Greed, greeed, greed
-
Destruent✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »You guys keep acting like this is something players wanted. ZOS never once said players were behind this change because they complained about difficulty. They said they have numbers they want (or probably need) to meet on content they design. If the content isnt meeting those numbers something is wrong and it needs to be addressed. In this case they decided to reduce the difficulty of those two dungeons and revamp the rest of IC.
Why you ask? Because they spent a LOT of money on IC and hardly anyone is enjoying it. This change didnt come at the request of players. It came at the request of someone up top at ZOS who wants more bang for their buck out of the IC expansion. IC was a disaster. Everyone knows this. While yes I know a select few enjoy it the majority didnt bother buying it or subbing to get it.
So change had to be made. This wasnt because people wanted to do these dungeons but didnt want to bother learning how. Its because ZOS says IC is not meeting the goals they set for it.
Exactly - this is a business decision.
Same goes basically for Craglorn - they will revamp it, because it is not meeting their expectations.
Ive been playing since launch Ive never done even one quest in craglorn. Its the most annoying area Ive ever played in a MMO. All the quests are long (very long) and with phasing its very difficult to find a group on the same part as you. If you arent on the same "phase" you cant help anyone with it. So you end up stuck.
They changed this a long time ago. You only need 4 people to do some of them. They don't even need the quest.
Well like I said when it came out I was not happy with it. Never went back. The whole zone needs a revamp to bring it into line with the rest of the zones. At the time I can understand their reasoning for making it group centered. At the time there really was no end game to speak of. Now thats all changed and I think they should redesign it to make it more solo/casual friendly.
They made craglorn so much easier, i think it's as casual friendly as all other zones. The dungeons are a bit harder, but i think it's not that bad. Sure, you will need some help here and there, but that's not a bad thing in general, isn't it? They changed the quests so you don't need to be at the same phase...so what's the issue with it?Edited by Destruent on May 6, 2016 12:53PMNoobplar1 -
Shunravi✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »You guys keep acting like this is something players wanted. ZOS never once said players were behind this change because they complained about difficulty. They said they have numbers they want (or probably need) to meet on content they design. If the content isnt meeting those numbers something is wrong and it needs to be addressed. In this case they decided to reduce the difficulty of those two dungeons and revamp the rest of IC.
Why you ask? Because they spent a LOT of money on IC and hardly anyone is enjoying it. This change didnt come at the request of players. It came at the request of someone up top at ZOS who wants more bang for their buck out of the IC expansion. IC was a disaster. Everyone knows this. While yes I know a select few enjoy it the majority didnt bother buying it or subbing to get it.
So change had to be made. This wasnt because people wanted to do these dungeons but didnt want to bother learning how. Its because ZOS says IC is not meeting the goals they set for it.
Exactly - this is a business decision.
Same goes basically for Craglorn - they will revamp it, because it is not meeting their expectations.
Ive been playing since launch Ive never done even one quest in craglorn. Its the most annoying area Ive ever played in a MMO. All the quests are long (very long) and with phasing its very difficult to find a group on the same part as you. If you arent on the same "phase" you cant help anyone with it. So you end up stuck.
They changed this a long time ago. You only need 4 people to do some of them. They don't even need the quest.
Well like I said when it came out I was not happy with it. Never went back. The whole zone needs a revamp to bring it into line with the rest of the zones. At the time I can understand their reasoning for making it group centered. At the time there really was no end game to speak of. Now thats all changed and I think they should redesign it to make it more solo/casual friendly.
They made craglorn so much easier, i think it's as casual friendly as all other zones. The dungeons are a bit harder, but i think it's not that bad. Sure, you will need some help here and there, but that's not a bad thing in general, isn't it? They changed the quests so you don't need to be at the same phase...so what's the issue with it?
And you can outlevel it now too.This one has an eloquent and well thought out response to tha... Ooh sweetroll!0 -
Lysette✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »You guys keep acting like this is something players wanted. ZOS never once said players were behind this change because they complained about difficulty. They said they have numbers they want (or probably need) to meet on content they design. If the content isnt meeting those numbers something is wrong and it needs to be addressed. In this case they decided to reduce the difficulty of those two dungeons and revamp the rest of IC.
Why you ask? Because they spent a LOT of money on IC and hardly anyone is enjoying it. This change didnt come at the request of players. It came at the request of someone up top at ZOS who wants more bang for their buck out of the IC expansion. IC was a disaster. Everyone knows this. While yes I know a select few enjoy it the majority didnt bother buying it or subbing to get it.
So change had to be made. This wasnt because people wanted to do these dungeons but didnt want to bother learning how. Its because ZOS says IC is not meeting the goals they set for it.
Exactly - this is a business decision.
Same goes basically for Craglorn - they will revamp it, because it is not meeting their expectations.
Ive been playing since launch Ive never done even one quest in craglorn. Its the most annoying area Ive ever played in a MMO. All the quests are long (very long) and with phasing its very difficult to find a group on the same part as you. If you arent on the same "phase" you cant help anyone with it. So you end up stuck.
They changed this a long time ago. You only need 4 people to do some of them. They don't even need the quest.
Well like I said when it came out I was not happy with it. Never went back. The whole zone needs a revamp to bring it into line with the rest of the zones. At the time I can understand their reasoning for making it group centered. At the time there really was no end game to speak of. Now thats all changed and I think they should redesign it to make it more solo/casual friendly.
They made craglorn so much easier, i think it's as casual friendly as all other zones. The dungeons are a bit harder, but i think it's not that bad. Sure, you will need some help here and there, but that's not a bad thing in general, isn't it? They changed the quests so you don't need to be at the same phase...so what's the issue with it?
