Overland Content Feedback Thread

vsrs_au

I like the idea of dangerous areas within the zones, as @JharraStormrage just mentioned. This I think would satisfy both those who want the overland content to remain easier for whatever reason, and those who want some harder overland content. I may be wrong, but this also shouldn't require any major changes to these zones: the new more dangerous areas could be located within relatively unused areas.

Lysette

Hm, I just thought if it might be possible to have difficulty variable - like on some days it is higher and on other normal, not following a plan but maybe randomly selected when the day changes in UTC. If we venture out into overland and find it too difficult, we could just do something else on that day, but it would provide something different for those seeking challenge.

I'm not really seeking challenge, but I guess I would definitely try how well my characters are doing when it is more dangerous on certain days - and if I'm not in the mood, I might just do something else - either craft, or decorate my house or go on a shopping tour and when we will have this card game, visit inns and play against NPCs.

This difficulty could be variable, more or less difficult for us to find out, if we can do it or not. I could certainly not stand a difficulty level like a world boss - I tried it a couple of times on my own, but in the end no way for me to get it done. But I won't deny that it was fun to try, even I didn't succeed.

Callosum

Still think some kind of debuff scroll/food would be the best option for several reasons

- Easy to implement
- Totally optional
- Different levels of debuffs can be implemented to satisfy different players
- Works in whole Tamriel

Increased rewards would be based on the amount of debuff and be something like increased XP and increased chance for blue, purple and maybe gold drops. You will have to do 60-80% of the damage to get these rewards or be grouped with other players with the same debuff added.

LashanW

https://youtu.be/WtjuxrYjGFQ

Malprave

I think what is needed here is a toggle for our own character so we can increase our own difficulty without changing another player’s experience or causing a ton of work for the game developers. Some kind of reverse battle leveling.

SeaWoodStage

I personally favour keeping the overland pretty much as it is, difficulty wise. ESO is an RPG as much as it is an MMO, and while anyone who plays for long enough is going to improve to the extent that most of the overland will eventually become trivial, I love being able to blitz through overland on my way to somewhere, or when I want to fill empty soul gems fast. Plus it helps my character immersion that enemies which used to be a challenge are now easy.

If I'm in the mood to test myself, I'll attempt to solo a dungeon or WB that I haven't solo'd before. For me, doing even most base-game dungeons on normal by myself is still a serious challenge.

There are a lot of loyal consistent players in this game that keep improving (I'm not elite or particularly skilled but I count myself in that group), but there are also still a lot of new/casual players, and when I was new one of the things that kept me playing was that enemies stayed the same level. If you mainly play solo it's a helpful and satisfying measure of progress that enemies that used to kill you can, a while later, be dispatched in a couple of seconds. Like I mentioned there are plenty of challenges here for us. If I want to get my arse kicked I'll head into an arena, some of the dungeons, some of the WBs, and there are even already dangerous overland areas, like the Havrocel routes.

I guess it would be difficult to implement, but one thing I would love is either solo versions of dungeons where the difficulty remains the same but there are no "trapped and an intelligent human player must release you" mechs, or companions being smart enough to do those particular interrupt/releases.

CP5

Arunei wrote: »

-
I've been here since closed beta, and I'm perfectly fine with how overland is. Vet players have plenty to do, you can't speak for all of us to suit a narrative. All content SHOULD NOT be scaled to what any given player is capable of and thus thinks everyone else should be able to do as well.

You cannot have a toggle or slider that affects world difficulty. The game cannot make enemies both harder AND easier if there are people with different difficulty settings present. For example, a World Boss cannot have its Health and damage increased and its mechanics happen more frequently for someone with max difficulty, and at the same time have its Health and damage lowered and its mechanics happen less frequently for someone with minimum difficulty. And this WOULD happen, people with different difficulty settings would be doing the same content at the same time. The only way an optional slider would work is if it applied self debuffs of some kind.
-

Just wanted to touch on a few things here. On "Vet players have plenty to do," what if you don't want to do group content? Trials are out the window, and if you don't feel like brute forcing 4 man content you have 2 arenas, arenas that those players have likely run to the point of tedium from just having done it so many times to have it down to memory. What if people want to explore the world, engage in the stories and narratives that drive the year-long content? Just as some can say excessive difficulty would interrupt their ability to enjoy it, so too can people who are used to more challenging content say that the content's trivial nature makes it a chore to do.

