who eso was the first elder scrolls game

Yeah, you and me have different experiences with what other players want, because our view is biased by the content we are playing - it is clear that I encounter a lot more role players and you a lot more typical end game players, which are essentially MMOlers, because end game is not part of a role play game - the story content is the game there and end game means, you have played the game and can move on to another one - as in "end of game" - there is no further content, evtl. DLC, but that's it. So those players I come in contact with are much different from players you come mainly in contact with - our both views are therefore distorted and biased due to this.

spartaxoxo

Lysette wrote: »

.

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Harvokaan wrote: »

It is okay for you to think that way but I can asure you, it is wrong. There are many players here who are against separate intance and are not called "anti-vet".

No. There is not. Anyone who favors debuffs instead has been labeled as anti-vet except those who barely posted. There has been almost no posts in this thread at all in favor of doing nothing beyond the first couple of pages.

I am far from the only player falsely accused of not wanting difficulty changes. There is no crowd of people who don't want Overland to increase in difficulty.

Edit

SilverBride wrote: »

And to clarify, I fully support a debuff or toggle or slider and challenge banners. I also support a standalone adventure zone. I just don't support a separate veteran overland for reasons I've stated before.

Here's another one that gets labeled that. What do they want done about difficulty?

Whilst the latter is somewhat true, how much difficulty differs a whole lot - like 5-500% - there is absolutely no consent in how much more difficulty, if you include all those groups.

Honestly this is why I said they should just tune it to the same level as VMA. It seems the best solution to me. Less than that already has a lot of content, more than that inherently makes potential usage too small as people who can do that is already like 1% of the playerbase and some fraction of that wouldn't use it.

BronzeCaiman

I think the overland content is perfectly fine, I think what people would actually like is being able to replay the main story of the zones. Something like a repeatable quest from an NPC, that is all of the main zone quests in one so we can experience the story over again, without having to play a different character, and so we can see different outcomes of our choices. I don't think it would need any rewards but maybe a bit of gold for your time would be okay.

About what the previous posters are saying, I think we need a non DLC dungeon queue for normal and vet, the content there is much too different in difficulty. Not saying normal DLC isn't easy enough, but this game is designed in a way where in group content, most people feel like others make it hard for them. And they are right, due to the nature of the combat being skill based and nearly no actual character progression for about 5 years.

I see some people essentially say that splitting the finder will be bad for queue times. And if the playerbase is mostly casual I doubt the non-DLC side of it will suffer.

But if endgame players take the time to find groups and join guilds for veteran DLC trials. I think they should be capable of finding a premade group for veteran DLC dungeons with the same people if they feel like queue times are too long.

Lysette

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Lysette wrote: »

.

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Harvokaan wrote: »

It is okay for you to think that way but I can asure you, it is wrong. There are many players here who are against separate intance and are not called "anti-vet".

No. There is not. Anyone who favors debuffs instead has been labeled as anti-vet except those who barely posted. There has been almost no posts in this thread at all in favor of doing nothing beyond the first couple of pages.

I am far from the only player falsely accused of not wanting difficulty changes. There is no crowd of people who don't want Overland to increase in difficulty.

Edit

SilverBride wrote: »

And to clarify, I fully support a debuff or toggle or slider and challenge banners. I also support a standalone adventure zone. I just don't support a separate veteran overland for reasons I've stated before.

Here's another one that gets labeled that. What do they want done about difficulty?

Whilst the latter is somewhat true, how much difficulty differs a whole lot - like 5-500% - there is absolutely no consent in how much more difficulty, if you include all those groups.

Honestly this is why I said they should just tune it to the same level as VMA. It seems the best solution to me. Less than that already has a lot of content, more than that inherently makes potential usage too small as people who can do that is already like 1% of the playerbase and some fraction of that wouldn't use it.

I have read now a lot of ideas you guys have - and most of them are just asking for too much - much too much work for ZOS to even be considered and on top of it, most would never play it - the last ZOS wants is to create again zones, which aren't played by many - they had this before and changed the game because 2/3 of the harder content wasn't played by many.

If you want ZOS to consider this, it has to be somewhat reasonable AND be attractive to more than end game players - otherwise this will most likely not even be considered - to expect that they do an overhaul a la game+ for example, is pretty much out of scope. Most of the things you guys expect are not just a small change, but would cause a serious overhaul - and if that is in the same zone with us casuals, ZOS could not even be certain, that we will be staying, because the game would change so drastically, that we might just want to move on - the game is extremely successful as it is - even with low difficulty overland or maybe even because of it - and change to that could potentially have a really bad effect on ZOS's revenue, if they increase difficulty too much and make with it content inaccessible for the masses - who will never be that good - if they even want to be that good - role players have a different way to play - and if their character is meant to be no hero, he won't be one.