The same as with those quests they change - it is not meeting their expectations in numbers of players doing the content.
Edit: you should see it from the perspective of those, who made the decisions to do this kind of content. Money and resources where put into this, because they decided that way. Those making the decisions put their heads on the executioners block with it - if it will be success, fine, they are released, but if not, they might be given a 2nd chance, maybe - and they have to meet the expectations next time or their heads will roll. They have to make these decisions, to meet the expectations of their investors, who do not want to waste money.Edited by Lysette on May 6, 2016 12:59PM0 -
Destruent✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »You guys keep acting like this is something players wanted. ZOS never once said players were behind this change because they complained about difficulty. They said they have numbers they want (or probably need) to meet on content they design. If the content isnt meeting those numbers something is wrong and it needs to be addressed. In this case they decided to reduce the difficulty of those two dungeons and revamp the rest of IC.
Why you ask? Because they spent a LOT of money on IC and hardly anyone is enjoying it. This change didnt come at the request of players. It came at the request of someone up top at ZOS who wants more bang for their buck out of the IC expansion. IC was a disaster. Everyone knows this. While yes I know a select few enjoy it the majority didnt bother buying it or subbing to get it.
So change had to be made. This wasnt because people wanted to do these dungeons but didnt want to bother learning how. Its because ZOS says IC is not meeting the goals they set for it.
Exactly - this is a business decision.
Same goes basically for Craglorn - they will revamp it, because it is not meeting their expectations.
Ive been playing since launch Ive never done even one quest in craglorn. Its the most annoying area Ive ever played in a MMO. All the quests are long (very long) and with phasing its very difficult to find a group on the same part as you. If you arent on the same "phase" you cant help anyone with it. So you end up stuck.
They changed this a long time ago. You only need 4 people to do some of them. They don't even need the quest.
Well like I said when it came out I was not happy with it. Never went back. The whole zone needs a revamp to bring it into line with the rest of the zones. At the time I can understand their reasoning for making it group centered. At the time there really was no end game to speak of. Now thats all changed and I think they should redesign it to make it more solo/casual friendly.
They made craglorn so much easier, i think it's as casual friendly as all other zones. The dungeons are a bit harder, but i think it's not that bad. Sure, you will need some help here and there, but that's not a bad thing in general, isn't it? They changed the quests so you don't need to be at the same phase...so what's the issue with it?
And you can outlevel it now too.
Yes...makes it even easier. But that's nothing bad, i mean...you can still enjoy the landscape, quests, story, delves whatever. And ZOS did a great job designing this zone, still one of my favorites
Noobplar0 -
Shunravi✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »You guys keep acting like this is something players wanted. ZOS never once said players were behind this change because they complained about difficulty. They said they have numbers they want (or probably need) to meet on content they design. If the content isnt meeting those numbers something is wrong and it needs to be addressed. In this case they decided to reduce the difficulty of those two dungeons and revamp the rest of IC.
Why you ask? Because they spent a LOT of money on IC and hardly anyone is enjoying it. This change didnt come at the request of players. It came at the request of someone up top at ZOS who wants more bang for their buck out of the IC expansion. IC was a disaster. Everyone knows this. While yes I know a select few enjoy it the majority didnt bother buying it or subbing to get it.
So change had to be made. This wasnt because people wanted to do these dungeons but didnt want to bother learning how. Its because ZOS says IC is not meeting the goals they set for it.
Exactly - this is a business decision.
Same goes basically for Craglorn - they will revamp it, because it is not meeting their expectations.
Ive been playing since launch Ive never done even one quest in craglorn. Its the most annoying area Ive ever played in a MMO. All the quests are long (very long) and with phasing its very difficult to find a group on the same part as you. If you arent on the same "phase" you cant help anyone with it. So you end up stuck.
They changed this a long time ago. You only need 4 people to do some of them. They don't even need the quest.
Well like I said when it came out I was not happy with it. Never went back. The whole zone needs a revamp to bring it into line with the rest of the zones. At the time I can understand their reasoning for making it group centered. At the time there really was no end game to speak of. Now thats all changed and I think they should redesign it to make it more solo/casual friendly.
They made craglorn so much easier, i think it's as casual friendly as all other zones. The dungeons are a bit harder, but i think it's not that bad. Sure, you will need some help here and there, but that's not a bad thing in general, isn't it? They changed the quests so you don't need to be at the same phase...so what's the issue with it?
The same as with those quests they change - it is not meeting their expectations in numbers of players doing the content.
But my question is if it will actually change anything with regards to player use. That's the point of discussing craglorn in the other train of thought.This one has an eloquent and well thought out response to tha... Ooh sweetroll!0 -
Volkodav✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭KoshkaMurka wrote: »No, this is not a thread about developers. Its about the playerbase, some of its vocal part.
There's many topics about nerfing vICP and vWGT dungeons and there's plenty of people saying that "if only 10% of the playerbase can finish X, then X shoudl be nerfed so every player can finish it".
But from this point of view, why those 10% cant have 0,000001% (or so) of the content. I've never seen raiders begging Zos to convert everything in the game to raids and pvpers begging to disable all pve. Why casualssome of the casuals are so entitled? I mean, I dont have anything against people who are not interested in minmaxing etc, to each their own. But why do they deny others the right to play how they want (=at least with minimal challenge)? Can someone explain this? Are they really that greedy and arrogant or they just dont understand how mmos work?
Cause seriously, this "communist" approach is so toxic for the game.