On "All content SHOULD NOT be scaled to what any given player is capable of and thus thinks everyone else should be able to do as well," dungeons and trials accommodate for different groups of people by the rules based on the normal and veteran instances, with an added layer in hard mode for veteran content for those looking for even more of a challenge, why is it that overland should be the only piece of pve content in the game omitted from this?

"You cannot have a toggle or slider that affects world difficulty. The game cannot make enemies both harder AND easier if there are people with different difficulty settings present." I know some people don't like it, but this is one of the perks of instancing content. Overland zones are already subdivided to keep player counts in a given zone at a stable level, since too many players in one spot cause issues (see pvp or summerset during that last event). Leveraging those already existing instances, catering them to different player interest, is something that should be easy for ZOS to work with since it is tech they use everywhere, and that completely bypasses the issue of different difficulty minded players engaging with the same content at the same time. Yes, it means those two players won't cross paths, but when the alternative is for one of them to likely not even engage with the content in the first place, then the other player won't likely notice the difference.

At this point, given the issues that have plagued the game since the last update, and ZOS's inability to communicate during the entire duration of pts on AWA and the issues it alone was bringing, I don't feel confident in their ability to do anything major, but more than just the veteran crowd would be able to benefit from this, as it would also allow newer players a place to learn more about the game in an environment that would have higher expectations of them, and many players who don't feel confident moving beyond overland may find that they are in fact capable of doing more, if only needing a chance to prove it to themselves outside the stress of group content.

Abigail

CP5 wrote: »

[Making overland content more difficult] would also allow newer players a place to learn more about the game in an environment that would have higher expectations of them, and many players who don't feel confident moving beyond overland may find that they are in fact capable of doing more, if only needing a chance to prove it to themselves outside the stress of group content.

You are such a wonderful human being, sir, and this is a completely glorious idea. Contrariwise, there's a segment of the player base that, through advanced age and/or physical limitations, is rather limited in its ability to deal with more difficult content. In my case, for instance, while I have the will and desire to face vet- and trial-level content, the stress causes my hands to tremor so badly that I cannot play any aspect of the game.

Knowing how ZOS loves to pick the low-hanging fruit of player desires, what I see them doing is nerfing the dickens out of CP. This will kill two birds with one stone at no great cost with respect to programmer hours. Of course it will also drive a portion of the population away, as it's done multiple times already.

Still, your thoughtful and insightful notion about building confidence in other players is simply magnificent. Do have a most splendid day.

SilverBride

CP5 wrote: »

...it would also allow newer players a place to learn more about the game in an environment that would have higher expectations of them...

Not everyone wants an environment "that would have higher expectations of them". The player will set their own expectations. They don't need someone else's forced on them.

Seminolegirl1992

CP5 wrote: »

Arunei wrote: »

-
I've been here since closed beta, and I'm perfectly fine with how overland is. Vet players have plenty to do, you can't speak for all of us to suit a narrative. All content SHOULD NOT be scaled to what any given player is capable of and thus thinks everyone else should be able to do as well.

You cannot have a toggle or slider that affects world difficulty. The game cannot make enemies both harder AND easier if there are people with different difficulty settings present. For example, a World Boss cannot have its Health and damage increased and its mechanics happen more frequently for someone with max difficulty, and at the same time have its Health and damage lowered and its mechanics happen less frequently for someone with minimum difficulty. And this WOULD happen, people with different difficulty settings would be doing the same content at the same time. The only way an optional slider would work is if it applied self debuffs of some kind.
-

Just wanted to touch on a few things here. On "Vet players have plenty to do," what if you don't want to do group content? Trials are out the window, and if you don't feel like brute forcing 4 man content you have 2 arenas, arenas that those players have likely run to the point of tedium from just having done it so many times to have it down to memory. What if people want to explore the world, engage in the stories and narratives that drive the year-long content? Just as some can say excessive difficulty would interrupt their ability to enjoy it, so too can people who are used to more challenging content say that the content's trivial nature makes it a chore to do.

On "All content SHOULD NOT be scaled to what any given player is capable of and thus thinks everyone else should be able to do as well," dungeons and trials accommodate for different groups of people by the rules based on the normal and veteran instances, with an added layer in hard mode for veteran content for those looking for even more of a challenge, why is it that overland should be the only piece of pve content in the game omitted from this?

