Please fix Endless Archive difficulty

jaws343

LouisaB75 wrote: »

jaws343 wrote: »

LouisaB75 wrote: »

HalfDragoness wrote: »

For me personally it's only the Marauder's that are a jolt in difficulty level. Especially as the first bunch of times you do EA it's not obvious when they will appear. It also annoyed me that if they kill you, you don't get another chance to try and fight them during that cycle. You don't get a chance to learn, unless you then do EA repeatedly, where you learn that Marauders usually appear once per cycle starting in arc 2, and then almost always appear directly after you've fought a boss (Only on one occasion so far has a Marauder spawned on stage 2 rather than stage 1 for me). There's also three of them with very different mechs.

*waves at guildie (or someone who shares the name)*

I have noticed the stage one appearance of marauders too. I have yet to have one appear when I have a nice and powerful verse to take them down with like flame aura or class skills increase and exsanguinate.

I've taken to quickslotting the verse scrolls and popping one when a maurader spawns. But it is definitely a dice roll on if it will be useful or not.

I didn't realise they could be quickslotted. Handy to know. And yes, they are a dice roll. Usually a bad one in my case.

I got really lucky once and rolled the iron attro morph, or whatever it is. That maurader went down hard, but it was only the water one, so not really too hard to begin with.

SilverBride

Braffin wrote: »

Being casual usually means, that enjoyment and fun of said players isn't tied to gaming performance or progress made. A dedicated player, which gets their fun from playing well and overcome obstacles would be the opposite.

Why can't a player be both?

I consider myself casual because I enjoy an easy questing experience and housing and other low stress activities. But I also enjoy dungeons and Bastion Nymics and the Endless Archive, and am dedicated to do the best I can to maximize my success at these activities.

And I get equal enjoyment from both.

LouisaB75

jaws343 wrote: »

I got really lucky once and rolled the iron attro morph, or whatever it is. That maurader went down hard, but it was only the water one, so not really too hard to begin with.

Iron atro is the only one I have not got at all yet. Had ice twice and the ferocious one three times (in the same run) but the other just never seems to pop up for me, even though I take the visions to unlock it every time they appear.

The water one is definitely the easiest, certainly in arc 2 anyway. Not sure I have seen that one in arc 3. In the rare occasions I make it there it is always the hardest one that appears there.

The water one even my companion manages to survive most of the time.

HalfDragoness

LouisaB75 wrote: »

*waves at guildie (or someone who shares the name)*

I have noticed the stage one appearance of marauders too. I have yet to have one appear when I have a nice and powerful verse to take them down with like flame aura or class skills increase and exsanguinate.

*Waves back* It is indeed me! The person who faced a dragon... as a goat.

Braffin

SilverBride wrote: »

Braffin wrote: »

Being casual usually means, that enjoyment and fun of said players isn't tied to gaming performance or progress made. A dedicated player, which gets their fun from playing well and overcome obstacles would be the opposite.

Why can't a player be both?

I consider myself casual because I enjoy an easy questing experience and housing and other low stress activities. But I also enjoy dungeons and Bastion Nymics and the Endless Archive, and am dedicated to do the best I can to maximize my success at these activities.

And I get equal enjoyment from both.

I'm not denying that. In fact I see things very similar. I consider myself casual too, as I enjoy relaxing activities like fishing and housing. And I enjoy challenging content too. These things aren't mutually exclusive.

My point is: Being casual doesn't say anything about the skill level of a specific player. That's why it's incorrect to assume that casual gamers oppose more challenging content.

Ryori729

LouisaB75 wrote: »

ComradeBiscuit wrote: »

Are you applying dots to the mantikora? It can be a battle of attrition, but you should be able to do it if you keep dots up on the boss, focus the lightning pylon, and take the atros out with aoe. Honestly, this fight is a mess and probably my least favourite not-obviously-bugged boss in there. I don't think it is bugged, but might be a bit overtuned. I find the WB version of the boss easier (probably due to the larger arena).

(The other boss you are referring to is Molag Kena. I think her shield storm adds thingy is health based? So it should definitely not be happening so often.)

Yes, I am sure Molag Kena was bugged as I have rolled her enough to notice the difference in that one fight to the rest. It was literally, 1 single hit and she spawned them again, and again, and again. I lost count how many times I took them down only for her to do exactly the same again.

Regarding the Taupezu, yes I was applying DOTs as much as I could, but as I said, I really seem to struggle. Maybe it is just a case of practice, though a few seconds for the conduit is somewhat different to my experience. It was taking far longer to burn them down.

I was on the forums to see if anyone else ran into issues with Molag Kena and found this. I watched a video and based on that I am fairly sure I ran it correctly. I talked to someone and their comments didn't match to what I was seeing. Died three times to the spinning lighting wall, but twice it wasn't even out. In general I have had several runs where something bugged. Companions started the boss fight before I respawned. Mechanics working sometimes, but not others. And apparently some bug where when you become a goat or watcher your gear bonuses may not work. And the occasional lag spike. Difficult is fine, but loosing progress because of weird bugs gets annoying fast.

The fast difficulty increase is ok with me. I just find it gets boring really fast. And I can do lots of really grindy activities for a long time. Something about the EA and I'm ready to call it after just a few cycles. How some people have stayed in there for hours is both impressive and makes me wonder about their well being at the same time.

MidniteOwl1913

Toxic_Hemlock wrote: »

MidniteOwl1913 wrote: »

Toxic_Hemlock wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

...SNIP
FYI as you can see, I can straight up eat mechs from arc 4 bosses. I don't even need to dodge them. I also survived a glass ceiling block in this build from tho'at in arc 3. I mean it's safer if I block them obviously, but I messed up in this fight but was able to recover because this build can take a lot of punishment.

https://youtu.be/ka-hiG7QApA?si=SNEmS7huE4V-0LNY

I had to comment on this as it seems the intention of named mechanics gets lost when we talk about the bosses.

The Endling (I think that is its name) does not have what I would call mechanics. It has a couple knockbacks that can be eaten, so long as you are not on the edge of the platform, along with lightning attacks. These "red circle" events can be easily eaten if you have any kind of tanky build abilities (shields, high HP, good heals). My problem is not in having to avoid damage over time and avoiding red circles, it is in avoiding the one-hit dead mechanics in EA.

This is my major problem with EA. The only character I have done EA with was an arcanist wearing deadly, hexos and oaken, I compensate for my lack of skill with a high heal thanks to vigor, awesome shields (CP used to buff them) and great health of 35k; I have "tanked" the endling with this build too. All this means absolutely NOTHING if I am half a second late in standing behind a pillar, leave the safety circle for a few seconds due to knockdown, or do not block fast enough on a one-hit or don't take out the blobs fast enough on tho'at.

These are my problems and IMO should not be included in Arc 1 as 99.9% of the time they are my demise. All the other red circle events they can keep as if I am standing in a circle long enough with the aforementioned build to be damaged I deserve to die.

Edit: clarity

Yes, I don't die from damage I die from fiddly mechanics. And those side mini-games are also a fiddly pain.

Nice furnishing, nice sets totally not worth it.

My point exactly, I can always build to be as tanky as needed, but one missed major mechanic and I'm going to bite it. Something that some here, when telling you to build tankier don't seem to get, no matter, at least you do thanks, I don't feel totally alone in my obsolescence now. 😉

Yeah, I was talking to my daughter about this, she says because I didn't grow up playing video games (ESO is my first and so far only video game) I lack what she called a "video game vocabulary". That means times when she would just react instinctively I have to think, even after practice it's still just a bit longer time for me. For me at least it explains why I don't have much of a problem with the Tho-ats arc 1-2 or the maruders, but the boss mechanics are such a pain.

And the the gezzerlyness doesn't help either... ;-)

Anyway I saw yesterdays daily with yet another EA endeavor and thought, nope. I don't really PVP and don't like Cryo but quest in Burma 15 minutes done and dusted sooo much better than throwing myself into the RNG hell that is EA.