Dont apply all your cp.
You are welcome.
l2p, get CP, get gear etc.
you are welcome.
I think there is nothing wrong with it, if you enjoy doing it - the thing is just getting toxic, when debates like this are sprawling up and there is hate towards casuals - the word used in a very insulting way - and average players, just because they cannot do "faceroll easy cakewalk content" - and this is insulting too to put it this way. So the game is slightly adjusted in difficulty, that more can do the content - there is nothing wrong with this, it is pleasing more players than it is not.
This hate against "casual" is nothing better than the hate against the so called "elitist". Both side just want to play the game and have fun. If one side thinks there is something wrong with the game, they will complain.
Only toxic thing imo is to say, one side doesn't deserve any part of the game, bc the other side wants all of it..
And who are you saying saying says which? I detest the word "casuals" and always speak out about it.I have only used the word "elitist" when someone acts like they are a better player than someone else is.In the forums this goes on a lot.
However,the use of "casuals" is used constantly and it isnt even used in it's right context.People are too da-mn stupid to even know how to use it properly.(which in my book just shows a lack of being informed.)
I'll try explaining it again. "Casual" means:
1.Seeming or tending to be indifferent to what is happening; apathetic; unconcerned: a casual, nonchalant air.
2.done without much thought, effort.
3.marked by blithe unconcern.
4.tasks on a temporary or part-time basis.
People who play a game,whether they engage in serious PvP or not,are long term players,or who play several hours every day are none of the above.
Hence NOT "casual players".
They are dedicated,long term players and deserve the respect of being acknowledged as such.
This isnt a tirade against you or anything.It's just me a gain,flogging a dead horse.Trying to get people to see that casuals arent casual at all.0 -
Shunravi✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »You guys keep acting like this is something players wanted. ZOS never once said players were behind this change because they complained about difficulty. They said they have numbers they want (or probably need) to meet on content they design. If the content isnt meeting those numbers something is wrong and it needs to be addressed. In this case they decided to reduce the difficulty of those two dungeons and revamp the rest of IC.
Why you ask? Because they spent a LOT of money on IC and hardly anyone is enjoying it. This change didnt come at the request of players. It came at the request of someone up top at ZOS who wants more bang for their buck out of the IC expansion. IC was a disaster. Everyone knows this. While yes I know a select few enjoy it the majority didnt bother buying it or subbing to get it.
So change had to be made. This wasnt because people wanted to do these dungeons but didnt want to bother learning how. Its because ZOS says IC is not meeting the goals they set for it.
Exactly - this is a business decision.
Same goes basically for Craglorn - they will revamp it, because it is not meeting their expectations.
Ive been playing since launch Ive never done even one quest in craglorn. Its the most annoying area Ive ever played in a MMO. All the quests are long (very long) and with phasing its very difficult to find a group on the same part as you. If you arent on the same "phase" you cant help anyone with it. So you end up stuck.
They changed this a long time ago. You only need 4 people to do some of them. They don't even need the quest.
Well like I said when it came out I was not happy with it. Never went back. The whole zone needs a revamp to bring it into line with the rest of the zones. At the time I can understand their reasoning for making it group centered. At the time there really was no end game to speak of. Now thats all changed and I think they should redesign it to make it more solo/casual friendly.
They made craglorn so much easier, i think it's as casual friendly as all other zones. The dungeons are a bit harder, but i think it's not that bad. Sure, you will need some help here and there, but that's not a bad thing in general, isn't it? They changed the quests so you don't need to be at the same phase...so what's the issue with it?
And you can outlevel it now too.
Yes...makes it even easier. But that's nothing bad, i mean...you can still enjoy the landscape, quests, story, delves whatever. And ZOS did a great job designing this zone, still one of my favorites
Absolutely. The impressions of many of the delve-dungeon things still stick with me. Like the one that opens into that cavern with the bridges across it. I found a miniboss behind a waterfall at the school one (I love the invisible bridges.) So much great design and scenery.This one has an eloquent and well thought out response to tha... Ooh sweetroll!0 -
Lysette✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »You guys keep acting like this is something players wanted. ZOS never once said players were behind this change because they complained about difficulty. They said they have numbers they want (or probably need) to meet on content they design. If the content isnt meeting those numbers something is wrong and it needs to be addressed. In this case they decided to reduce the difficulty of those two dungeons and revamp the rest of IC.
Why you ask? Because they spent a LOT of money on IC and hardly anyone is enjoying it. This change didnt come at the request of players. It came at the request of someone up top at ZOS who wants more bang for their buck out of the IC expansion. IC was a disaster. Everyone knows this. While yes I know a select few enjoy it the majority didnt bother buying it or subbing to get it.
So change had to be made. This wasnt because people wanted to do these dungeons but didnt want to bother learning how. Its because ZOS says IC is not meeting the goals they set for it.
Exactly - this is a business decision.
Same goes basically for Craglorn - they will revamp it, because it is not meeting their expectations.
Ive been playing since launch Ive never done even one quest in craglorn. Its the most annoying area Ive ever played in a MMO. All the quests are long (very long) and with phasing its very difficult to find a group on the same part as you. If you arent on the same "phase" you cant help anyone with it. So you end up stuck.
They changed this a long time ago. You only need 4 people to do some of them. They don't even need the quest.
Well like I said when it came out I was not happy with it. Never went back. The whole zone needs a revamp to bring it into line with the rest of the zones. At the time I can understand their reasoning for making it group centered. At the time there really was no end game to speak of. Now thats all changed and I think they should redesign it to make it more solo/casual friendly.
