Another Cyclical debate regarding vet overworld content

datgladiatah · March 2018

Let me just start by saying that I'm a player who has gotten to CP720, has 6 fully leveled character, but I have not completed all vanilla content on any one character. I have done most dungeons, vanilla trials/MOL, and most DLC areas, and I've completed vMA a few times on one character. I say this because I want to make sure that it's known that I've experienced most of the content in various degrees and a lack of content isn't a part of the arguments I'm presenting/asking to talk about. This discussion is about giving more options to access veteran content throughout the game.

So when it comes to ESO, I'm completely dedicated to it and I love its gameplay for various reasons. I like that you can effective builds can come in many shapes and I love that my classes aren't defined by the MMO trio outside of VERY hardcore content. That being said, my favorite part of the game is metagaming. I love making more niche builds, like my nightblade tank/healer or a 2h DPS, mostly because I'm not trying to use those characters in particular in trials (or can swap out the build when necessary). That being said, I played this game because I love Elder Scrolls in general. The lore and story telling in ESO in particular is good, outside the stagnant animations and tedious directions quest npcs give. My favorite part about the quests is discovering new and interesting things about the world and exploring it with my boyfriend, which I use to bounce ideas and theories off of. But that's where the problems start to begin for me.

When it comes to any roleplaying game, there is an aspect of challenge. You can raise the difficulty on Skyrim, for instance, and die plenty of times if you don't understand your build. You definitely can make the game easier for yourself, but for the most part I was still presented with a chance to die fairly. Dragonbreath one hits you unless you build resistances, bandit chiefs randomly execute animation you if you're not careful, mages tend to do 5x the damage your spells do, etc. Even after min maxing, I think most people agree that at least the game keeps your interest because it's more dynamic. Now, ESO is more stiff in the overworld and that's fine, because the game can challenge you with various combat mechanics to spice up the combat, and you especially see that in dungeons but, if you stop long enough to see it, there's also instances of this in many of the zone bosses. I personally loved Barbos in Morrowind even if he was a complete push over for a max level character.

This is where I'm left longing with ESO. When One Tamriel first came out, the one thing that inspired my boyfriend into playing the game again was that all content was available and the areas scaled with you. It made exploring a lot more fun at first, but then after a while you realize you'll never be met with a challenge. We finally went to Craglorn, tried some of the public bosses, and that's where we were finally having fun with the mechanics and finally being challenged. It was a blast until we ran out of stuff to do and realized that all the rewards and sets, outside some motifs, weren't worth repeating it over and over again.

A lot of MMO fans went to ESO and expected an MMO, which they got. They got a game more dynamic then a lot of them but they still got their 4 man dungeons and their group trials, eventually their battlegrounds and dueling. Outside of various balance concerns and a demand for more group content, their needs have been met. So what about TES/RPG fans?

I came into the game expecting to want to duo with someone throughout the world. I loved duoing in various diablo clones/neverwinter/etc. I longed for a co-op TES experience more so than with traditional mmo groups of people. That sort of gameplay doesn't really represent the dynamic of a TES game, but at times the overworld can. It just lacks literally... any challenge. At all. It's been proven that it can be solo'd by people with no CP 10x over, and not only does it not present any challenge, it also teaches nothing about the game's group content or PVP. So what is it really there for outside of being a barrier for ESO's more entertaining gameplay? Decent storytelling but otherwise, few rewards and fewer challenges.

With the new Chapter looming over us and Morrowind acknowledging only some of these issues (World bosses had double the hp of vanilla, had more mechanics, public dungeons provided more challenge and unique rewards, overworld enemies were a bit stronger and had more interesting attacks and interactions), I think it still has a long way to go. While I believe new exploration and solo content is good, I think there should be a push to make more interesting, eventful, and rewarding solo content that, at the very least, might push a player to ask for a duo or player assistance and might push for more of a communal interaction with the zone. Doing world bosses is fine, but what about vet delves or public dungeons? What about repeating quests with stronger enemies and bosses(I really like the looks of some zone main quests, but I have no desire to go through it because the gameplay feels like a choir)? What about DLC zones specifically being centered around working together with others or otherwise being more challenging, like Craglorn (Murkmire anyone???)? What about content specifically made to challenge, like maelstrom arena? Cyrodiil fort sieges, but PvE horde modes? I could come up with stuff all day.