Braffin

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Braffin wrote: »

I disagree. Do you have any proof for your claims, that the few mostly seasoned veterans, which play this game for years (besides being obviously performing bad in EA and any other more challenging content) are in any way "representative" for more casual players?

We would have to define the term "casual" beforehand. And I refuse to equal it with "lowly skilled", as that's highly inaccurate.

You say it's a fact, that forums are populated with more hardcore players (again without any proof), and I agree with that.

It's just something that is well known in those who have done community moderation, that it's a general industry trend. I can't say for certain it is the case in this forum, but given that this one has more hoops to go through than most, it would be very shocking if it didn't follow the same pattern. Forums tend to have players that are representative from all types of players, and they also tend to skew a bit more towards the hardcore crowd. A lot of developers don't talk about that openly, but here's an example of one that did in a different game.

AndyB from Overwatch 2 wrote:

The forums are always much more critical of us than the broader community. This likely has to do with the profile of player who tends to be more engaged on a platform like fora (hyper engaged, core fans), whereas the other platforms tend to be a bit less serious in nature.

AndyB from Overwatch 2 wrote:

There’s a general rule of thumb that’s known by most community professionals:

* Less than 10% of all players will ever even look at your forums or owned channels
* Of that 10%, less than 10% will ever be an active participant in the conversation on these owned channels

It’s important to understand that this in no way diminishes the usefulness of community discussion hubs (like forums). Forums serve as a microcosm of the larger OW community, representing viewpoints from many different segments of players; casual, what we call “Core Players”, competitive players, representation from marginalized groups such as BIPOC or LGBTQIA+, the list goes on.

So you say for yourself now, that it's only an assumption. That's something entirely else than facts.

Either way, as I didn't disagree with this part of your statement, it's pointless to discuss this any further.

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Braffin wrote: »

So it's more likely, the complainers are in fact hardcore players too, regardless the fact they lack the necessary skill or interest to play EA properly. That doesn't make them casuals tho. A player, which is playing a single game for several years and complaining about progress (without even really trying the options at hand), definitely isn't.

So we have a clear minority of hardcore players complaining against a clear majority of hardcore players opposing that. That's the facts, not assumptions regarding casuals based on personal ideology of a few nerfmaniacs.

I mean you can describe them as hardcore if you want to. They probably are if you define it solely as a function of playtime. But, that's not how the devs distinguish between content. It's not how many people are defining it in this thread. And it's not how some of these players have defined themselves. Casual also doesn't have a definitive definition.

I don't define being casual solely as a function of playtime. What I said is, that the complainers about difficulty are more likely hardcore players, which lack the necessary skill or interest to play EA properly. And yes, I say that the equation of "casual player" and "lowly skilled player" is plain wrong.

Time is a factor tho, as sticking several years with a specific game takes some sort of dedication. Same goes for being an active member of the community (for example by participating in forums) as well as being concerned about "progress" (which after all is the reason for the urge to nerf content).

A common definition of "casual gamer" is for example:

A person who plays games but aren't competitive. Usually they are just there to be social and have fun but if they end up losing in the game they wouldn't mind. They don't put in a lot of effort to try to win. They may or may not play long hours of games. A casual gamer doesn't place their gaming as a first priority.

Source: https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Casual Gamer

Nowhere I could find a definiton, that it's necessary, or even common, for a casual gamer to be bad in the chosen game, so a player dedicated enough to being concerned about their progress and ranting about that in game forums isn't representative for this group of players at all. That's what I'm saying and it is only loosely connected to playtime.

This part of your response a nice example of your reframing btw.

spartaxoxo wrote: »

On a sidenote: Of course counterpoints are perfectly viable. They should at least be somewhat connected to the statement you're responsing tho, instead of twisting someone's words into a completely different statement and arguing against that simply to make a point. That's eristical and dishonest. So yes, my statement stands: Imo you're trying to reframe.

Where did I attribute any statement to you? I did not. I made my own point. And it was connected to what you were saying.

You stated that only a few people were complaining.
And I stated those few people are likely representative of a larger group, and that this is what makes forum feedback generally important to listen to.

It's likely to be a representative sample is a perfectly valid counterargument to "it's just a few people complaining."

Yes, you're saying (without any proof and against all circumstancial evidence), that a minority of dedicated players here in forums, namely the one calling for nerfs (Even if they aren't necessarily personally affected, as some state for themselves.), are representing an otherwise silent majority of "casual gamers". I don't believe that's the case, as I said in my statement you initially responded to. You may call that a honest style of discussion. I don't.

spartaxoxo

Braffin wrote: »

So you say for yourself now, that it's only an assumption. That's something entirely else than facts.

""But they're a usually a representative sample (that skews towards more hardcore players) and are generally a good indicator of how a given playerbase feels about content"

No I said forums GENERALLY are a good indicator. And that is a fact. It is generally true, but individual websites might vary. Just like Americans generally enjoy vanilla ice cream, but that doesn't mean that every individual you meet might like it.

I don't define being casual solely as a function of playtime. What I said is, that the complainers about difficulty are more likely hardcore players, which lack the necessary skill or interest to play EA properly. And yes, I say that the equation of "casual player" and "lowly skilled player" is plain wrong.

Time is a factor tho, as sticking several years with a specific game takes some sort of dedication. Same goes for being an active member of the community (for example by participating in forums) as well as being concerned about "progress" (which after all is the reason for the urge to nerf content).

A common definition of "casual gamer" is for example:

A person who plays games but aren't competitive. Usually they are just there to be social and have fun but if they end up losing in the game they wouldn't mind. They don't put in a lot of effort to try to win. They may or may not play long hours of games. A casual gamer doesn't place their gaming as a first priority.

Source: https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Casual Gamer

I would see statements like "not competitive," and "don't put in a lot of effort to try and win," to indicate that generally speaking they aren't the players that care about things like builds, skill, gear, etc.

This part of your response a nice example of your reframing btw.

Yes, you're saying (without any proof and against all circumstancial evidence), that a minority of dedicated players here in forums, namely the one calling for nerfs (Even if they aren't necessarily personally affected, as some state for themselves.), are representing an otherwise silent majority of "casual gamers". I don't believe that's the case, as I said in my statement you initially responded to. You may call that a honest style of discussion. I don't.

No. That's actually reframing. I did not claim they were the majority of casuals. What I said that generally speaking these people are representative of other players who aren't speaking. That these websites skew towards hardcore users. And that player feedback is valuable.

I made no claims of who was in the majority on this issue. You complain about reframing but "there's only a few people complaining" is a fair summary of your post. "The people complaining are the silent majority" is not a fair summary of mine. Mine can be best summed up as "Forums are a good place for player feedback because the comments are generally representative of how many players feel, even if it's only a few people posting that opinion." That's what I was trying to convey. Perhaps I could have worded it better, but I was speaking generally to convey the idea that all of the feedback is important.

Braffin wrote: »

Once again: It may be a torrent of complaints, but there are only a very few complainers. That's an essential difference.

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Surveys, forums, etc only ever represent a small portion of players. But they're a usually a representative sample (that skews towards more hardcore players) and are generally a good indicator of how a given playerbase feels about content. Developers ignore player feedback on forums and social media at the risk of alienating playerbases.

Toxic_Hemlock

MidniteOwl1913 wrote: »

Toxic_Hemlock wrote: »

MidniteOwl1913 wrote: »

Toxic_Hemlock wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

...SNIP
FYI as you can see, I can straight up eat mechs from arc 4 bosses. I don't even need to dodge them. I also survived a glass ceiling block in this build from tho'at in arc 3. I mean it's safer if I block them obviously, but I messed up in this fight but was able to recover because this build can take a lot of punishment.

https://youtu.be/ka-hiG7QApA?si=SNEmS7huE4V-0LNY

I had to comment on this as it seems the intention of named mechanics gets lost when we talk about the bosses.