They made craglorn so much easier, i think it's as casual friendly as all other zones. The dungeons are a bit harder, but i think it's not that bad. Sure, you will need some help here and there, but that's not a bad thing in general, isn't it? They changed the quests so you don't need to be at the same phase...so what's the issue with it?
The same as with those quests they change - it is not meeting their expectations in numbers of players doing the content.
But my question is if it will actually change anything with regards to player use. That's the point of discussing craglorn in the other train of thought.
It is more about survivability in the company. If money is put into stuff, which does not meet the expectations and this is not fixed, those who made these decisions might to have to work for another company next year. Anyone making decisions in a company is in an ejection seat - he gets more money than fellow employees - but it takes just a few bad decisions and they will be ejected.
Edit: take Zynga as an example - they have a quarter billion logins per month - they were very successful with farmville and other games on facebook - but then the CEO tried to introduce that to mobile gaming. And it was partly a success, but did not meet the expectations. Then he decided to make their now popular poker game look more elegant - and people hated it - stocks of the company went side-ways - and the CEO left in 2015. Ejection seat enabled.Edited by Lysette on May 6, 2016 1:10PM0 -
jamesharv2005ub17_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭Guaranteed if they revamp craglorn people will go there. Right now even IC is used more than craglorn. When there was an option to skip it 99% of the playerbase did. Thats why they said they have "plans" for craglorn. Im assuming they mean scaling it and making it more solo friendly.
If craglorn scaled to vr16 or 160cp whatever it will be then I bet more would go there. By the time you can solo there you have outleveled the area and there is no point in it.Edited by jamesharv2005ub17_ESO on May 6, 2016 1:08PM1 -
anitajoneb17_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »Ive been playing since launch Ive never done even one quest in craglorn. Its the most annoying area Ive ever played in a MMO. All the quests are long (very long) and with phasing its very difficult to find a group on the same part as you. If you arent on the same "phase" you cant help anyone with it. So you end up stuck.
How do you know any of this if you haven't played a single quest ever there ?
The phasing issues in the Craglorn quests have been solved. But there are still some mechanics here and there that prevent you from questing forward if you're not a complete group of 4 people, and this really sucks, because the difficulty of the content is now appropriate for 2manning or even soloing. 4 manning Craglorn puts everyone to sleep really.
0 -
Destruent✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »Guaranteed if they revamp craglorn people will go there. Right now even IC is used more than craglorn. When there was an option to skip it 99% of the playerbase did. Thats why they said they have "plans" for craglorn. Im assuming they mean scaling it and making it more solo friendly.
If craglorn scaled to vr16 or 160cp whatever it will be then I bet more would go there. By the time you can solo there you have outleveled the area and there is no point in it.
Why? What's the difference whether your enemy is CP120/140/160 if you just want to do the quests? It doesn't matter, the quests and all the things around stay the same. And as long as it stays at CP160 you will be able to outlevel it, so nothing changes there.Edited by Destruent on May 6, 2016 1:15PMNoobplar1 -
ZOS_AlanGadminWhile there's a lot of constructive debate in this thread, there's also some sniping going on. Please remember to keep criticism civil and constructive. Additionally, if you have a critique, please focus on the opinion being put forth, not the person making it. Personal attacks, even minor ones, are unhelpful and likely against the forum rules. Some posts have been removed.Forum Rules | Promoting Constructive Discussion | Code of Conduct | Terms of Service | Help Site
I’ve moved to a new position and I am no longer active on this forum. For assistance, please check the resources linked above0 -
jamesharv2005ub17_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »Guaranteed if they revamp craglorn people will go there. Right now even IC is used more than craglorn. When there was an option to skip it 99% of the playerbase did. Thats why they said they have "plans" for craglorn. Im assuming they mean scaling it and making it more solo friendly.
If craglorn scaled to vr16 or 160cp whatever it will be then I bet more would go there. By the time you can solo there you have outleveled the area and there is no point in it.
Why? What's the difference whether your enemy is CP120/140/160 if you just want to do the quests? It doesn't matter, the quests and all the things around stay the same. And as long as it stays at CP160 you will be able to outlevel it, so nothing changes there.
If it was a VR16 area we could earn top XP from the quests and mobs. A LOT easier to find groups at VR16 also. So there would be incentive to go there. Maybe have some rare V16 or 160 cp whatever drops come from dailies. I dont know something better than just letting it sit there unused.Edited by jamesharv2005ub17_ESO on May 6, 2016 1:25PM1 -
Shunravi✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »Guaranteed if they revamp craglorn people will go there. Right now even IC is used more than craglorn. When there was an option to skip it 99% of the playerbase did. Thats why they said they have "plans" for craglorn. Im assuming they mean scaling it and making it more solo friendly.
If craglorn scaled to vr16 or 160cp whatever it will be then I bet more would go there. By the time you can solo there you have outleveled the area and there is no point in it.
Why? What's the difference whether your enemy is CP120/140/160 if you just want to do the quests? It doesn't matter, the quests and all the things around stay the same. And as long as it stays at CP160 you will be able to outlevel it, so nothing changes there.
Exactly. The 'point' is the quests, the scenery, role-playing, just the environment in general. Its always been possible to solo, just the quests had locks for a while.This one has an eloquent and well thought out response to tha... Ooh sweetroll!0 -
CossackHD✭✭While some dungeons get nerfed so they are accessible by "casuals", how about ZOS add a new "ultra difficult dungeon" challenge? Requirement to participate should be 10 completed gold pledges in certain time (one month for example), and players who complete 10 gold dungeons get item/invitation for the "platinum" pledge which is used to pick the quest and get rolling.1 -
Shunravi✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »Guaranteed if they revamp craglorn people will go there. Right now even IC is used more than craglorn. When there was an option to skip it 99% of the playerbase did. Thats why they said they have "plans" for craglorn. Im assuming they mean scaling it and making it more solo friendly.