"You cannot have a toggle or slider that affects world difficulty. The game cannot make enemies both harder AND easier if there are people with different difficulty settings present." I know some people don't like it, but this is one of the perks of instancing content. Overland zones are already subdivided to keep player counts in a given zone at a stable level, since too many players in one spot cause issues (see pvp or summerset during that last event). Leveraging those already existing instances, catering them to different player interest, is something that should be easy for ZOS to work with since it is tech they use everywhere, and that completely bypasses the issue of different difficulty minded players engaging with the same content at the same time. Yes, it means those two players won't cross paths, but when the alternative is for one of them to likely not even engage with the content in the first place, then the other player won't likely notice the difference.

At this point, given the issues that have plagued the game since the last update, and ZOS's inability to communicate during the entire duration of pts on AWA and the issues it alone was bringing, I don't feel confident in their ability to do anything major, but more than just the veteran crowd would be able to benefit from this, as it would also allow newer players a place to learn more about the game in an environment that would have higher expectations of them, and many players who don't feel confident moving beyond overland may find that they are in fact capable of doing more, if only needing a chance to prove it to themselves outside the stress of group content.

Wonderfully said my friend.

CP5

SilverBride wrote: »

CP5 wrote: »

...it would also allow newer players a place to learn more about the game in an environment that would have higher expectations of them...

Not everyone wants an environment "that would have higher expectations of them". The player will set their own expectations. They don't need someone else's forced on them.

Optional. Compromising what people enjoy now is not an idea ZOS should ever entertain, but video games primarily teach people through gameplay. In the very first Mario if you don't jump when you come across the first enemy you will die, no way around it. That's because jumping is key to success, and that expectation is presented early so players know what to expect. Options would enable those who want something more engaging to have something that engages them, and a lack of engagement bores experienced players who are expecting more and fails to teach new players how to effectively engage with the game.

It isn't about denying what people enjoy now, it's about expanding what's available to engage more players.

SilverBride

CP5 wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

CP5 wrote: »

...it would also allow newer players a place to learn more about the game in an environment that would have higher expectations of them...

Not everyone wants an environment "that would have higher expectations of them". The player will set their own expectations. They don't need someone else's forced on them.

Optional. Compromising what people enjoy now is not an idea ZOS should ever entertain, but video games primarily teach people through gameplay. In the very first Mario if you don't jump when you come across the first enemy you will die, no way around it. That's because jumping is key to success, and that expectation is presented early so players know what to expect. Options would enable those who want something more engaging to have something that engages them, and a lack of engagement bores experienced players who are expecting more and fails to teach new players how to effectively engage with the game.

It isn't about denying what people enjoy now, it's about expanding what's available to engage more players.

Mario isn't a fair comparison because there is only one way to play. ESO has multiple ways to play. A player can do nothing but fish all day and still feel successful. Dungeons and Trials, World Bosses, Harrowstorms etc. are not everyone's end game, but if it is they will pursue this on their own, not because someone else thinks overland needs to teach them something they may not want.

Also, it is an innaccurate assumption that all experienced players are bored with overland. I am an experienced player and I am not the least but bored with overland just as it is now. I could do veteran content but I don't because after years of raiding in multiple mmos I just want to relax now. Not everyone who enjoys the current overland difficulty is new or inexperienced or incapable of handling bigger challenges.

Sylvermynx

CP5 wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

CP5 wrote: »

...it would also allow newer players a place to learn more about the game in an environment that would have higher expectations of them...

Not everyone wants an environment "that would have higher expectations of them". The player will set their own expectations. They don't need someone else's forced on them.

Optional. Compromising what people enjoy now is not an idea ZOS should ever entertain, but video games primarily teach people through gameplay. In the very first Mario if you don't jump when you come across the first enemy you will die, no way around it. That's because jumping is key to success, and that expectation is presented early so players know what to expect. Options would enable those who want something more engaging to have something that engages them, and a lack of engagement bores experienced players who are expecting more and fails to teach new players how to effectively engage with the game.

It isn't about denying what people enjoy now, it's about expanding what's available to engage more players.

See, that would work for me - because I'd still be in my comfort and ability (or lack thereof....) zone, and others would have options that fit them too. I always thought instanced content would be best, I just don't know how actually doable it is for this company.... And of course, once again, they are saying nothing about anything.