The Endling (I think that is its name) does not have what I would call mechanics. It has a couple knockbacks that can be eaten, so long as you are not on the edge of the platform, along with lightning attacks. These "red circle" events can be easily eaten if you have any kind of tanky build abilities (shields, high HP, good heals). My problem is not in having to avoid damage over time and avoiding red circles, it is in avoiding the one-hit dead mechanics in EA.

This is my major problem with EA. The only character I have done EA with was an arcanist wearing deadly, hexos and oaken, I compensate for my lack of skill with a high heal thanks to vigor, awesome shields (CP used to buff them) and great health of 35k; I have "tanked" the endling with this build too. All this means absolutely NOTHING if I am half a second late in standing behind a pillar, leave the safety circle for a few seconds due to knockdown, or do not block fast enough on a one-hit or don't take out the blobs fast enough on tho'at.

These are my problems and IMO should not be included in Arc 1 as 99.9% of the time they are my demise. All the other red circle events they can keep as if I am standing in a circle long enough with the aforementioned build to be damaged I deserve to die.

Edit: clarity

Yes, I don't die from damage I die from fiddly mechanics. And those side mini-games are also a fiddly pain.

Nice furnishing, nice sets totally not worth it.

My point exactly, I can always build to be as tanky as needed, but one missed major mechanic and I'm going to bite it. Something that some here, when telling you to build tankier don't seem to get, no matter, at least you do thanks, I don't feel totally alone in my obsolescence now. 😉

Yeah, I was talking to my daughter about this, she says because I didn't grow up playing video games (ESO is my first and so far only video game) I lack what she called a "video game vocabulary". That means times when she would just react instinctively I have to think, even after practice it's still just a bit longer time for me. For me at least it explains why I don't have much of a problem with the Tho-ats arc 1-2 or the maruders, but the boss mechanics are such a pain.

And the the gezzerlyness doesn't help either... ;-)

Anyway I saw yesterdays daily with yet another EA endeavor and thought, nope. I don't really PVP and don't like Cryo but quest in Burma 15 minutes done and dusted sooo much better than throwing myself into the RNG hell that is EA.

My crafters did the first daily quick, and I did the first half of Fungal for the 77 kills, can't recall what the third was, but I avoid EA too now.

Edit to add: the third was alchemical plants IIRC, and that was over in less than 5 minutes too.

Braffin

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Braffin wrote: »

So you say for yourself now, that it's only an assumption. That's something entirely else than facts.

""But they're a usually a representative sample (that skews towards more hardcore players) and are generally a good indicator of how a given playerbase feels about content"

No I said forums GENERALLY are a good indicator. And that is a fact. It is generally true, but individual websites might vary. Just like Americans generally enjoy vanilla ice cream, but that doesn't mean that every individual you meet might like it.

Care to elaborate this then?

spartaxoxo wrote: »

I am replying that the number of complaints are concerning and likely representative of how many casual players feel about the game, even if they are not posting in here.

spartaxoxo wrote: »

I don't define being casual solely as a function of playtime. What I said is, that the complainers about difficulty are more likely hardcore players, which lack the necessary skill or interest to play EA properly. And yes, I say that the equation of "casual player" and "lowly skilled player" is plain wrong.

Time is a factor tho, as sticking several years with a specific game takes some sort of dedication. Same goes for being an active member of the community (for example by participating in forums) as well as being concerned about "progress" (which after all is the reason for the urge to nerf content).

A common definition of "casual gamer" is for example:

A person who plays games but aren't competitive. Usually they are just there to be social and have fun but if they end up losing in the game they wouldn't mind. They don't put in a lot of effort to try to win. They may or may not play long hours of games. A casual gamer doesn't place their gaming as a first priority.

Source: https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Casual Gamer

I would see statements like "not competitive," and "don't put in a lot of effort to try and win," to indicate that generally speaking they aren't the players that care about things like builds, skill, gear, etc.

Why are you ripping out a small portion of the whole quote while ignoring the part about "if they end up losing in the game they wouldn't mind."?

spartaxoxo wrote: »

This part of your response a nice example of your reframing btw.

Yes, you're saying (without any proof and against all circumstancial evidence), that a minority of dedicated players here in forums, namely the one calling for nerfs (Even if they aren't necessarily personally affected, as some state for themselves.), are representing an otherwise silent majority of "casual gamers". I don't believe that's the case, as I said in my statement you initially responded to. You may call that a honest style of discussion. I don't.

No. That's actually reframing. I did not claim they were the majority. What I said that generally speaking these people are representative of other players who aren't speaking. That these websites skew towards hardcore users. And that they should be listened to.

I made no claims of who was in the majority.

Yes, you didn't make claims about who is in the majority. I'll give you that.

Nonetheless you're pretending that people here in forums (a place tendencial inhabited by more hardcore users) are representative for casual gamers, which don't speak for themselves.

My initial statement was, that the most vocal group (the one calling for nerfs) is a clear minority of the more dedicated players here in forums and therefore should be ignored by developers, as the majority of the more dedicated players here in forums are fine with EA difficulty-wise.

You responded, that this group "likely representative" for the feelings "of many casual players" and therefore should be listened to.

Now show me what this two groups have to do with each other.

Braffin

spartaxoxo wrote: »

I made no claims of who was in the majority on this issue. You complain about reframing but "there's only a few people complaining" is a fair summary of your post. "The people complaining are the silent majority" is not a fair summary of mine. Mine can be best summed up as "Forums are a good place for player feedback because the comments are generally representative of how many players feel, even if it's only a few people posting that opinion." That's what I was trying to convey. Perhaps I could have worded it better, but I was speaking generally to convey the idea that all of the feedback is important.

There wouldn't be a disagreement between us if you would only talk about forums in general.

That's what I saying btw: The majority of players participating here in forums is fine with the current difficulty of EA, while a minority of the very same playertype (dedicated enough to post here in forums all day long) isn't.

Unfortunately you were also saying:

spartaxoxo wrote: »

I am replying that the number of complaints are concerning and likely representative of how many casual players feel about the game, even if they are not posting in here.

That statement isn't about feedback in forums in general, but ties the statements of a specific group to players which aren't posting around here at all.

So, once again: Based on what foundation is it possible to say that?

spartaxoxo

@Braffin

The quotes are getting difficult to work with on mobile, so I'm just going to ping you.

First, I ignored "they wouldn't mind," because I did not think it was all that relevant. It was more about the attitude than skill, time investment, or dedication, etc. The latter two of which is how I thought you defined it.

Moving on, many doesn't necessarily mean the majority. I think there's a torrent of complaints because lots of players probably feel the same way. But that doesn't necessarily mean they are in the majority. I just think it's likely enough people feel that way the feedback is worthy of being listened to.

We can observe that from events and non-event participation that it's likely a minority of players PvP regularly. But I believe PvP needs new content and that PvPers are right to feel neglected. It also seems likely a minority of players enjoy Tales of Tribute, but I think that the Tales of Tribute players that contribute their voice to that forum are generally worth listening to about how it is balanced.

The last I checked your poll was like at 20% or something like that thought it needed a nerf? IDK. That's not a slim amount of voters. And there HAS been some pretty constructive feedback about minor adjustments they could make to it more for everyone. I think like 90% of people should be able to complete arc 1, so 20% finding it too difficult on the forums is concerning that it might actually be SLIGHTLY too hard and could use some SMALL adjustments to specific pain points (like SilverBride's suggestion about the number of aoes on the ground).

And I think it would do the game and developers good to listen to those players. This doesn't mean implement everything they have to say and gut the whole thing. But, I do think it's valuable feedback to listen to what's causing these players so much trouble.

Again, some of these players describe themselves as casuals. And a player that doesn't worry about builds is probably likely to face the same challenges as them, regardless if we agree that they are correctly described as casual or not.