If craglorn scaled to vr16 or 160cp whatever it will be then I bet more would go there. By the time you can solo there you have outleveled the area and there is no point in it.
Why? What's the difference whether your enemy is CP120/140/160 if you just want to do the quests? It doesn't matter, the quests and all the things around stay the same. And as long as it stays at CP160 you will be able to outlevel it, so nothing changes there.
If it was a VR16 area we could earn top XP from the quests and mobs. A LOT easier to find groups at VR16 also. So there would be incentive to go there. Maybe have some rare V16 or 160 cp whatever drops come from dailies. I dont know something better than just letting it sit there unused.
When craglorn was the top place to be they repeatedly nerffed xp and drops which I concider a big reason for the loss of interest.
But leveling it up could prove to go well for the zone. I hope they do level it up, but that's more because I want to have a challenge in Shadas tear again.... It's so fun.
They really do need to breathe life into the zone, I'm hopeful with vet removal.Edited by Shunravi on May 6, 2016 1:30PMThis one has an eloquent and well thought out response to tha... Ooh sweetroll!0 -
jamesharv2005ub17_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭While some dungeons get nerfed so they are accessible by "casuals", how about ZOS add a new "ultra difficult dungeon" challenge? Requirement to participate should be 10 completed gold pledges in certain time (one month for example), and players who complete 10 gold dungeons get item/invitation for the "platinum" pledge which is used to pick the quest and get rolling.
They already did. Its called vMoL. Maybe not the whole pledge thing but as far as I know only a handful of guilds have been able to complete it.1 -
jamesharv2005ub17_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »Guaranteed if they revamp craglorn people will go there. Right now even IC is used more than craglorn. When there was an option to skip it 99% of the playerbase did. Thats why they said they have "plans" for craglorn. Im assuming they mean scaling it and making it more solo friendly.
If craglorn scaled to vr16 or 160cp whatever it will be then I bet more would go there. By the time you can solo there you have outleveled the area and there is no point in it.
Why? What's the difference whether your enemy is CP120/140/160 if you just want to do the quests? It doesn't matter, the quests and all the things around stay the same. And as long as it stays at CP160 you will be able to outlevel it, so nothing changes there.
Exactly. The 'point' is the quests, the scenery, role-playing, just the environment in general. Its always been possible to solo, just the quests had locks for a while.
It has not always been possible. Maybe for the seasoned vets of the game but not for the everyday guy (or girl). Its not possible now as a matter of fact. Hence why noone uses it hardly. So like IC they are revamping it. Just IC was a priority because you know $$ and all.1 -
LadyNalcarya✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Well, as Matt Firor said in an interview a few weeks ago, they HAVE game data that shows everything every player is doing in-game... which means they KNOW how many have completed what content and how many have failed and how many of those players eventually left the game, etc. So it seems to me they would be making these decisions about changes based upon that game data, and if it is clear that an overwhelming MAJORITY of players are unable to finish specific content, then it explains why they would make changes to make the content easier.
what that data does not show how ever is the reason they left or if they would have left anyway or how many will unsub or leave if nerfs like these are to become par for the course
And why do you think that would matter?- This is as well a form of balancing - less no-lifers, less 1337-players, but more casuals and average players, which can do the content - this is a form of balancing the player base by removing both, the unsuccessful (by making them more successful) and the 1337, who are no benefit for the community, but toxicate it. It would be no loss for the community and the game in a whole, if those would just leave for good.
The thing is, they released some really difficult content - like vMoL and vSO. So its not like they just gave up on "hardcore" crowd. vMoL for example has some very exquisite mechanics, not just "stack and burn".
But there's no middle grounds for people who are not super dedicated but still want some challenge, that's the problem. Also there's no content that would prepare people for this. Its either super easy (nothing wrong with that, super easy content is needed too) or super hard. I meet many people in game who would like to start raiding, and many new raidguilds appeared with vMoL release so its not like there's just a few people interested in it.
And btw, Im not a no-lifer, I play less than some casuals.
Its about interests in game, not just playtime.
P.S. Like I said, less grindyness would be more casual-friendly and more everyone-friendly and would allow people who dont play a lot to get good sets etc.
P.P.S Casuals are the majority of the game - but they are not homogenous mass. And TES fans are also very different, some play only with tgm and some install a ton of difficulty mods (which are very popular).Edited by LadyNalcarya on May 6, 2016 1:51PMDro-m'Athra Destroyer | Divayth Fyr's Coadjutor | Voice of Reason
PC/EU0 -
Shunravi✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »Guaranteed if they revamp craglorn people will go there. Right now even IC is used more than craglorn. When there was an option to skip it 99% of the playerbase did. Thats why they said they have "plans" for craglorn. Im assuming they mean scaling it and making it more solo friendly.
If craglorn scaled to vr16 or 160cp whatever it will be then I bet more would go there. By the time you can solo there you have outleveled the area and there is no point in it.
Why? What's the difference whether your enemy is CP120/140/160 if you just want to do the quests? It doesn't matter, the quests and all the things around stay the same. And as long as it stays at CP160 you will be able to outlevel it, so nothing changes there.
Exactly. The 'point' is the quests, the scenery, role-playing, just the environment in general. Its always been possible to solo, just the quests had locks for a while.