Think of what Rich Lambert said - most people do not want difficulty in their story - and that is what overland is about - story-content - it has some combat, but that is not the focus - but from you I hear just arguments about combat - these zones are not made for this and not meant for this. If you want to do quests, you can already, nothing is hindering you to do those quests - they will be easy, but you can experience the story - but if you expect hard combat, this is not very likely to ever happen, if zones will not be separated, and ZOS doesn't want to separate them - I think they should do a separate veteran overland though - but to mix that in with us casuals is a dangerous thing to do for ZOS - the masses might not like it and find another game to play - and then what?- can you replace this missing revenue?

spartaxoxo

Lysette wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Lysette wrote: »

.

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Harvokaan wrote: »

It is okay for you to think that way but I can asure you, it is wrong. There are many players here who are against separate intance and are not called "anti-vet".

No. There is not. Anyone who favors debuffs instead has been labeled as anti-vet except those who barely posted. There has been almost no posts in this thread at all in favor of doing nothing beyond the first couple of pages.

I am far from the only player falsely accused of not wanting difficulty changes. There is no crowd of people who don't want Overland to increase in difficulty.

Edit

SilverBride wrote: »

And to clarify, I fully support a debuff or toggle or slider and challenge banners. I also support a standalone adventure zone. I just don't support a separate veteran overland for reasons I've stated before.

Here's another one that gets labeled that. What do they want done about difficulty?

Whilst the latter is somewhat true, how much difficulty differs a whole lot - like 5-500% - there is absolutely no consent in how much more difficulty, if you include all those groups.

Honestly this is why I said they should just tune it to the same level as VMA. It seems the best solution to me. Less than that already has a lot of content, more than that inherently makes potential usage too small as people who can do that is already like 1% of the playerbase and some fraction of that wouldn't use it.

I have read now a lot of ideas you guys have - and most of them are just asking for too much - much too much work for ZOS to even be considered and on top of it, most would never play it - the last ZOS wants is to create again zones, which aren't played by many - they had this before and changed the game because 2/3 of the harder content wasn't played by many.

If you want ZOS to consider this, it has to be somewhat reasonable AND be attractive to more than end game players - otherwise this will most likely not even be considered - to expect that they do an overhaul a la game+ for example, is pretty much out of scope. Most of the things you guys expect are not just a small change, but would cause a serious overhaul - and if that is in the same zone with us casuals, ZOS could not even be certain, that we will be staying, because the game would change so drastically, that we might just want to move on - the game is extremely successful as it is - even with low difficulty overland or maybe even because of it - and change to that could potentially have a really bad effect on ZOS's revenue, if they increase difficulty too much and make with it content inaccessible for the masses - who will never be that good - if they even want to be that good - role players have a different way to play - and if their character is meant to be no hero, he won't be one.

Think of what Rich Lambert said - most people do not want difficulty in their story - and that is what overland is about - story-content - it has some combat, but that is not the focus - but from you I hear just arguments about combat - these zones are not made for this and not meant for this. If you want to do quests, you can already, nothing is hindering you to do those quests - they will be easy, but you can experience the story - but if you expect hard combat, this is not very likely to ever happen, if zones will not be separated, and ZOS doesn't want to separate them - I think they should do a separate veteran overland though - but to mix that in with us casuals is a dangerous thing to do for ZOS - the masses might not like it and find another game to play - and then what?- can you replace this missing revenue?

My ideas were debuffs, a new adventure zone, challenge banners, and incursions.

None of these would require an overhaul of the game.

Debuffs are personal. The only way it would affect you is more people on the map.

Challenge banners for story bosses would have no impact on anyone but the player using them at all because they are already private instances.

New zone instead of a dlc, given the number of casuals who don't like the dlc dungeons I doubt they'd quit because one was replaced by an entire zone.

Incursions are already being added to the game, the Walking World Boss in Deadlands. That is a successful change.

Lysette

I will give another example - I revisited newbie zones for antiquities - but I tried hard to stay clear from the trash mob, because if newbies see what my armor does to these mobs, without me even fighting at all - they just get frustrated, because they still struggle with this content - to have you guys in the same zone with us, will just have the same effect, it would frustrate us and take away from our enjoyment of the game as it is - and this is a really important thing to consider for ZOS.