Braffin

@spartaxoxo I agree regarding the quotes.

I stated several times, that being casual imo has nothing to do with skill but everything with attitude towards a game (or even gaming in general). Dedication is a type of attitude in this regards and has nothing to do with skill and not necessarily with time investment (Although I admit there is usually some sort of accordance if we assume people aren't knowingly wasting their time on purpose.) imo.
For example a player can be highly skilled but nonetheless don't care in the slightest about results simply because they play for personal relaxation. Another player maybe is highly dedicated to a specific activity, but can't get the expected results because they lack the necessary skill to reach their goals.
So I'd say this part of the chosen definition is the most important.

Yes, many doesn't mean majority. I agree with that. Nonetheless not every feedback is constructive. Your examples of PvP, especially during MYM-event, and ToT are very suitable to demonstrate the issue:
If we look at forum posts during MYM, we see the following: A small fraction of players (usually the same each year and a lot of them are very active in this thread too) is demanding PvE-options for event tickets, so they don't have to PvP for them. This fraction is very loud tho, producing a torrent of complaints during this time.
Same goes for ToT: There isn't a single week without some players (also usually the same, also producing a plethora of complaints) complaining about "gatekept" rewards behind "that silly card game", while demanding, that no further rewards are added to it.
In both cases these players pretend to speak for the otherwise silent majority of "casual gamers" without delivering any proof. Because this proof doesn't exist. It's simply a strawman to push the own argument.

Honestly, PvPers and ToT-players may be minorities (none of us have data regarding this tho), but I think they have a legitimate place in this game and deserve attention. The other group is denying this.

I remember you said several times, that people tend to use forums for complaints and I agree with that statement. But how could then ever speak those complainers for the "silent majority" they pretend to represent? Sorry, but that's not logical. On the contrary: If unsatisfied customers are even the minority on forums, it's save to assume that most players, casuals and dedicated ones alike, are fine with the content the complainers complain about.

Regarding the polls: You say 90% of participants should be able to complete Arc 1 and I remember myself agreeing to that statement (I still do). Well, I made a poll regarding this:

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/647373/how-far-did-you-already-get-into-ea/p1

We are already there, as only 12% couldn't beat Arc 1 besides trying. That's the only poll we have, everything else (difficulty-wise) will have to be adjusted according to internal metrics instead of feedback from a few outliers.

You are right btw, there has indeed been some constructive feedback regarding specific issues in this thread. But there were also a lot of nonsensical statements like "I'm not interested in the content, but only in the rewards. I play this because I have to, not because I want to." or "Delete several bosses from Arc 1, because I don't want to learn them. I'm not interested in trial bosses.". That's not what I call constructive, but these people are very vocal. The very same people do so regarding ToT, as you know for yourself. That's the people I oppose, not those with specific issues.

Really, I want everyone interested in EA (or ToT or any other part of the game) to succeed and reach their personal goals. That's why I also agreed to the proposal of reduced AoE in the Arc 1 Tho'at fight for example. I don't agree with the statement, that EA is an "elitist playground" from the same person tho. I find it insulting tbh.

Finally, I agree, that all feedback should be listened to. "Ignoring them" was badly worded, I admit that. What I meant was: "Dear devs, don't do a kneeling before a vocal minority in forums.", because that can end as badly as ignoring general player feedback.

MidniteOwl1913

Braffin wrote: »

@spartaxoxo I agree regarding the quotes.

I stated several times, that being casual imo has nothing to do with skill but everything with attitude towards a game (or even gaming in general). Dedication is a type of attitude in this regards and has nothing to do with skill and not necessarily with time investment (Although I admit there is usually some sort of accordance if we assume people aren't knowingly wasting their time on purpose.) imo.
For example a player can be highly skilled but nonetheless don't care in the slightest about results simply because they play for personal relaxation. Another player maybe is highly dedicated to a specific activity, but can't get the expected results because they lack the necessary skill to reach their goals.
So I'd say this part of the chosen definition is the most important.

Yes, many doesn't mean majority. I agree with that. Nonetheless not every feedback is constructive. Your examples of PvP, especially during MYM-event, and ToT are very suitable to demonstrate the issue:
If we look at forum posts during MYM, we see the following: A small fraction of players (usually the same each year and a lot of them are very active in this thread too) is demanding PvE-options for event tickets, so they don't have to PvP for them. This fraction is very loud tho, producing a torrent of complaints during this time.
Same goes for ToT: There isn't a single week without some players (also usually the same, also producing a plethora of complaints) complaining about "gatekept" rewards behind "that silly card game", while demanding, that no further rewards are added to it.
In both cases these players pretend to speak for the otherwise silent majority of "casual gamers" without delivering any proof. Because this proof doesn't exist. It's simply a strawman to push the own argument.

Honestly, PvPers and ToT-players may be minorities (none of us have data regarding this tho), but I think they have a legitimate place in this game and deserve attention. The other group is denying this.

I remember you said several times, that people tend to use forums for complaints and I agree with that statement. But how could then ever speak those complainers for the "silent majority" they pretend to represent? Sorry, but that's not logical. On the contrary: If unsatisfied customers are even the minority on forums, it's save to assume that most players, casuals and dedicated ones alike, are fine with the content the complainers complain about.

Regarding the polls: You say 90% of participants should be able to complete Arc 1 and I remember myself agreeing to that statement (I still do). Well, I made a poll regarding this:

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/647373/how-far-did-you-already-get-into-ea/p1

We are already there, as only 12% couldn't beat Arc 1 besides trying. That's the only poll we have, everything else (difficulty-wise) will have to be adjusted according to internal metrics instead of feedback from a few outliers.

You are right btw, there has indeed been some constructive feedback regarding specific issues in this thread. But there were also a lot of nonsensical statements like "I'm not interested in the content, but only in the rewards. I play this because I have to, not because I want to." or "Delete several bosses from Arc 1, because I don't want to learn them. I'm not interested in trial bosses.". That's not what I call constructive, but these people are very vocal. The very same people do so regarding ToT, as you know for yourself. That's the people I oppose, not those with specific issues.

Really, I want everyone interested in EA (or ToT or any other part of the game) to succeed and reach their personal goals. That's why I also agreed to the proposal of reduced AoE in the Arc 1 Tho'at fight for example. I don't agree with the statement, that EA is an "elitist playground" from the same person tho. I find it insulting tbh.

Finally, I agree, that all feedback should be listened to. "Ignoring them" was badly worded, I admit that. What I meant was: "Dear devs, don't do a kneeling before a vocal minority in forums.", because that can end as badly as ignoring general player feedback.

So the poll was complete arc 1, completing it once doesn't mean much. It's a daily. If 90% can't complete consistently then that's a problem. And really since the weapons for the sets only drop in arc 2 it should be consistently finish arc 1 and 2.

But it's no longer my problem. I've decided I don't really need the new sets and while I will miss the furnishings (housing is the real end game...) oh well it's not worth the aggravation. I'm glad you enjoy it. The game should have something for everyone.

Although why zos thought spending that much time and effort on something that only a minority would participate in was a good business decision is beyond me.

Braffin

MidniteOwl1913 wrote: »

Braffin wrote: »

@spartaxoxo I agree regarding the quotes.

I stated several times, that being casual imo has nothing to do with skill but everything with attitude towards a game (or even gaming in general). Dedication is a type of attitude in this regards and has nothing to do with skill and not necessarily with time investment (Although I admit there is usually some sort of accordance if we assume people aren't knowingly wasting their time on purpose.) imo.
For example a player can be highly skilled but nonetheless don't care in the slightest about results simply because they play for personal relaxation. Another player maybe is highly dedicated to a specific activity, but can't get the expected results because they lack the necessary skill to reach their goals.
So I'd say this part of the chosen definition is the most important.