I think the game comes out with plenty of solo content but fails to see that it's all streamlined and even casual players have no reason to come back if everything feels repetitive and unnecessary.

TL;DR: If ZOS intends to focus on making massive explorable every half year that isn't challenging, but release group content that could be either challenging or casual, why can't you do the same to an extent with the solo content? Focus more on player duos and rewarding group exploration. Make growth in ESO more dynamic and don't always have it focus on group content as the only intention to reach end game.

datgladiatah · March 2018

tried to edit and made a double post sorry

phermitgb · March 2018

I sorta understand your feelings - I too would really like to see stronger, more versatile designed content for small group play. However, I also recognize that there are some inherent limitations to the things an MMO can do while accommodating a huge number of different people with different interests...

1 - some of us want story, some of us want action, some of us want rewards, some of us want pvp - MOST of us want all 4 features, to varying degrees, at any given moment
2 - there are multiple power levels of players in the game at any given moment, creating a huge divide in how difficult content can be if it has to accommodate EVERYONE to varying degrees...you've got...
a - beginning players - sorry to inform you, but for beginning players, that don't have any cp, alts, guild support, or gear - most of the overland content can still be quite hard - for awhile
b - experienced players - every MMO i've EVER played, gets easier the 2nd time around. Once I've run one character through the primary content of the game, even if I'm using a new class that I'm totally unfamiliar with, EVERYTHING is easier - usually significantly so
c - dedicated players - I consider these people to be the ones that play enough that they've at least *dabbled* in SOME aspects of hardcore gameplay - they've grinded out a set or two, they've at least looked at a build guide for some suggestions - they're still not hardcore, elite, min/max, munchkin, pro, whatever term you want to use - but they've at least gotten to a new tier of gameplay (I'm currently right about there - with a build that now more-or-less blenders all overland content, but still isn't anywhere near leaderboard score type stuff)
d - munchkins (from the steve jackson term, you may know them as mlgs, the "elite", hardcore, etc...) - these are the people that have dedicated their gameplay time to meta-gaming, builds, guides, leaderboards, world-first completions, etc, etc...these people TREMENDOUSLY skew the upper range of dps output and survivability

now, if we want overland content to accomodate people just beginning to learn the game (probably topping out under 10k dps just as an example) vs people pushing hard to get their builds up to leaderboard levels (which i've heard are in the 60k+ range), you can see we've got at least 50k+ dps gap of difficulty that somehow has to accommodate everyone

even if we build two tiers of dungeons, we, at some point, have to say that anything that's going to be even REMOTELY challenging for a hardcore group that works upwards of 50k+ dps is going to be nearly (if not totally) impossible for a team that has proudly tweaked their builds into lets say the 20-25k dps range

and of course, the people who have pushed their builds up into the "hardcore" range ALSO insist on better rewards for their efforts, functionally pushing high tier rewards out of the reach of the "lesser" players and/or sometimes just making it easier for their own category to get top-tier rewards, all while complaining that overland content is "too easy"

and don't even get me started on the divide in PVP...

I'm getting distracted - the point I'm trying to make, I guess, is that while I support your impulse for "challenging overland content for 2-4 people", the problem is that if overland content for 2-4 people is made even "moderately" challenging, it could very well be functionally impossible for someone playing the game for the first time (and alone), and still trivially easy for even a single person with a mega-build (don't believe me - just listen to the stories of "hardcore" players soloing dungeons to try and get a last piece of perfect gear - e.g. 4 man content being reasonably easy for a single person to play through)

now, any instanced zone could be better tuned (for example, people have frequently asked for delves to become private instances, which could then adjust mob density and base stats to adjust for numbers of players in a group and general level), and I guess we could do the same things with dungeons and even trials (although there's serious potential for exploitation for gear and whatnot that would have to be addressed), but I suspect any of that would require a significant re-coding of the game.

anyway - If *I* had absolute power over Zenimax (and I'm not kidding, sometimes I dream that I do), I could force a development cycle or two to adjust the overall game mechanics of ESO to better accommodate small grouping and more dynamic adjusting of challenging components - but I don't, and so all I guess we can hope for is that someone, somewhere, someday, at ZOS listens, thinks that this is a good idea to one extent or another, and convinces a money-grubbing accountant somewhere on the 30th floor corner penthouse to sink some damn money into improving the overall ESO game experience rather than just dumping it into limited time random-chance rainbow-colored sparkle dragon mounts.