It has not always been possible. Maybe for the seasoned vets of the game but not for the everyday guy (or girl). Its not possible now as a matter of fact. Hence why noone uses it hardly. So like IC they are revamping it. Just IC was a priority because you know $$ and all.
Yea it has. I soloed in there when it launched (not everything of course, but a fair amount of things.) At vet 7. I believe the only armor set I had back then was song of lamae, and everything else was drops, so it wasn't as if I had 'elite' gear or anything either.
Though, I will say I am a seasoned player as I played through the silver and gold zones. That's really my only claim of expertise.
And you can solo a lot of it now. I have videos available on request.
And it certainly is a money thing. That's their focus. I just hope it actually works as I really like the zone.
This one has an eloquent and well thought out response to tha... Ooh sweetroll!0 -
Molag_Crow✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Too right.--ϟ-- Crows_Descend - Templar - Ebonheart Pact [PS4]&[PC] [EU] --ϟ--
YoutTube ESO Playlist
The greatest prison that people live in, is the fear of what other people think. - David Icke
Be your true, authentic self.0 -
jamesharv2005ub17_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »Guaranteed if they revamp craglorn people will go there. Right now even IC is used more than craglorn. When there was an option to skip it 99% of the playerbase did. Thats why they said they have "plans" for craglorn. Im assuming they mean scaling it and making it more solo friendly.
If craglorn scaled to vr16 or 160cp whatever it will be then I bet more would go there. By the time you can solo there you have outleveled the area and there is no point in it.
Why? What's the difference whether your enemy is CP120/140/160 if you just want to do the quests? It doesn't matter, the quests and all the things around stay the same. And as long as it stays at CP160 you will be able to outlevel it, so nothing changes there.
Exactly. The 'point' is the quests, the scenery, role-playing, just the environment in general. Its always been possible to solo, just the quests had locks for a while.
It has not always been possible. Maybe for the seasoned vets of the game but not for the everyday guy (or girl). Its not possible now as a matter of fact. Hence why noone uses it hardly. So like IC they are revamping it. Just IC was a priority because you know $$ and all.
Yea it has. I soloed in there when it launched (not everything of course, but a fair amount of things.) At vet 7. I believe the only armor set I had back then was song of lamae, and everything else was drops, so it wasn't as if I had 'elite' gear or anything either.
Though, I will say I am a seasoned player as I played through the silver and gold zones. That's really my only claim of expertise.
And you can solo a lot of it now. I have videos available on request.
And it certainly is a money thing. That's their focus. I just hope it actually works as I really like the zone.
When you say "you can" you mean you yourself right? Just saying no way the average joe can go solo in craglorn. Also if its so easy already why worry about them amking it a little easier so others can do it too?Edited by jamesharv2005ub17_ESO on May 6, 2016 1:53PM1 -
LadyNalcarya✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »Guaranteed if they revamp craglorn people will go there. Right now even IC is used more than craglorn. When there was an option to skip it 99% of the playerbase did. Thats why they said they have "plans" for craglorn. Im assuming they mean scaling it and making it more solo friendly.
If craglorn scaled to vr16 or 160cp whatever it will be then I bet more would go there. By the time you can solo there you have outleveled the area and there is no point in it.
Why? What's the difference whether your enemy is CP120/140/160 if you just want to do the quests? It doesn't matter, the quests and all the things around stay the same. And as long as it stays at CP160 you will be able to outlevel it, so nothing changes there.
Exactly. The 'point' is the quests, the scenery, role-playing, just the environment in general. Its always been possible to solo, just the quests had locks for a while.
It has not always been possible. Maybe for the seasoned vets of the game but not for the everyday guy (or girl). Its not possible now as a matter of fact. Hence why noone uses it hardly. So like IC they are revamping it. Just IC was a priority because you know $$ and all.
Yea it has. I soloed in there when it launched (not everything of course, but a fair amount of things.) At vet 7. I believe the only armor set I had back then was song of lamae, and everything else was drops, so it wasn't as if I had 'elite' gear or anything either.
Though, I will say I am a seasoned player as I played through the silver and gold zones. That's really my only claim of expertise.
And you can solo a lot of it now. I have videos available on request.
And it certainly is a money thing. That's their focus. I just hope it actually works as I really like the zone.
If that would be just a money thing, why wouldnt they listen to casuals and add purely pve instance of IC? For quests and such.Dro-m'Athra Destroyer | Divayth Fyr's Coadjutor | Voice of Reason
PC/EU0 -
jamesharv2005ub17_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭KoshkaMurka wrote: »jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »Guaranteed if they revamp craglorn people will go there. Right now even IC is used more than craglorn. When there was an option to skip it 99% of the playerbase did. Thats why they said they have "plans" for craglorn. Im assuming they mean scaling it and making it more solo friendly.
If craglorn scaled to vr16 or 160cp whatever it will be then I bet more would go there. By the time you can solo there you have outleveled the area and there is no point in it.
Why? What's the difference whether your enemy is CP120/140/160 if you just want to do the quests? It doesn't matter, the quests and all the things around stay the same. And as long as it stays at CP160 you will be able to outlevel it, so nothing changes there.
Exactly. The 'point' is the quests, the scenery, role-playing, just the environment in general. Its always been possible to solo, just the quests had locks for a while.
It has not always been possible. Maybe for the seasoned vets of the game but not for the everyday guy (or girl). Its not possible now as a matter of fact. Hence why noone uses it hardly. So like IC they are revamping it. Just IC was a priority because you know $$ and all.