CP5

The issue, Silver, is that if players want to do things like dungeons and trials, where are they supposed to begin? Normal dungeons, sure, but those are filled with experienced players clearing them as fast as possible for daily rewards and the newer player stands to learn nothing. If they try to do vet content first, they're in for a poor experience, as even simple concepts like using buff skills or changing targets as the fight demands are things that were never expected of them. In Mario you're expected to jump, and in a majority of eso's quest you're expected to fight, having a form of overland that pushes players to the point of exploring their options would provide them a place to learn this without needing to be in a group where they're more likely to have a very negative experience.

For example, when I got to Stonefalls, my first 'silver' zone, I didn't have a way of dealing with enemies like flame atronachs, I needed healing and used a restoration staff to fill the role. I was a sorcerer though, and sorcerer's have surge, a skill that would have perfectly solved my problems, but one I never bothered with in all my time prior because I felt it wasn't needed. The simple fact is that if I'm running a random dungeon and see another player use a buff skill at all, especially before a fight, they're already in the top 10% of players, simply for looking beyond the most direct skills they have available and looking for other ones that, while providing far more power, don't have as tangible direct returns.

And you're exactly right Sylvermynx, between all the things happening around this update my confidence in them is slim, and I would prefer they do nothing than risk upheaving the entire game again with more half finished half measures.

Sylvermynx

CP5 wrote: »

And you're exactly right Sylvermynx, between all the things happening around this update my confidence in them is slim, and I would prefer they do nothing than risk upheaving the entire game again with more half finished half measures.

Yes, that's my nightmare too. *sigh*

SeaWoodStage

CPS, this is not in any way supposed to sound rude or dismissive, but I want to reply to this part of your comment:
*if players want to do things like dungeons and trials, where are they supposed to begin? Normal dungeons, sure, but those are filled with experienced players clearing them as fast as possible for daily rewards and the newer player stands to learn nothing. If they try to do vet content first, they're in for a poor experience, as even simple concepts like using buff skills or changing targets as the fight demands are things that were never expected of them.*

Yes, you start with normal dungeons! That isn't weird. You can either join a guild, ask for help, and be upfront about the fact you're new to dungeons and might need a bit of time for more experienced players to explain mechs, or you can ask in zone chat for anyone in a similar situation to form a group and take it as you go. Or you're very talented and get there solo before in a group. But group content is exactly that and while some of it can be soloed, it's not a freebie. Yeah there are total elite arseholes out there, but also plenty of people that will help you through your first dungeons if you're honest about your lack of experience. (I'm talking generally at this point, not specifically to CPS or anyone else).

What amazes me is the amount of people who still think they can come in and be doing vet trials within a couple of weeks. Calm yourself mate, if you like the game enough you'll still be around in a few months and will be amazed by what you can do by then. And innate skill levels differ of course (mine isn't great) but you have to put SOME effort in before you're wondering why you're not hitting 90k dps and the best prog teams aren't begging you to join them on bended knee. Take your fricking time. I know "it's a marathon, not a sprint" is a massive cliche, but it is genuinely true in the case of ESO.

SilverBride

CP5 wrote: »

The issue, Silver, is that if players want to do things like dungeons and trials, where are they supposed to begin? Normal dungeons, sure, but those are filled with experienced players clearing them as fast as possible for daily rewards and the newer player stands to learn nothing. If they try to do vet content first, they're in for a poor experience, as even simple concepts like using buff skills or changing targets as the fight demands are things that were never expected of them. In Mario you're expected to jump, and in a majority of eso's quest you're expected to fight, having a form of overland that pushes players to the point of exploring their options would provide them a place to learn this without needing to be in a group where they're more likely to have a very negative experience.

Overland is the story. It is not a training ground for dungeons and trials. I don't know of any mmo where players learned dungeons and raids except in dungeons and raids.

If normal dungeons are filled with experienced players clearing them as fast as possible, that is a problem that could be helped by having story/quest mode for dungeons. But it is not an overland problem.

CP5

I appreciate the response SeaWoodStage, but the issue is more around engaging with other players. ZOS did mention at one point that companions were implemented, in part, to help solo players get comfortable with the idea of playing with other players. The issue is that running around with a companion takes a lot of the weight off the player, they won't be in as many situations where they'll need to manage an aggressive enemy approaching, healing themselves, or noticing their damage slacking as the sub-50 scaling buff fades.

