Armianlee wrote: »

born2beagator wrote: »

Armianlee wrote: »

hamon wrote: »

the other poll is flawed imo. simply asking if its was too hard especially on a public poll where your answer is seen by everyone is wrong.

some folk might feel it was too hard to be fun but not too hard to actually do. so this poll is worded in a better way imo

This one is just as flawed. Yes it needs rebalancing, but not a heavy nerf.

Funny thing...we don't even know if its a heavy nerf.

Well, we do know it isn't going to be so heavy. That has nothing to do with what I was saying though. I wasn't saying it was or was not getting a heavy nerf. I was merely saying that this poll is as flawed as the ones that are simple "yes" or "no". Seeing a couple more options like

Yes it needs rebalancing, but with rewards.

Yes it needs rebalancing, slight nerf and higher rewards.

So on and so forth, honestly the "Yes it needs rebalancing" option is just as flawed as saying "No it isn't that hard".

Tabbycat wrote: »

born2beagator wrote: »

Armianlee wrote: »

hamon wrote: »

the other poll is flawed imo. simply asking if its was too hard especially on a public poll where your answer is seen by everyone is wrong.

some folk might feel it was too hard to be fun but not too hard to actually do. so this poll is worded in a better way imo

This one is just as flawed. Yes it needs rebalancing, but not a heavy nerf.

Funny thing...we don't even know if its a heavy nerf.

I think they said instead of VR content being aimed at 2 players, they are changing it to 1.5. Easier for two people but still fairly challenging for one.

Yes, middle ground is indeed what they've been saying (did not see the 1.5 bit until tonight) and is why I have said, and maintain, that I have no problems with it.

born2beagator wrote: »

There you go then. All you whiners need to can it with the "massive nerf" talk. Its clearly not.

You're the only one who has mentioned "massive nerf" in this thread. You are going around from thread to thread waving your "win" in the air and pretty much telling everyone else to "suck it". It also seems to me you were a great "whiner" when things were .5 more difficult.

hamon wrote: »

yes but dont ask for common sense from the drama queens. who can only see things in terms of masssive nerf or OP. there is no middle ground

That door swings both ways. There are plenty in here that were complaining that current VR levels are "Impossible". That is wholly false and makes them "drama queens".

/shrug. My only point that I was making was that the poll is flawed. That is all.

I don't know if they have actually said 1.5 per se. But you can figure that if the content was originally tuned to be grouped (2 players), and now it is tuned to be a middle ground between 1-50 (1 player) and Veteran Zones (2 players), then the difficulty should end up being at about 1.5 similar to the open world group dungeons (not the instanced 4 man ones and not the solo ones) that are geared towards 1.5 players.

Uncheck the "Suck" button.

This poll is just as flawed. I find it funny that the poll that supports YOUR opinion is the one that is "worded better"

Alphashado wrote: »

Interesting how the same topic presented differently can have very different results. And the one with a more reasonable presentation gets less attention.

This is the reasonable presentation correct? If so the only reasonable thing about it is that the poll is private. It's only reasonable to you because it supports your opinion.

If I was playing my nb, I'd vote Yes even though I got it to V12.

Now I'm playing a dk in vet ranks. Since VR is balanced around dk and sorcs, I'd maybe vote Yes to support the players who are struggling because three months after launch ZOS is still apparently stumped on what to do with nb's in pve.

Although I'm a big fan of POLL posts (sensible ones) as they allow large amounts of data to be easily digested. Isn't it kind of pointless making a post to ask peoples opinions on something Zenimax have already said they are going to do ! ?

Redlag wrote: »

I think ZOS needs to sit back and figure out their demographic. Right now they have PvE'ers that like it overly challenging. They're changing content to get players back, which will alienate the ones here.. Which btw isn't me. I don't even want a challenge at all. I want to make it to AvA fast. So I'm probably out the door soon anyways, because I don't like buffing keep guards. Everyone just out of range on a keep wall or that ZOS feels like PvE is the problem.

I think people left because of AvA. It was packed and they were gone before VR mobs were even made harder.

If I wanted a PvE game with a bad PvP side to it.. I could play WoW.

The thing about pvp in WoW is that you can measure your skill by competing against equally geared players. See arenas or rated bgs. In eso, there is nothing comparable. Most of the time it comes down to zergs or V12s preying on the weak.

It needed proper character advancement not nerfing of mobs.

Thank you so much for making this poll.

I did almost all the content in the first 6 veteran zones (as well as starter zones) alone. It was definitely doable solo -- but frustrating. So was it too hard to do? No, but I still think the sudden increase in difficulty was ridiculous, and just because I can survive against 3-4 enemies at once (with <25% health) doesn't mean I like it or want it to stay the same. So in the other poll, I said "yes," veteran content is too difficult to do at all, because I had a feeling most people would say that "no," veteran content is not too difficult to complete.