Sixty5 · March 2018

The soloution I came up with was just adding something akin to battlespirit to overland.

Have a momento you get from completing the main quest that lets you deal half damage and take double damage from enemies.
You make overland harder for those that want it harder, and you don't lose the ability to group up with anyone.

ADarklore · March 2018

Sixty5 wrote: »

The soloution I came up with was just adding something akin to battlespirit to overland.

Have a momento you get from completing the main quest that lets you deal half damage and take double damage from enemies.
You make overland harder for those that want it harder, and you don't lose the ability to group up with anyone.

The problem is, we already have that option that players DO NOT want to use. They could equip lower level weapons, wear lower level gear or none, remove all CP... they could do this all themselves, but they refuse. Why? Because they want ZOS to force them to use it... it's some psychological issue I think. It reminds me of a single player game (won't mention titles) that had exploits, a large number of players demanded that it be patched... even though using the exploit was never required and it was an offline single player game- so the only person it impacted was the one who chose to use it. However, players complained that it was 'too tempting' and wanted the temptation removed... because they had absolutely no willpower to resist and therefore wanted the 'fix' forced onto everyone- including those who enjoyed the exploit. Same thing here... any person can 'downgrade' their character, but players don't want to do it themselves, they want it forced upon them because they have no willpower to do it themselves.

Plus, let's get real, the more you play the game, the better you become, thus the easier the game becomes at any level. So it's tough to accommodate every person and every skill level.

datgladiatah · March 2018

Sixty5 wrote: »

The soloution I came up with was just adding something akin to battlespirit to overland.

Have a momento you get from completing the main quest that lets you deal half damage and take double damage from enemies.
You make overland harder for those that want it harder, and you don't lose the ability to group up with anyone.

But I don't think that's really what anyone would be looking for though. It doesn't really improve the experience. It's just a self cripple that lessens the experience. There would be no way to be rewarded for it and it artificially creates challenge as it doesn't improve mechanics or force anyone to think. You either get cheesed by certain abilities or you still blow through everything because the overland mechanics generally don't change. The only time it would create an interesting challenge is like, delve/public dungeon bosses and zone bosses. Even then you're only doubling the time needed to fight it, not really experiencing it like a vet dungeon.

ADarklore wrote: »

The problem is, we already have that option that players DO NOT want to use. They could equip lower level weapons, wear lower level gear or none, remove all CP... they could do this all themselves, but they refuse. Why? Because they want ZOS to force them to use it... it's some psychological issue I think. It reminds me of a single player game (won't mention titles) that had exploits, a large number of players demanded that it be patched... even though using the exploit was never required and it was an offline single player game- so the only person it impacted was the one who chose to use it. However, players complained that it was 'too tempting' and wanted the temptation removed... because they had absolutely no willpower to resist and therefore wanted the 'fix' forced onto everyone- including those who enjoyed the exploit. Same thing here... any person can 'downgrade' their character, but players don't want to do it themselves, they want it forced upon them because they have no willpower to do it themselves.

Plus, let's get real, the more you play the game, the better you become, thus the easier the game becomes at any level. So it's tough to accommodate every person and every skill level.

Self crippling isn't good game design. I shouldn't really have to make that argument but I guess I will. If a game is too easy that you need challenge through doing the opposite of what the game builds you up to do, it's not a well designed game. You're coming for the players when you should be arguing the flaw with ZOS's design. Why? Just admit overland isn't fun and that it needs an overhaul. I don't believe this fits into fixing exploits for single player games. You can't exploit easy, but you can easily CHOOSE to use duplicate glitches and manipulate stupid 'radiant' ai. But if players think it's fun, hey, at least they have to somewhat work at it to get to that point. My first ESO character was a stamplar tank that went through all AD content with a sword and board resto staff and it was 100% no issue at all, even when i had no CP or vet levels. We've had threads like this before and very few to no people think overland was hard, cp or no, and have even tested not running CP on characters in DLC like CWC and found no issues doing anything.