Yes, many doesn't mean majority. I agree with that. Nonetheless not every feedback is constructive. Your examples of PvP, especially during MYM-event, and ToT are very suitable to demonstrate the issue:
If we look at forum posts during MYM, we see the following: A small fraction of players (usually the same each year and a lot of them are very active in this thread too) is demanding PvE-options for event tickets, so they don't have to PvP for them. This fraction is very loud tho, producing a torrent of complaints during this time.
Same goes for ToT: There isn't a single week without some players (also usually the same, also producing a plethora of complaints) complaining about "gatekept" rewards behind "that silly card game", while demanding, that no further rewards are added to it.
In both cases these players pretend to speak for the otherwise silent majority of "casual gamers" without delivering any proof. Because this proof doesn't exist. It's simply a strawman to push the own argument.

Honestly, PvPers and ToT-players may be minorities (none of us have data regarding this tho), but I think they have a legitimate place in this game and deserve attention. The other group is denying this.

I remember you said several times, that people tend to use forums for complaints and I agree with that statement. But how could then ever speak those complainers for the "silent majority" they pretend to represent? Sorry, but that's not logical. On the contrary: If unsatisfied customers are even the minority on forums, it's save to assume that most players, casuals and dedicated ones alike, are fine with the content the complainers complain about.

Regarding the polls: You say 90% of participants should be able to complete Arc 1 and I remember myself agreeing to that statement (I still do). Well, I made a poll regarding this:

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/647373/how-far-did-you-already-get-into-ea/p1

We are already there, as only 12% couldn't beat Arc 1 besides trying. That's the only poll we have, everything else (difficulty-wise) will have to be adjusted according to internal metrics instead of feedback from a few outliers.

You are right btw, there has indeed been some constructive feedback regarding specific issues in this thread. But there were also a lot of nonsensical statements like "I'm not interested in the content, but only in the rewards. I play this because I have to, not because I want to." or "Delete several bosses from Arc 1, because I don't want to learn them. I'm not interested in trial bosses.". That's not what I call constructive, but these people are very vocal. The very same people do so regarding ToT, as you know for yourself. That's the people I oppose, not those with specific issues.

Really, I want everyone interested in EA (or ToT or any other part of the game) to succeed and reach their personal goals. That's why I also agreed to the proposal of reduced AoE in the Arc 1 Tho'at fight for example. I don't agree with the statement, that EA is an "elitist playground" from the same person tho. I find it insulting tbh.

Finally, I agree, that all feedback should be listened to. "Ignoring them" was badly worded, I admit that. What I meant was: "Dear devs, don't do a kneeling before a vocal minority in forums.", because that can end as badly as ignoring general player feedback.

So the poll was complete arc 1, completing it once doesn't mean much. It's a daily. If 90% can't complete consistently then that's a problem. And really since the weapons for the sets only drop in arc 2 it should be consistently finish arc 1 and 2.

But it's no longer my problem. I've decided I don't really need the new sets and while I will miss the furnishings (housing is the real end game...) oh well it's not worth the aggravation. I'm glad you enjoy it. The game should have something for everyone.

Although why zos thought spending that much time and effort on something that only a minority would participate in was a good business decision is beyond me.

See, that's exactly the problem: Do you have any proof, that "only a minority" is participating in EA? Share it then or simply stop this baseless claims.

Same goes for every part if content you personally don't enjoy btw. The game isn't yet in that a bad shape, that a single player is 90% of the playerbase.

On a sidenote: I could say the very same you say about EA regarding several other parts of this game, which I'm not interested in. I'm not selfish enough to do so tho and in all honesty hope that the participants have a joyful experience without having to try to hold back a flood of salt.

[Snip]

[Edited for minor bait]

MidniteOwl1913

Braffin wrote: »

MidniteOwl1913 wrote: »

Braffin wrote: »

@spartaxoxo I agree regarding the quotes.

I stated several times, that being casual imo has nothing to do with skill but everything with attitude towards a game (or even gaming in general). Dedication is a type of attitude in this regards and has nothing to do with skill and not necessarily with time investment (Although I admit there is usually some sort of accordance if we assume people aren't knowingly wasting their time on purpose.) imo.
For example a player can be highly skilled but nonetheless don't care in the slightest about results simply because they play for personal relaxation. Another player maybe is highly dedicated to a specific activity, but can't get the expected results because they lack the necessary skill to reach their goals.
So I'd say this part of the chosen definition is the most important.

Yes, many doesn't mean majority. I agree with that. Nonetheless not every feedback is constructive. Your examples of PvP, especially during MYM-event, and ToT are very suitable to demonstrate the issue:
If we look at forum posts during MYM, we see the following: A small fraction of players (usually the same each year and a lot of them are very active in this thread too) is demanding PvE-options for event tickets, so they don't have to PvP for them. This fraction is very loud tho, producing a torrent of complaints during this time.
Same goes for ToT: There isn't a single week without some players (also usually the same, also producing a plethora of complaints) complaining about "gatekept" rewards behind "that silly card game", while demanding, that no further rewards are added to it.
In both cases these players pretend to speak for the otherwise silent majority of "casual gamers" without delivering any proof. Because this proof doesn't exist. It's simply a strawman to push the own argument.

Honestly, PvPers and ToT-players may be minorities (none of us have data regarding this tho), but I think they have a legitimate place in this game and deserve attention. The other group is denying this.

I remember you said several times, that people tend to use forums for complaints and I agree with that statement. But how could then ever speak those complainers for the "silent majority" they pretend to represent? Sorry, but that's not logical. On the contrary: If unsatisfied customers are even the minority on forums, it's save to assume that most players, casuals and dedicated ones alike, are fine with the content the complainers complain about.

Regarding the polls: You say 90% of participants should be able to complete Arc 1 and I remember myself agreeing to that statement (I still do). Well, I made a poll regarding this:

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/647373/how-far-did-you-already-get-into-ea/p1

We are already there, as only 12% couldn't beat Arc 1 besides trying. That's the only poll we have, everything else (difficulty-wise) will have to be adjusted according to internal metrics instead of feedback from a few outliers.

You are right btw, there has indeed been some constructive feedback regarding specific issues in this thread. But there were also a lot of nonsensical statements like "I'm not interested in the content, but only in the rewards. I play this because I have to, not because I want to." or "Delete several bosses from Arc 1, because I don't want to learn them. I'm not interested in trial bosses.". That's not what I call constructive, but these people are very vocal. The very same people do so regarding ToT, as you know for yourself. That's the people I oppose, not those with specific issues.

Really, I want everyone interested in EA (or ToT or any other part of the game) to succeed and reach their personal goals. That's why I also agreed to the proposal of reduced AoE in the Arc 1 Tho'at fight for example. I don't agree with the statement, that EA is an "elitist playground" from the same person tho. I find it insulting tbh.

Finally, I agree, that all feedback should be listened to. "Ignoring them" was badly worded, I admit that. What I meant was: "Dear devs, don't do a kneeling before a vocal minority in forums.", because that can end as badly as ignoring general player feedback.

So the poll was complete arc 1, completing it once doesn't mean much. It's a daily. If 90% can't complete consistently then that's a problem. And really since the weapons for the sets only drop in arc 2 it should be consistently finish arc 1 and 2.

But it's no longer my problem. I've decided I don't really need the new sets and while I will miss the furnishings (housing is the real end game...) oh well it's not worth the aggravation. I'm glad you enjoy it. The game should have something for everyone.

Although why zos thought spending that much time and effort on something that only a minority would participate in was a good business decision is beyond me.

See, that's exactly the problem: Do you have any proof, that "only a minority" is participating in EA? Share it then or simply stop this baseless claims.

Same goes for every part if content you personally don't enjoy btw. The game isn't yet in that a bad shape, that a single player is 90% of the playerbase.

On a sidenote: I could say the very same you say about EA regarding several other parts of this game, which I'm not interested in. I'm not selfish enough to do so tho and in all honesty hope that the participants have a joyful experience without having to try to hold back a flood of salt.