Yea it has. I soloed in there when it launched (not everything of course, but a fair amount of things.) At vet 7. I believe the only armor set I had back then was song of lamae, and everything else was drops, so it wasn't as if I had 'elite' gear or anything either.
Though, I will say I am a seasoned player as I played through the silver and gold zones. That's really my only claim of expertise.
And you can solo a lot of it now. I have videos available on request.
And it certainly is a money thing. That's their focus. I just hope it actually works as I really like the zone.
If that would be just a money thing, why wouldnt they listen to casuals and add purely pve instance of IC? For quests and such.
Because thats simply not possible. They made orsinium TG and DB for PVE. Imagine now I say I want all those converted to PVP. Just no way to do that. IC was sold on the PVE/PVP mix. Its in cyrodill. PVE DLC is not in cyrodill. You make it sound like they could do this in an afternoon by hitting a few keystrokes.1 -
Volkodav✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭While there's a lot of constructive debate in this thread, there's also some sniping going on. Please remember to keep criticism civil and constructive. Additionally, if you have a critique, please focus on the opinion being put forth, not the person making it. Personal attacks, even minor ones, are unhelpful and likely against the forum rules. Some posts have been removed.
Personal attacks are all over the forums here,and always have been.Some of it is pretty rough as well.Yet,some clean threads get either locked,or snipped when the comments were quite innocent when compared to others.0 -
Lysette✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭KoshkaMurka wrote: »Well, as Matt Firor said in an interview a few weeks ago, they HAVE game data that shows everything every player is doing in-game... which means they KNOW how many have completed what content and how many have failed and how many of those players eventually left the game, etc. So it seems to me they would be making these decisions about changes based upon that game data, and if it is clear that an overwhelming MAJORITY of players are unable to finish specific content, then it explains why they would make changes to make the content easier.
what that data does not show how ever is the reason they left or if they would have left anyway or how many will unsub or leave if nerfs like these are to become par for the course
And why do you think that would matter?- This is as well a form of balancing - less no-lifers, less 1337-players, but more casuals and average players, which can do the content - this is a form of balancing the player base by removing both, the unsuccessful (by making them more successful) and the 1337, who are no benefit for the community, but toxicate it. It would be no loss for the community and the game in a whole, if those would just leave for good.
The thing is, they released some really difficult content - like vMoL and vSO. So its not like they just gave up on "hardcore" crowd. vMoL for example has some very exquisite mechanics, not just "stack and burn".
But there's no middle grounds for people who are not super dedicated but still want some challenge, that's the problem. Also there's no content that would prepare people for this. Its either super easy (nothing wrong with that, super easy content is needed too) or super hard. I meet many people in game who would like to start raiding, and many new raidguilds appeared with vMoL release so its not like there's just a few people interested in it.
And btw, Im not a no-lifer, I play less than some casuals. Its about interests in game, not just playtime.
P.S. Like I said, less grindyness would be more casual-friendly and more everyone-friendly and would allow people who dont play a lot to get good sets etc.
P.P.S Casuals are the majority of the game - but they are not homogenous mass. And TES fans are also very different, some play only with tgm and some install a ton of difficulty mods (which are very popular).
So if that is the problem, that there is no middle ground, maybe this should be addressed then instead to say, do not nerf this content. This is the first time, that I hear someone expressing this as being the problem - so it would be better IMO to say what the actual problem is, so that we could discuss that - instead to debate about if ZOS should nerf content or not. They do anyway that, what meets their expectations better - but they might not be aware of the problem of missing middle ground.
Edit: as far as single player games go, which can be modded, I am one of those who is using a lot of surival mods and mods which make things harder - less in combat difficulty, but in regards to survival. I love the new fallout 4 survival mode, it is much nearer to the way I normally play games like this. And this is the first time, that I do not need mods in fallout 4 but am quite happy with the original content and the DLCs - in the new survival mode that is, the older modes did not catch my attention that much like the new survival mode.Edited by Lysette on May 6, 2016 2:03PM0 -
Shunravi✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »Guaranteed if they revamp craglorn people will go there. Right now even IC is used more than craglorn. When there was an option to skip it 99% of the playerbase did. Thats why they said they have "plans" for craglorn. Im assuming they mean scaling it and making it more solo friendly.
If craglorn scaled to vr16 or 160cp whatever it will be then I bet more would go there. By the time you can solo there you have outleveled the area and there is no point in it.
Why? What's the difference whether your enemy is CP120/140/160 if you just want to do the quests? It doesn't matter, the quests and all the things around stay the same. And as long as it stays at CP160 you will be able to outlevel it, so nothing changes there.
Exactly. The 'point' is the quests, the scenery, role-playing, just the environment in general. Its always been possible to solo, just the quests had locks for a while.
It has not always been possible. Maybe for the seasoned vets of the game but not for the everyday guy (or girl). Its not possible now as a matter of fact. Hence why noone uses it hardly. So like IC they are revamping it. Just IC was a priority because you know $$ and all.
Yea it has. I soloed in there when it launched (not everything of course, but a fair amount of things.) At vet 7. I believe the only armor set I had back then was song of lamae, and everything else was drops, so it wasn't as if I had 'elite' gear or anything either.
Though, I will say I am a seasoned player as I played through the silver and gold zones. That's really my only claim of expertise.
And you can solo a lot of it now. I have videos available on request.
And it certainly is a money thing. That's their focus. I just hope it actually works as I really like the zone.
When you say "you can" you mean you yourself right? Just saying no way the average joe can go solo in craglorn.
I suppose I have some otherworldly positioning skills or an inhuman amount of patience.