Yes, you do get better at things. The content is 100% leveled with your character with no variations however. Most RPGs increase challenge as you progress. This game does not progress like that outside of group content and you shouldn't be forced to ONLY do group content for rewarding progress, especially when most people need to PUG and might not enjoy one form of gameplay over and over again. That's why they made Maelstrom Arena; a fun, rewarding solo arena that you definitely have to earn into winning. It's still challenging and it's not for everyone, but it's popular enough where plenty of people have the weapons to show for it. This is the one and only example of vet solo content and it still doesn't fit into the paradigm of what ESO is; Elder Scrolls with a Friend. People don't just want 4 man rigid MMO solo dungeons, they want to explore and experience the game with a friend, and it's just not a fun experience in the overworld for CP players.

datgladiatah · March 2018

1 - some of us want story, some of us want action, some of us want rewards, some of us want pvp - MOST of us want all 4 features, to varying degrees, at any given moment

That's very true and that expectation can't be reached all of the time. I wouldn't begin to demand that at all points in time.

2 - there are multiple power levels of players in the game at any given moment, creating a huge divide in how difficult content can be if it has to accommodate EVERYONE to varying degrees...you've got...
a - beginning players - sorry to inform you, but for beginning players, that don't have any cp, alts, guild support, or gear - most of the overland content can still be quite hard - for awhile
b - experienced players - every MMO i've EVER played, gets easier the 2nd time around. Once I've run one character through the primary content of the game, even if I'm using a new class that I'm totally unfamiliar with, EVERYTHING is easier - usually significantly so
c - dedicated players - I consider these people to be the ones that play enough that they've at least *dabbled* in SOME aspects of hardcore gameplay - they've grinded out a set or two, they've at least looked at a build guide for some suggestions - they're still not hardcore, elite, min/max, munchkin, pro, whatever term you want to use - but they've at least gotten to a new tier of gameplay (I'm currently right about there - with a build that now more-or-less blenders all overland content, but still isn't anywhere near leaderboard score type stuff)
d - munchkins (from the steve jackson term, you may know them as mlgs, the "elite", hardcore, etc...) - these are the people that have dedicated their gameplay time to meta-gaming, builds, guides, leaderboards, world-first completions, etc, etc...these people TREMENDOUSLY skew the upper range of dps output and survivability

I mentioned this before, and it's not hugely relevant because it's anecdotal, but I ran my first character as a stamplar tank with no cp and while it wasn't a fun or fast experience, it was still easy even without CP or vet levels. There's also a few videos of people doing no CP runs of DLC that still ends up ungodly easy. But yeah, we do understand rotation and our damage output, and that's something a beginner won't have. But they're not necessarily challenged into learning at any point, at least not beyond the bare minimum 'cast spells instead of just heavy attacking', and yet here i am in group vet dlc dungeons still seeing people doing that...

now, if we want overland content to accomodate people just beginning to learn the game (probably topping out under 10k dps just as an example) vs people pushing hard to get their builds up to leaderboard levels (which i've heard are in the 60k+ range), you can see we've got at least 50k+ dps gap of difficulty that somehow has to accommodate everyone

Yeah but those DPS parses are rarely solo and when they are they're against solo dummies that don't challenge the rotation. Challenging content wouldn't allow for a perfect rotation like that, not without lots of protection/other targets/general teamwork and understanding. There is a gap and that should be respected however. But that's why HA magicka bow builds don't do vMA but people that are within dedicated/munchkin do, and the more content there is, the more experienced players will gain an interest (especially if the rewards are tempting)

even if we build two tiers of dungeons, we, at some point, have to say that anything that's going to be even REMOTELY challenging for a hardcore group that works upwards of 50k+ dps is going to be nearly (if not totally) impossible for a team that has proudly tweaked their builds into lets say the 20-25k dps range

and of course, the people who have pushed their builds up into the "hardcore" range ALSO insist on better rewards for their efforts, functionally pushing high tier rewards out of the reach of the "lesser" players and/or sometimes just making it easier for their own category to get top-tier rewards, all while complaining that overland content is "too easy"

Yeah but I feel like the nature of two or three people duoing in overworld and quest content would naturally face different challenges than people who all watched youtube videos of vet DLC dungeons and work together to beat repeatable content over and over. Solo adventuring is hard to memorize and can vary. I doubt anyone has memorized the final bosses in zones or even know what the mechanics are in public dungeon bosses because they blow up so fast. In a world where adventuring is difficult, and we know there's tons of adventuring content, it's difficult to memorize everything.