Some players are anxious of running with other players, others don't notice how they're doing as an individual while in a group. In these situations it is important for them to be able to improve on their own, doing 4-man dungeons solo at that level is a high thing to ask, and shoving them all into vateshran or maelstrom, while helpful in the long term, may also be too much. By being able to up the difficulty in an area they're already comfortable in, without the sense that they're being judged or without group members influencing the results, they could find it easier to improve.

The ability for them to ask for help and learn that way does definitely exist, but as someone who used to write out near essay's in dungeons to help new players through the content, I've stopped lately just because of how quickly I get called out for being an elitist and for trying to tell others how to play. There is a divide there, not always, but enough to make trying to even discuss things with randoms a gamble.

SilverBride wrote: »

CP5 wrote: »

The issue, Silver, is that if players want to do things like dungeons and trials, where are they supposed to begin? Normal dungeons, sure, but those are filled with experienced players clearing them as fast as possible for daily rewards and the newer player stands to learn nothing. If they try to do vet content first, they're in for a poor experience, as even simple concepts like using buff skills or changing targets as the fight demands are things that were never expected of them. In Mario you're expected to jump, and in a majority of eso's quest you're expected to fight, having a form of overland that pushes players to the point of exploring their options would provide them a place to learn this without needing to be in a group where they're more likely to have a very negative experience.

Overland is the story. It is not a training ground for dungeons and trials. I don't know of any mmo where players learned dungeons and raids except in dungeons and raids.

If normal dungeons are filled with experienced players clearing them as fast as possible, that is a problem that could be helped by having story/quest mode for dungeons. But it is not an overland problem.

Video games are an interactive medium, good games tend to teach players through gameplay, not through info dumps of text or tactless videos, player input and game output. If players face a fight they can't just brute force through, and they explore their options, maybe they find a buff skill they can use to give them an edge, or a crowd control tool to cut back on the incoming aggression, or maybe using consumables to buy you time. If players never face situations that demand more than the same single plan that they have been using since level 1, they'll think that what they're doing is both the limit of what they can do, and that anything more is too much or unfair. It is my belief, that players like myself and even some who think nothing of it, that a form of overland that would take more attention and focus, with a higher demand of the player's input and interactions with in game systems, would be well worth the time and be very engaging for many people.

And as far as story goes, the way people can enjoy a story is entirely subjective, but as it stands ESO's overland content is so basic for me that I would be better off watching a video or reading, the facade of stakes is gone and the tension is ruined when I'm able to directly pull back the curtain and show the villain to be nothing more than a hand puppet.

Abigail

CP5 wrote: »

And as far as story goes, the way people can enjoy a story is entirely subjective, but as it stands ESO's overland content is so basic for me that I would be better off watching a video or reading, the façade of stakes is gone and the tension is ruined when I'm able to directly pull back the curtain and show the villain to be nothing more than a hand puppet.

Might I suggest that you simply keep a set of white gear and wear that for overland content. But, yeah, no one wants to forego their prized endgame gear -- they'd rather see others have to struggle with the game.

More to one of your other points: for overland mobs/bosses, unless ZOS is willing to commit much developer time, which doesn't seem likely, all they can really do is increase mob/boss health or significantly nerf player dmg/health. Given that harder instanced content often relies on more complicated mechanics or procedures, simply upping mob health or dumbing down player damage won't be particularly instructive. SWTOR just pulled this stunt with their 7.0 release and the outcry from players for having to spend more time grinding junk mobs has been profound.

LashanW

Abigail wrote: »

CP5 wrote: »

And as far as story goes, the way people can enjoy a story is entirely subjective, but as it stands ESO's overland content is so basic for me that I would be better off watching a video or reading, the façade of stakes is gone and the tension is ruined when I'm able to directly pull back the curtain and show the villain to be nothing more than a hand puppet.

Might I suggest that you simply keep a set of white gear and wear that for overland content. But, yeah, no one wants to forego their prized endgame gear -- they'd rather see others have to struggle with the game.

Overland questing is so trivial to the point where sets and CP don't matter. Mobs and their bosses have very little health and they do very little damage to you over a certain period of time. (they have lots of idle time). Some quest bosses do have interesting mechanics already, they are just often not seen because they die quick. Most who are asking for a change here don't want to force it on everybody. I don't want that, I'm sure CP5 mentioned that as well, possibly many times.