I dunno man. I don't concider myself anything else but your avereage Joe. I'm not special. I can't do things others can't. I cannot access anything that anyone else isn't able to either.
The only thing I can lay claim to is the desire to see how far I can go in content. If I fail I take a deep breath and try again. That's about it... Practice.
This one has an eloquent and well thought out response to tha... Ooh sweetroll!0 -
Volkodav✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭KoshkaMurka wrote: »Well, as Matt Firor said in an interview a few weeks ago, they HAVE game data that shows everything every player is doing in-game... which means they KNOW how many have completed what content and how many have failed and how many of those players eventually left the game, etc. So it seems to me they would be making these decisions about changes based upon that game data, and if it is clear that an overwhelming MAJORITY of players are unable to finish specific content, then it explains why they would make changes to make the content easier.
what that data does not show how ever is the reason they left or if they would have left anyway or how many will unsub or leave if nerfs like these are to become par for the course
And why do you think that would matter?- This is as well a form of balancing - less no-lifers, less 1337-players, but more casuals and average players, which can do the content - this is a form of balancing the player base by removing both, the unsuccessful (by making them more successful) and the 1337, who are no benefit for the community, but toxicate it. It would be no loss for the community and the game in a whole, if those would just leave for good.
The thing is, they released some really difficult content - like vMoL and vSO. So its not like they just gave up on "hardcore" crowd. vMoL for example has some very exquisite mechanics, not just "stack and burn".
But there's no middle grounds for people who are not super dedicated but still want some challenge, that's the problem. Also there's no content that would prepare people for this. Its either super easy (nothing wrong with that, super easy content is needed too) or super hard. I meet many people in game who would like to start raiding, and many new raidguilds appeared with vMoL release so its not like there's just a few people interested in it.
And btw, Im not a no-lifer, I play less than some casuals. Its about interests in game, not just playtime.
P.S. Like I said, less grindyness would be more casual-friendly and more everyone-friendly and would allow people who dont play a lot to get good sets etc.
P.P.S Casuals are the majority of the game - but they are not homogenous mass. And TES fans are also very different, some play only with tgm and some install a ton of difficulty mods (which are very popular).
Just a point here.I play about 5 hours a day,most of the time,but I am not a "no-lifer". I do have a life.It just comes to me rather than me going out to it.
Careful there with things like that.0 -
jamesharv2005ub17_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭Stuff being "easy" and stuff being " hard" is very very subjective. Everyone has different ideas of what it is. Or what it should be. So making blanket statements about difficulty is again opinion only. I stated before why they needed to revamp IC and it has nothing to do with casuals wanting all the content to be easy. I would guess most casuals havent bothered doing a single dungeon outside of say public ones or delves.
It isnt casuals out to ruin your day. Its just business. Its not personal its about the bottom line and how can they make the most money.Edited by jamesharv2005ub17_ESO on May 6, 2016 2:01PM1 -
LadyNalcarya✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭KoshkaMurka wrote: »Well, as Matt Firor said in an interview a few weeks ago, they HAVE game data that shows everything every player is doing in-game... which means they KNOW how many have completed what content and how many have failed and how many of those players eventually left the game, etc. So it seems to me they would be making these decisions about changes based upon that game data, and if it is clear that an overwhelming MAJORITY of players are unable to finish specific content, then it explains why they would make changes to make the content easier.
what that data does not show how ever is the reason they left or if they would have left anyway or how many will unsub or leave if nerfs like these are to become par for the course
And why do you think that would matter?- This is as well a form of balancing - less no-lifers, less 1337-players, but more casuals and average players, which can do the content - this is a form of balancing the player base by removing both, the unsuccessful (by making them more successful) and the 1337, who are no benefit for the community, but toxicate it. It would be no loss for the community and the game in a whole, if those would just leave for good.
The thing is, they released some really difficult content - like vMoL and vSO. So its not like they just gave up on "hardcore" crowd. vMoL for example has some very exquisite mechanics, not just "stack and burn".
But there's no middle grounds for people who are not super dedicated but still want some challenge, that's the problem. Also there's no content that would prepare people for this. Its either super easy (nothing wrong with that, super easy content is needed too) or super hard. I meet many people in game who would like to start raiding, and many new raidguilds appeared with vMoL release so its not like there's just a few people interested in it.
And btw, Im not a no-lifer, I play less than some casuals. Its about interests in game, not just playtime.
P.S. Like I said, less grindyness would be more casual-friendly and more everyone-friendly and would allow people who dont play a lot to get good sets etc.
P.P.S Casuals are the majority of the game - but they are not homogenous mass. And TES fans are also very different, some play only with tgm and some install a ton of difficulty mods (which are very popular).
So if that is the problem, that there is no middle ground, maybe this should be addressed then instead to say, do not nerf this content. This is the first time, that I hear someone expressing this as being the problem - so it would be better IMO to say what the actual problem is, so that we could discuss that - instead to debate about if ZOS should nerf content or not. They do anyway that, what meets their expectations better - but they might not be aware of the problem of missing middle ground.
Yeah, but ICP and WGT have been nerfed several times and they already were middle grounds. City of Ash was released before champion system and also nerfed several times.
Theyre beatable with scaled up lower vets and non-optimized builds, but to beat them, you need to pay attention to the mechanics (bombs, portals, pinion...). I know that for sure, I help my guildies from social guild with those dungeons, and success only depends on willingness to play as a team. Of course, its easier with high dps, but its doable with low as well.
Dro-m'Athra Destroyer | Divayth Fyr's Coadjutor | Voice of Reason
PC/EU1