And in terms of rewards, I think with the advent of Homestead there's a lot more opportunity to reward less combat based things. Maelstrom weapons are very nice and quite welcome, but furniture/furniture recipes, costumes and styles, assistants, pets, all of these things are nice to collect and feel rewarding and they don't increase the power level above the more casual groups. I think that's why I find Imperial City so nice, is that while there's sets, there's also interesting collectibles and fun achievements. The only issue is the ganking. I feel like Imperial City demonstrates challenges enough where I can imagine it being fun with or without the pvp aspect.

I'm getting distracted - the point I'm trying to make, I guess, is that while I support your impulse for "challenging overland content for 2-4 people", the problem is that if overland content for 2-4 people is made even "moderately" challenging, it could very well be functionally impossible for someone playing the game for the first time (and alone), and still trivially easy for even a single person with a mega-build (don't believe me - just listen to the stories of "hardcore" players soloing dungeons to try and get a last piece of perfect gear - e.g. 4 man content being reasonably easy for a single person to play through)

Yeah I mean I have toons that can solo some vanilla vet content, but I mean, they're just not difficult dungeons anyways in hindsight. City of Ash 1? Fungal Grotto? Wayrest Sewers? Arx Corinium? They're just not scaled right. ZOS has no desire to 'buff' content because there's no reason to. But being able to solo these is just a gameplay issue. I think it honestly demonstrates an issue with ZOS's early design that they genuinely didn't understand how to make the game fun or interesting using the challenges normal RPGs emulate. Besides at least people with megabuilds wouldn't find it 100% trivial like doing any vanilla overworld content.

now, any instanced zone could be better tuned (for example, people have frequently asked for delves to become private instances, which could then adjust mob density and base stats to adjust for numbers of players in a group and general level), and I guess we could do the same things with dungeons and even trials (although there's serious potential for exploitation for gear and whatnot that would have to be addressed), but I suspect any of that would require a significant re-coding of the game.

I personally think it would be easy to make veteran versions of quest lines because many quest hubs and zone main quests have instances and their progress isn't seen by the player. Being able to repeat quests in veteran form after say, beating the main alliance quest for your toon seems like a decent reward and an easy thing to code. Solo delves and public dungeons would be nice if they had a vet version. Honestly, if it can be done with all the Craglorn instances, why not??? Craglorn is a perfect example of what you mentioned (while they don't do it with delves they do it all the time with their group quest hubs)

anyway - If *I* had absolute power over Zenimax (and I'm not kidding, sometimes I dream that I do), I could force a development cycle or two to adjust the overall game mechanics of ESO to better accommodate small grouping and more dynamic adjusting of challenging components - but I don't, and so all I guess we can hope for is that someone, somewhere, someday, at ZOS listens, thinks that this is a good idea to one extent or another, and convinces a money-grubbing accountant somewhere on the 30th floor corner penthouse to sink some damn money into improving the overall ESO game experience rather than just dumping it into limited time random-chance rainbow-colored sparkle dragon mounts.

I think it's a lost financial opportunity to think that the hardcore players wouldn't play longer and stay with them for longer periods if they released dlc with the intent of creating rewarding and challenging RPG experiences. CWC was a waste of time for most people (and on top of that really difficult to swallow from a lore perspective), but look and DB and TG dlc. Most people didn't care for the guild lines, but I found the stealth missions to be a refreshing challenge that had great non-combat based rewards. You didn't need the ultimate build to tear through it (just be a nightblade lol) but I think casuals loved the gameplay and loved the push towards making the justice system more interesting. Again though, actual combat challenge lacked, even though all main quests were built around soloing. I just think that's very odd to buy dlc that gives me the same experience as a 9 dollar game. It has prettier land I suppose, but there's no acknowledgment of the few of players that bought this for a TES experience. The gameplay is there, the story telling is there, the design is just what lacks and designs can change with some effort. It's all just talk on our end, but I seriously do hope ZOS sees this and thinks of it as healthy criticism and not an attack on the game itself.

Avran_Sylt · March 2018

My suggestion: Expand the Normal Mode and Veteran Mode Dungeon toggle to also include Vet Overland/delves/dungeons.

Generally making it a 'difficulty toggle' of Normal or Vet.