[Snip]

You are of course entitled to your opinion.
Zos gonna do what zos gonna do anyway.

I did get a nice tanky DK build out of it that is proving very useful for soloing WB's in Blackwood. I think I will finally be able to solo Bastion Nymic with it too.


[Edited quote]

Braffin

MidniteOwl1913 wrote: »

Braffin wrote: »

MidniteOwl1913 wrote: »

Braffin wrote: »

@spartaxoxo I agree regarding the quotes.

I stated several times, that being casual imo has nothing to do with skill but everything with attitude towards a game (or even gaming in general). Dedication is a type of attitude in this regards and has nothing to do with skill and not necessarily with time investment (Although I admit there is usually some sort of accordance if we assume people aren't knowingly wasting their time on purpose.) imo.
For example a player can be highly skilled but nonetheless don't care in the slightest about results simply because they play for personal relaxation. Another player maybe is highly dedicated to a specific activity, but can't get the expected results because they lack the necessary skill to reach their goals.
So I'd say this part of the chosen definition is the most important.

Yes, many doesn't mean majority. I agree with that. Nonetheless not every feedback is constructive. Your examples of PvP, especially during MYM-event, and ToT are very suitable to demonstrate the issue:
If we look at forum posts during MYM, we see the following: A small fraction of players (usually the same each year and a lot of them are very active in this thread too) is demanding PvE-options for event tickets, so they don't have to PvP for them. This fraction is very loud tho, producing a torrent of complaints during this time.
Same goes for ToT: There isn't a single week without some players (also usually the same, also producing a plethora of complaints) complaining about "gatekept" rewards behind "that silly card game", while demanding, that no further rewards are added to it.
In both cases these players pretend to speak for the otherwise silent majority of "casual gamers" without delivering any proof. Because this proof doesn't exist. It's simply a strawman to push the own argument.

Honestly, PvPers and ToT-players may be minorities (none of us have data regarding this tho), but I think they have a legitimate place in this game and deserve attention. The other group is denying this.

I remember you said several times, that people tend to use forums for complaints and I agree with that statement. But how could then ever speak those complainers for the "silent majority" they pretend to represent? Sorry, but that's not logical. On the contrary: If unsatisfied customers are even the minority on forums, it's save to assume that most players, casuals and dedicated ones alike, are fine with the content the complainers complain about.

Regarding the polls: You say 90% of participants should be able to complete Arc 1 and I remember myself agreeing to that statement (I still do). Well, I made a poll regarding this:

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/647373/how-far-did-you-already-get-into-ea/p1

We are already there, as only 12% couldn't beat Arc 1 besides trying. That's the only poll we have, everything else (difficulty-wise) will have to be adjusted according to internal metrics instead of feedback from a few outliers.

You are right btw, there has indeed been some constructive feedback regarding specific issues in this thread. But there were also a lot of nonsensical statements like "I'm not interested in the content, but only in the rewards. I play this because I have to, not because I want to." or "Delete several bosses from Arc 1, because I don't want to learn them. I'm not interested in trial bosses.". That's not what I call constructive, but these people are very vocal. The very same people do so regarding ToT, as you know for yourself. That's the people I oppose, not those with specific issues.

Really, I want everyone interested in EA (or ToT or any other part of the game) to succeed and reach their personal goals. That's why I also agreed to the proposal of reduced AoE in the Arc 1 Tho'at fight for example. I don't agree with the statement, that EA is an "elitist playground" from the same person tho. I find it insulting tbh.

Finally, I agree, that all feedback should be listened to. "Ignoring them" was badly worded, I admit that. What I meant was: "Dear devs, don't do a kneeling before a vocal minority in forums.", because that can end as badly as ignoring general player feedback.

So the poll was complete arc 1, completing it once doesn't mean much. It's a daily. If 90% can't complete consistently then that's a problem. And really since the weapons for the sets only drop in arc 2 it should be consistently finish arc 1 and 2.

But it's no longer my problem. I've decided I don't really need the new sets and while I will miss the furnishings (housing is the real end game...) oh well it's not worth the aggravation. I'm glad you enjoy it. The game should have something for everyone.

Although why zos thought spending that much time and effort on something that only a minority would participate in was a good business decision is beyond me.

See, that's exactly the problem: Do you have any proof, that "only a minority" is participating in EA? Share it then or simply stop this baseless claims.

Same goes for every part if content you personally don't enjoy btw. The game isn't yet in that a bad shape, that a single player is 90% of the playerbase.

On a sidenote: I could say the very same you say about EA regarding several other parts of this game, which I'm not interested in. I'm not selfish enough to do so tho and in all honesty hope that the participants have a joyful experience without having to try to hold back a flood of salt.

[Snip]

You are of course entitled to your opinion.
Zos gonna do what zos gonna do anyway.

I did get a nice tanky DK build out of it that is proving very useful for soloing WB's in Blackwood. I think I will finally be able to solo Bastion Nymic with it too.

Congrats to the build you achieved by the challenge EA presented to you. It seems this experience wasn't pointless at all then.

I wish you the best for your further endeavors, which are possible for you now thanks to EA.

[Edited quote]

MidniteOwl1913

Braffin wrote: »

MidniteOwl1913 wrote: »

Braffin wrote: »

MidniteOwl1913 wrote: »

Braffin wrote: »

@spartaxoxo I agree regarding the quotes.

I stated several times, that being casual imo has nothing to do with skill but everything with attitude towards a game (or even gaming in general). Dedication is a type of attitude in this regards and has nothing to do with skill and not necessarily with time investment (Although I admit there is usually some sort of accordance if we assume people aren't knowingly wasting their time on purpose.) imo.
For example a player can be highly skilled but nonetheless don't care in the slightest about results simply because they play for personal relaxation. Another player maybe is highly dedicated to a specific activity, but can't get the expected results because they lack the necessary skill to reach their goals.
So I'd say this part of the chosen definition is the most important.

Yes, many doesn't mean majority. I agree with that. Nonetheless not every feedback is constructive. Your examples of PvP, especially during MYM-event, and ToT are very suitable to demonstrate the issue:
If we look at forum posts during MYM, we see the following: A small fraction of players (usually the same each year and a lot of them are very active in this thread too) is demanding PvE-options for event tickets, so they don't have to PvP for them. This fraction is very loud tho, producing a torrent of complaints during this time.
Same goes for ToT: There isn't a single week without some players (also usually the same, also producing a plethora of complaints) complaining about "gatekept" rewards behind "that silly card game", while demanding, that no further rewards are added to it.
In both cases these players pretend to speak for the otherwise silent majority of "casual gamers" without delivering any proof. Because this proof doesn't exist. It's simply a strawman to push the own argument.

Honestly, PvPers and ToT-players may be minorities (none of us have data regarding this tho), but I think they have a legitimate place in this game and deserve attention. The other group is denying this.

I remember you said several times, that people tend to use forums for complaints and I agree with that statement. But how could then ever speak those complainers for the "silent majority" they pretend to represent? Sorry, but that's not logical. On the contrary: If unsatisfied customers are even the minority on forums, it's save to assume that most players, casuals and dedicated ones alike, are fine with the content the complainers complain about.

Regarding the polls: You say 90% of participants should be able to complete Arc 1 and I remember myself agreeing to that statement (I still do). Well, I made a poll regarding this:

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/647373/how-far-did-you-already-get-into-ea/p1

We are already there, as only 12% couldn't beat Arc 1 besides trying. That's the only poll we have, everything else (difficulty-wise) will have to be adjusted according to internal metrics instead of feedback from a few outliers.

You are right btw, there has indeed been some constructive feedback regarding specific issues in this thread. But there were also a lot of nonsensical statements like "I'm not interested in the content, but only in the rewards. I play this because I have to, not because I want to." or "Delete several bosses from Arc 1, because I don't want to learn them. I'm not interested in trial bosses.". That's not what I call constructive, but these people are very vocal. The very same people do so regarding ToT, as you know for yourself. That's the people I oppose, not those with specific issues.