Here's what a magsorc with trash gear and no CP can do, once they get used to the combat system.
25k dps in a fully solo scenario with near infinite sustain,

Skills, CP and gear

Put on Pale order ring or slot crit surge, and never have to worry about healing yourself. None of this stuff is prized endgame gear. Using endgame gear in overland is a complete joke, and not a funny one.

Abigail

LashanW wrote: »

Most who are asking for a change here don't want to force it on everybody. I don't want that, I'm sure CP5 mentioned that as well, possibly many times.

And what you and CP5 fail to understand is that ZOS has neither a history nor inclination to customize the game to player-segment desires. When they do act, instead of using a tack hammer they use a mallet. Time and again people have complained overland is too easy, and ZOS reacts by nerfing CPs -- those whatchamacallits we labored so hard to acquire.

Point is, you can claim all you want that you're not trying to hurt others, but the result from ZOS's end will be much different.

Here's the fact of life: game developers have numerous strategies to make their products appear more engaging and robust, particularly as they age. Almost all combat-oriented games suffer from damage creep, where players simply outgrow original content. To retain those players and retain that content's relevancy developers will often beef up mobs or nerf players. Developers like to call this "balancing," but their real intent is to retain players and collect money. So, when people like you and CP5 get on here and plead a case for harder overland content, ZOS will happily oblige. Thank you very much for screwing the rest of us over, yet again.

LashanW

Abigail wrote: »

Time and again people have complained overland is too easy, and ZOS reacts by nerfing CPs -- those whatchamacallits we labored so hard to acquire.

What are you trying to prove here? CPs were nerfed sure. But we all got extra stats instead (~5k more health and 1000 or so weapon and spell damage, all for free. even for a level 1 player)
Player power keeps rising, always. Even more so with changes like skill hybridization. Not to mention addition of companions.

Abigail wrote: »

To retain those players and retain that content's relevancy developers will often beef up mobs or nerf players. Developers like to call this "balancing," but their real intent is to retain players and collect money. So, when people like you and CP5 get on here and plead a case for harder overland content, ZOS will happily oblige. Thank you very much for screwing the rest of us over, yet again.

I can only recall heavy attack builds being nerfed significantly and vampire mistform and toggle. What else has been significantly nerfed on player side without options?
When is the last time ZoS buffed old content to a noticeable level? It's the other way around, they keep nerfing middle content like dlc dungeons.

If ZoS happily oblige when we ask for something, what a dream that would be. We'd have vet overland instances, PvP performance issues would be fixed, no more long lasting bugs like DK leap, and account-wide achievements would've been properly implemented in an optional manner after a massive amount of PTS feedback.

If this game goes downhill someday, it will be because ZoS keep turning a blind eye to its major problems.

CP5

Abigail wrote: »

CP5 wrote: »

And as far as story goes, the way people can enjoy a story is entirely subjective, but as it stands ESO's overland content is so basic for me that I would be better off watching a video or reading, the façade of stakes is gone and the tension is ruined when I'm able to directly pull back the curtain and show the villain to be nothing more than a hand puppet.

Might I suggest that you simply keep a set of white gear and wear that for overland content. But, yeah, no one wants to forego their prized endgame gear -- they'd rather see others have to struggle with the game.

More to one of your other points: for overland mobs/bosses, unless ZOS is willing to commit much developer time, which doesn't seem likely, all they can really do is increase mob/boss health or significantly nerf player dmg/health. Given that harder instanced content often relies on more complicated mechanics or procedures, simply upping mob health or dumbing down player damage won't be particularly instructive. SWTOR just pulled this stunt with their 7.0 release and the outcry from players for having to spend more time grinding junk mobs has been profound.

I appreciate the sentiment, but making a fight take longer doesn't make it more engaging. Once you learn things like what skills you have at your disposal and how to use them (say, using an area of effect skill to deal with a group of enemies rather than using single target skills to kill them one at a time), or how to manage aggressive enemies (like looking out for the interrupt telegraphs above enemies heads, or the red versions signifying powerful attacks you need to block or dodge, or even just how to kite enemies around, so they spend more time walking around each other than fighting you), there isn't a quality of gear I can use to counter that. All I can do is make these encounters take longer, which only goes to show the limits of what's there.

How threatening is an enemy who is able to back up and throw 5 knives that do bugger all as opposed to only throwing 1 before being killed? How impactful is an enemy tank when they're just as durable as their mage allies? What's the point of an enemy healer when their healing output was explicitly nerfed to require time to 'ramp up' as well as their ability to heal themselves being reduced? Design choices prevent encounters from being engaging, because after years of tweaks ZOS has deliberately balanced things to be as 'consistent' as possible, and as a result it all feels flat.