Though that may be true, the wording of the other poll skews the results (unreliable as they may be) in the favor of the players who do not want veteran content to change.

hamon wrote: »

the other poll is flawed imo. simply asking if its was too hard especially on a public poll where your answer is seen by everyone is wrong.

some folk might feel it was too hard to be fun but not too hard to actually do. so this poll is worded in a better way imo

Seems more like an attempt to ride the tail coat of another thread in my HONEST opinion.

The poll I created was a follow up to another thread where I asked the community if they thought vet content was to hard. Hard as in difficulty, I generalized the options on purpose to accurately gather information on the current mindset of players about the difficulty of vet content. It was discussed in the previous thread that everyone agrees vet content is too grindy, so there really was no point in asking that particular question.

On another note, allowing everyone to see what each person voted allows readers to see ahead of what they are about to read. This helps others to quickly find common opinions and gather a better picture of the situation. This is common among debates. Whats the point of hiding what they voted for when they are just going to write it down in their comment.

Also, this thread is in no way better worded, it simply re-worded the thread you have mentioned, which is my thread indeed. So you changed the concept from hard(difficulty) to unbalanced, all you have done is made the choice more vague as many players have different concepts of what unbalanced means. Some people might consider unbalance as "too hard" indeed, but other might see it as the difficulty ramp is too steep or some mobs are too easy while others are ridiculous. All this thread is, is a clone thread.BTW look at the date of the previous thread, it was made before zeni announced vet changes.

Move over a seat Warcrap here we come. even bet the panda's will look the same.

Animus0724 wrote: »

hamon wrote: »

the other poll is flawed imo. simply asking if its was too hard especially on a public poll where your answer is seen by everyone is wrong.

some folk might feel it was too hard to be fun but not too hard to actually do. so this poll is worded in a better way imo

Seems more like an attempt to ride the tail coat of another thread in my HONEST opinion.

The poll I created was a follow up to another thread where I asked the community if they thought vet content was to hard. Hard as in difficulty, I generalized the options on purpose to accurately gather information on the current mindset of players about the difficulty of vet content. It was discussed in the previous thread that everyone agrees vet content is too grindy, so there really was no point in asking that particular question.

On another note, allowing everyone to see what each person voted allows readers to see ahead of what they are about to read. This helps others to quickly find common opinions and gather a better picture of the situation. This is common among debates. Whats the point of hiding what they voted for when they are just going to write it down in their comment.

Also, this thread is in no way better worded, it simply re-worded the thread you have mentioned, which is my thread indeed. So you changed the concept from hard(difficulty) to unbalanced, all you have done is made the choice more vague as many players have different concepts of what unbalanced means. Some people might consider unbalance as "too hard" indeed, but other might see it as the difficulty ramp is too steep or some mobs are too easy while others are ridiculous. All this thread is, is a clone thread.BTW look at the date of the previous thread, it was made before zeni announced vet changes.

well for one thing if everyone is positing about how saying its too hard equals your some sort of "milk drinking noob who needs to l2p" then you have that badge attached to your name for all to see , you dont see how that might discourage a percentage to not poll?

sort of reminds me of "fair and free elections " in places like zimbabwe where guys with guns are hanging about the door to make sure you vote correctly.

on top of that asking if folk feel it needs re-balanced leaves the opinion open that while some folk might not find it too hard might still feel they would like it -re-balanced for the sake of the game..

hence we have a very diffrent outcome it seems.

they should make weapons and builds that aren't viable not suck and make your character increase in power more..

This is treating the symptoms and allowing the disease to fester.

You will all still suck when you get to end game content and we will ask you to leave because you don't know how to roll dodge, block, or use your abilities properly. At some point you will have to learn to play.

KariTR wrote: »

Wifeaggro13 wrote: »

Soloeus wrote: »

Wifeaggro13 wrote: »

hamon wrote: »

the other poll is flawed imo. simply asking if its was too hard especially on a public poll where your answer is seen by everyone is wrong.

some folk might feel it was too hard to be fun but not too hard to actually do. so this poll is worded in a better way imo

The melee skills and armor needed re balancing. all they are doing is ruining the game by making content easier so the broken heavy medium melee specs can accomplish it. This game is done before its first anniversary. Incoming freemium announcement

Players who think they can put 5 Stamina/Weapon skills on their bar and be viable need to lose a whole lot and keep QQ. They need to learn how to mix it up and be more well rounded. Quite simple, really.

You sit {sic} do not understand the game in the least and you are definately dont play the pve endgame. No one even remotely described your current syatement. You should not have to wear a dress and staff swap to make end game viable dps checks. Statements like that show trollish tendancies

Actually, you won't have to search all that hard to find posters describing exactly this as their playstyle/build. Just look in new player questions, or class forums for threads requesting help.

Look the community has been bringing this to dev attention for months.we are speaking about viability in end game.its specifcally tied to any class trying to use melee weapons and any armor other then light.