Really, I want everyone interested in EA (or ToT or any other part of the game) to succeed and reach their personal goals. That's why I also agreed to the proposal of reduced AoE in the Arc 1 Tho'at fight for example. I don't agree with the statement, that EA is an "elitist playground" from the same person tho. I find it insulting tbh.

Finally, I agree, that all feedback should be listened to. "Ignoring them" was badly worded, I admit that. What I meant was: "Dear devs, don't do a kneeling before a vocal minority in forums.", because that can end as badly as ignoring general player feedback.

So the poll was complete arc 1, completing it once doesn't mean much. It's a daily. If 90% can't complete consistently then that's a problem. And really since the weapons for the sets only drop in arc 2 it should be consistently finish arc 1 and 2.

But it's no longer my problem. I've decided I don't really need the new sets and while I will miss the furnishings (housing is the real end game...) oh well it's not worth the aggravation. I'm glad you enjoy it. The game should have something for everyone.

Although why zos thought spending that much time and effort on something that only a minority would participate in was a good business decision is beyond me.

See, that's exactly the problem: Do you have any proof, that "only a minority" is participating in EA? Share it then or simply stop this baseless claims.

Same goes for every part if content you personally don't enjoy btw. The game isn't yet in that a bad shape, that a single player is 90% of the playerbase.

On a sidenote: I could say the very same you say about EA regarding several other parts of this game, which I'm not interested in. I'm not selfish enough to do so tho and in all honesty hope that the participants have a joyful experience without having to try to hold back a flood of salt.

[Snip]

You are of course entitled to your opinion.
Zos gonna do what zos gonna do anyway.

I did get a nice tanky DK build out of it that is proving very useful for soloing WB's in Blackwood. I think I will finally be able to solo Bastion Nymic with it too.

Congrats to the build you achieved by the challenge EA presented to you. It seems this experience wasn't pointless at all then.

I wish you the best for your further endeavors, which are possible for you now thanks to EA.

I never said it was pointless to try it. And I don't regret trying EA, neither do I regret walking away...

[Edited quote]

Trier_Sero

So I just tried duoing EA and we died on 3rd Thoat. I don't know what magic those people who say they can solo it use, but I can say for sure that 95% of players won't be able to even duo it. It needs nerf badly!!!.

YffresTrill

Trier_Sero wrote: »

So I just tried duoing EA and we died on 3rd Thoat. I don't know what magic those people who say they can solo it use, but I can say for sure that 95% of players won't be able to even duo it. It needs nerf badly!!!.

If you can make it to this point, I reckon you should be able to do it. Do you know what was actually killing ya'll?

What sort of group composition were you running? Tank and DD or two DD's? Are you built tanky?

Were you interrupting the blobs? Were you focusing knight first, then atronach, then mantikora?

There is a lot going on in this fight, but there is no dps check, and other than the heavy attack from the sword in the first phase, nothing should one-shot if you are built tanky.

spartaxoxo

ComradeBiscuit wrote: »

Trier_Sero wrote: »

So I just tried duoing EA and we died on 3rd Thoat. I don't know what magic those people who say they can solo it use, but I can say for sure that 95% of players won't be able to even duo it. It needs nerf badly!!!.

If you can make it to this point, I reckon you should be able to do it. Do you know what was actually killing ya'll?

What sort of group composition were you running? Tank and DD or two DD's? Are you built tanky?

Were you interrupting the blobs? Were you focusing knight first, then atronach, then mantikora?

There is a lot going on in this fight, but there is no dps check, and other than the heavy attack from the sword in the first phase, nothing should one-shot if you are built tanky.

On Arc 3, the glass ceiling can one shot non-tanks if ignored. It's pretty heavy telegraphed though, just block or dodge.

mercer_cap

spartaxoxo wrote: »

ComradeBiscuit wrote: »

Trier_Sero wrote: »

So I just tried duoing EA and we died on 3rd Thoat. I don't know what magic those people who say they can solo it use, but I can say for sure that 95% of players won't be able to even duo it. It needs nerf badly!!!.

If you can make it to this point, I reckon you should be able to do it. Do you know what was actually killing ya'll?

What sort of group composition were you running? Tank and DD or two DD's? Are you built tanky?

Were you interrupting the blobs? Were you focusing knight first, then atronach, then mantikora?

There is a lot going on in this fight, but there is no dps check, and other than the heavy attack from the sword in the first phase, nothing should one-shot if you are built tanky.

On Arc 3, the glass ceiling can one shot non-tanks if ignored. It's pretty heavy telegraphed though, just block or dodge.

Ehm, it doesn't one shot me and I play with 26k resists and 28k health xD

mercer_cap

Galeriano wrote: »

Your build is a poor EA build. That marauder is just a hint what would be happening in later arcs. Please show me anyone who is trying to progress EA with one bar HA setup and gets to later arcs with it.

Me, it is not hard to get far into endless archive even with a not too tanky HA setup:

28k hp, 32k spell resists, 26k phys resist, 5 light armour 1 med 1 heavy
Sergeants + order wrath + 1x slime + oaken lightning staff
Unstable wall (aoe spammable if needed), sorc shield, bound aegis, crit surge, flex (pet/execute/storm/streak) and ulti (mostly comet, sometimes atro or destro ulti)

As long as you take the fire, ice and werewolf support and then the increase on status effect, weapon trait and damage and crit on physical attacks (bleed) you will have a lot of damage
Put 2x stamina regen, 1x magicka regen and the rest just max health and together with the ice support you will be invincible.

You can basically roll dodge/sprint/shield everything without running out of resource or being one shot, and your damage will be huge from the bleeds and the fire that kills everything.
Due to time issues I have only been into arc 5 solo with this, but it wasn't too hard getting there with a not too tanky build.

alternatelder

mercer_cap wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

ComradeBiscuit wrote: »

Trier_Sero wrote: »

So I just tried duoing EA and we died on 3rd Thoat. I don't know what magic those people who say they can solo it use, but I can say for sure that 95% of players won't be able to even duo it. It needs nerf badly!!!.

If you can make it to this point, I reckon you should be able to do it. Do you know what was actually killing ya'll?

What sort of group composition were you running? Tank and DD or two DD's? Are you built tanky?

Were you interrupting the blobs? Were you focusing knight first, then atronach, then mantikora?

There is a lot going on in this fight, but there is no dps check, and other than the heavy attack from the sword in the first phase, nothing should one-shot if you are built tanky.

On Arc 3, the glass ceiling can one shot non-tanks if ignored. It's pretty heavy telegraphed though, just block or dodge.

Ehm, it doesn't one shot me and I play with 26k resists and 28k health xD

You're playing with tank resists, please re-read what they said.

mercer_cap

alternatelder wrote: »

mercer_cap wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

ComradeBiscuit wrote: »

Trier_Sero wrote: »

So I just tried duoing EA and we died on 3rd Thoat. I don't know what magic those people who say they can solo it use, but I can say for sure that 95% of players won't be able to even duo it. It needs nerf badly!!!.

If you can make it to this point, I reckon you should be able to do it. Do you know what was actually killing ya'll?

What sort of group composition were you running? Tank and DD or two DD's? Are you built tanky?

Were you interrupting the blobs? Were you focusing knight first, then atronach, then mantikora?

There is a lot going on in this fight, but there is no dps check, and other than the heavy attack from the sword in the first phase, nothing should one-shot if you are built tanky.

On Arc 3, the glass ceiling can one shot non-tanks if ignored. It's pretty heavy telegraphed though, just block or dodge.

Ehm, it doesn't one shot me and I play with 26k resists and 28k health xD

You're playing with tank resists, please re-read what they said.