In 2.1.4 they standardized enemies, "Mages, skirmishers, and tanks have all been tweaked to have less dramatic variation. In general, mages will have less damage and more health, while tanks will have less health and more damage. This means the average fight length and amount of incoming damage will be more balanced, while retaining the thematic differences between monster types."

In 2.4.5 they significantly reduced the effectiveness of npc healers from being able to actually do their jobs "The first tick of Focused Healing now begins 0.5 seconds after the channel begins, and also heals less for the first 3 ticks" and "Healers are now healed less by their own Focused Healing."

In 4.0.5 they removed the focus on elemental weaknesses, a change that allows any class to enjoy any content, since before a dk would be worthless in a fire based dungeon but be irreplaceable in a vampire dungeon for example, but it still goes to make the experience the same no matter where you go or what you're doing. Why bother going to the deadlands when you'll have the same experience walking around wayrest and dealing with their dreugh infestation?

SilverBride

@ZOS_Kevin @ZOS_GinaBruno

This thread has been up for 5 months now and is getting close to 3000 posts. May we please get an answer if any of the suggestions are something that we may see in the future or not so we can settle this debate?

Thank you.

Arunei

Yeah, I was getting ready to make a ping myself. At this point the team has to know if any of the suggestions here are viable or not, or if they plan to do anything whether they are or aren't. It's time for that communication that has repeatedly been stated needs to happen more.

CharlieFreak

Lots of opinions here. Here's mine.

It's way too easy.

The questing in this game is GREAT - best I've ever seen in an MMO in 23 years of playing them. Many of the stories are really funny and engaging if you are patient and take the time to listen. Especially in the DLCs.

The problem is just that the combat is a snooze for anyone with any experience playing games. Most of the end bosses in the quests are ridiculously easy and go down in one rotation or less. This isn't fun (for me). I'd like at least somechallenge, some slight fear or worry that "Uh oh. Boss time, how am I going to approach this?". I'd expect to die a couple times until I figure out the best way to do it.

Instead, when meeting the guy who's been terrorizing a town for a thousand years - the most feared necromancer in all the lands blah blah blah - my pets accidentally kill him while I'm looking away from the screen for a second to sip my coffee.

It's a shame. I honestly think this is the best MMO ever made, but the overland stuff is boring, only because it's so easy. This has nothing to do with the quests themselves, which are mostly awesome. Great writing, great voice acting.

SilverBride

CharlieFreak wrote: »

The problem is just that the combat is a snooze for anyone with any experience playing games.

That is your opinion but not the opinion of "anyone with any experience playing games". Having the same experiences doesn't mean we have the same opinion. I have been playing games over 2 decades and I love overland difficulty just as it is.

pelle412

How fun a game is for me is how well the game balances the risk vs reward in accomplishing something. In ESO, questing has no risk at all so when completing quests or a storyline, there is no sense of accomplishment at all. This has led me to not do the new stories as they come out because it feels dull.

spartaxoxo

SilverBride wrote: »

CharlieFreak wrote: »

The problem is just that the combat is a snooze for anyone with any experience playing games.

That is your opinion but not the opinion of "anyone with any experience playing games". Having the same experiences doesn't mean we have the same opinion. I have been playing games over 2 decades and I love overland difficulty just as it is.

I've been playing games since I could hold a controller. Literally. The first game I ever played was the first Sonic game, and I was a literal toddler.

Sometimes I enjoy how easy Overland is, and sometimes I do not and want a greater challenge. My personal enjoyment is in-between the people who find it totally enjoyable and totally unenjoyable. It really depends on a number of factors including my mood, who I am playing with, and also if my hands hurt too bad that day.

The only thing I ALWAYS hate about Overland is the ease of the final bosses. Because those have a grander story feel to them that is made anticlimactic by having to just stand there so I see their moves. That's why what I want most is challenge banners for them.

Abigail

Irony in reading about how upset people are with the ease of overland is that the vast majority of overland players are flying through the content with their hair on fire -- obviously so because so few people stick around for the cut scenes. Also, for those who want a more challenging boss experience, apparently you don't do much overland or you'd know that 9 times out of 10, one or more players will come along and join in the fight, making it anything but challenging no matter the difficulty.