That is literally what you get when you slot 5x light armour, bound aegis, oakensoul and drink a resist pot. Tank resists are maxed at the soft cap, which is 7k higher xD

jaws343

mercer_cap wrote: »

Galeriano wrote: »

Your build is a poor EA build. That marauder is just a hint what would be happening in later arcs. Please show me anyone who is trying to progress EA with one bar HA setup and gets to later arcs with it.

Me, it is not hard to get far into endless archive even with a not too tanky HA setup:

28k hp, 32k spell resists, 26k phys resist, 5 light armour 1 med 1 heavy
Sergeants + order wrath + 1x slime + oaken lightning staff
Unstable wall (aoe spammable if needed), sorc shield, bound aegis, crit surge, flex (pet/execute/storm/streak) and ulti (mostly comet, sometimes atro or destro ulti)

As long as you take the fire, ice and werewolf support and then the increase on status effect, weapon trait and damage and crit on physical attacks (bleed) you will have a lot of damage
Put 2x stamina regen, 1x magicka regen and the rest just max health and together with the ice support you will be invincible.

You can basically roll dodge/sprint/shield everything without running out of resource or being one shot, and your damage will be huge from the bleeds and the fire that kills everything.
Due to time issues I have only been into arc 5 solo with this, but it wasn't too hard getting there with a not too tanky build.

Yeah, my HA sorc setups for EA are one of the following:

Heartland/Torug, heavy armor setup

Sergeant's/Orders Wrath, also heavy armor

With the same bar setup for each:
Crit Surge, Hardened Ward, Bound Aegis, Wall of Elements, Caltrops (Flex of Ele sus), Meteor

Cirt Surge is my only heal, with the CP that heals on direct damage also doing some work.
Hardened Ward gives cover for surge healing
Bound Aegis gives some nice passive armor and max mag
Wall of Elements adds some decent AOE, with a chance to proc enchant, and provide crit surge healing
Caltrops is more AOE, and debuffs enemies, and provides physical damage. Plus, it counts for the assault skill verse buff if that is an option and there are no other better ones.
Ele Sus is a flex for Caltrops if and only if I get more than 1 Focused Efforts. At which point, it becomes a weaved in spammable in between heavy attacks.
Meteor provides some passive buffs, as well as ult return on hit, as well as damage from guild buff verses.

Making it to late ARC 6 so far with that setup and really poor vision RNG. Can definitely go further with more Focused Efforts or Attuned.

mercer_cap

jaws343 wrote: »

mercer_cap wrote: »

Galeriano wrote: »

Your build is a poor EA build. That marauder is just a hint what would be happening in later arcs. Please show me anyone who is trying to progress EA with one bar HA setup and gets to later arcs with it.

Me, it is not hard to get far into endless archive even with a not too tanky HA setup:

28k hp, 32k spell resists, 26k phys resist, 5 light armour 1 med 1 heavy
Sergeants + order wrath + 1x slime + oaken lightning staff
Unstable wall (aoe spammable if needed), sorc shield, bound aegis, crit surge, flex (pet/execute/storm/streak) and ulti (mostly comet, sometimes atro or destro ulti)

As long as you take the fire, ice and werewolf support and then the increase on status effect, weapon trait and damage and crit on physical attacks (bleed) you will have a lot of damage
Put 2x stamina regen, 1x magicka regen and the rest just max health and together with the ice support you will be invincible.

You can basically roll dodge/sprint/shield everything without running out of resource or being one shot, and your damage will be huge from the bleeds and the fire that kills everything.
Due to time issues I have only been into arc 5 solo with this, but it wasn't too hard getting there with a not too tanky build.

Yeah, my HA sorc setups for EA are one of the following:

Heartland/Torug, heavy armor setup

Sergeant's/Orders Wrath, also heavy armor

With the same bar setup for each:
Crit Surge, Hardened Ward, Bound Aegis, Wall of Elements, Caltrops (Flex of Ele sus), Meteor

Cirt Surge is my only heal, with the CP that heals on direct damage also doing some work.
Hardened Ward gives cover for surge healing
Bound Aegis gives some nice passive armor and max mag
Wall of Elements adds some decent AOE, with a chance to proc enchant, and provide crit surge healing
Caltrops is more AOE, and debuffs enemies, and provides physical damage. Plus, it counts for the assault skill verse buff if that is an option and there are no other better ones.
Ele Sus is a flex for Caltrops if and only if I get more than 1 Focused Efforts. At which point, it becomes a weaved in spammable in between heavy attacks.
Meteor provides some passive buffs, as well as ult return on hit, as well as damage from guild buff verses.

Making it to late ARC 6 so far with that setup and really poor vision RNG. Can definitely go further with more Focused Efforts or Attuned.

Oh yeh, I actually forgot to mention focused efforts. That one is also the reason why I run light armour, so the penetration is quite good and I don't have to use the flex spot for a penetration skill. Either one will work I guess, in heavy armour survival might be a bit easier.

Edit: I didn't mean focused efforts, but piercing perfection. Both are very nice

Jaraal

mercer_cap wrote: »

28k hp, 32k spell resists, 26k phys resist, 5 light armour 1 med 1 heavy
Sergeants + order wrath + 1x slime + oaken lightning staff
Unstable wall (aoe spammable if needed), sorc shield, bound aegis, crit surge, flex (pet/execute/storm/streak) and ulti (mostly comet, sometimes atro or destro ulti)

jaws343 wrote: »

Heartland/Torug, heavy armor setup

Sergeant's/Orders Wrath, also heavy armor

With the same bar setup for each:
Crit Surge, Hardened Ward, Bound Aegis, Wall of Elements, Caltrops (Flex of Ele sus), Meteor

Cirt Surge is my only heal, with the CP that heals on direct damage also doing some work.
Hardened Ward gives cover for surge healing
Bound Aegis gives some nice passive armor and max mag
Wall of Elements adds some decent AOE, with a chance to proc enchant, and provide crit surge healing
Caltrops is more AOE, and debuffs enemies, and provides physical damage. Plus, it counts for the assault skill verse buff if that is an option and there are no other better ones.
Ele Sus is a flex for Caltrops if and only if I get more than 1 Focused Efforts. At which point, it becomes a weaved in spammable in between heavy attacks.
Meteor provides some passive buffs, as well as ult return on hit, as well as damage from guild buff verses.

Both of you using Weakening enchants?

mercer_cap

Jaraal wrote: »

mercer_cap wrote: »

28k hp, 32k spell resists, 26k phys resist, 5 light armour 1 med 1 heavy
Sergeants + order wrath + 1x slime + oaken lightning staff
Unstable wall (aoe spammable if needed), sorc shield, bound aegis, crit surge, flex (pet/execute/storm/streak) and ulti (mostly comet, sometimes atro or destro ulti)

jaws343 wrote: »

Heartland/Torug, heavy armor setup

Sergeant's/Orders Wrath, also heavy armor

With the same bar setup for each:
Crit Surge, Hardened Ward, Bound Aegis, Wall of Elements, Caltrops (Flex of Ele sus), Meteor

Cirt Surge is my only heal, with the CP that heals on direct damage also doing some work.
Hardened Ward gives cover for surge healing
Bound Aegis gives some nice passive armor and max mag
Wall of Elements adds some decent AOE, with a chance to proc enchant, and provide crit surge healing
Caltrops is more AOE, and debuffs enemies, and provides physical damage. Plus, it counts for the assault skill verse buff if that is an option and there are no other better ones.
Ele Sus is a flex for Caltrops if and only if I get more than 1 Focused Efforts. At which point, it becomes a weaved in spammable in between heavy attacks.
Meteor provides some passive buffs, as well as ult return on hit, as well as damage from guild buff verses.

Both of you using Weakening enchants?

I haven't really trying to figure out the best combination there, so for now I'm just using precise + berserker because both buff damage and healing. Might as well go for decisive/sharpened/nirnhoned trait or for the weakening or penetration glyph.