You'll pad enemies health and damage, so their attacks can't be waded through without having to heal or block, which in turn reduces overall DPS output, and places less importance on burst damage (hopefully).

And if you really want to make it interesting? Make a new drop table for new sets/items in the Vet Overworld. Normal Overworld has their own sets (and thus its own allure), and Vet Overworld has their own sets (and thus a different allure).

Narvuntien · March 2018

Okay so I am definitely in the "dedicated player" box... all of my dabbling in harder content (vet trails, DSA and DLC dungeons) resulted in complete failure.

I like to quest just to relax, but I am running around one shotting the opponents, I only need the one ability and whole mobs die. And all the bosses need is me to use my ultimate.

I want to be more dynamically change the difficulty in overland, the scaling system in this game should allow us to do that. At least allow us to have no CP overland. You just put in the option in the settings somewhere.

Cadbury · March 2018

Avran_Sylt wrote: »

My suggestion: Expand the Normal Mode and Veteran Mode Dungeon toggle to also include Vet Overland/delves/dungeons.

Generally making it a 'difficulty toggle' of Normal or Vet.

You'll pad enemies health and damage, so their attacks can't be waded through without having to heal or block, which in turn reduces overall DPS output, and places less importance on burst damage (hopefully).

And if you really want to make it interesting? Make a new drop table for new sets/items in the Vet Overworld. Normal Overworld has their own sets (and thus its own allure), and Vet Overworld has their own sets (and thus a different allure).

I'd wholeheartedly support this.

Jarryzzt · March 2018

You can't have overland vet and normal modes unless you run separate instances of each overland area.

Well - technically you sort of can, except that it creates all sorts of design stupidity. For example, suppose someone on "normal" and someone else on "vet" attack the same wolf/goblin/whatever simultaneously from two directions. Now what happens?

So what people who want to "split" overland content are really asking for is to double the server load - potentially - for...what reason, exactly? No, not the "I am a player and want X" reason, but how would you justify this in a project management meeting? I don't see how you could.

Delves and public dungeons they could potentially multi-instance, of course, except they've clearly made the decision not to do so from the very outset. I can only imagine it's for performance reasons, because it is utterly stupid to deliberately want to set up boss-camping scenarios. Not that I should ever underestimate human (or manager) stupidity.

The only thing that really leaves - for overland content - is to add a separate continent/country/area/whatever that is all "veteran". Sort of like it used to be a while ago, in fact, low level players go here, high levels over there. Except that they've moved in precisely the opposite design direction with One Tamriel, and again I cannot fathom how one could convince management to allocate the developers to build an area for high levels only if ZOS itself has claimed not too long ago that only a minority of players have hit or approached the CP cap (implying that the majority are lowbies or midbies and so would not benefit from such a "veteran" area in the slightest).

TLDR. This is, what, the 100th thread asking for the same thing in the past year? And the countervailing reasons, both technical and corporate, are still pretty much the same. Dead horse - beaten.

Anotherone773 · March 2018

OP: I just skimmed your post. It seems what your asking for is harder overland tailored more to vet players. The problem with that is the more you tailor to vets, the more 1T loses its purpose. I am ok with that. This game lacks any sort of meaningful progression and content that is to easy is just boring, at least to me. I am finding most overland and most delve bosses to be pretty easy now and im not anywhere near max CP nor do i have BiS gear. I think their is plenty of overland content for people who like the 1T system, so i would be fine with newer areas being harder in part or full.

ADarklore wrote: »

Sixty5 wrote: »

The soloution I came up with was just adding something akin to battlespirit to overland.

Have a momento you get from completing the main quest that lets you deal half damage and take double damage from enemies.
You make overland harder for those that want it harder, and you don't lose the ability to group up with anyone.

The problem is, we already have that option that players DO NOT want to use. They could equip lower level weapons, wear lower level gear or none, remove all CP... they could do this all themselves, but they refuse. Why? Because they want ZOS to force them to use it... it's some psychological issue I think. It reminds me of a single player game (won't mention titles) that had exploits, a large number of players demanded that it be patched... even though using the exploit was never required and it was an offline single player game- so the only person it impacted was the one who chose to use it. However, players complained that it was 'too tempting' and wanted the temptation removed... because they had absolutely no willpower to resist and therefore wanted the 'fix' forced onto everyone- including those who enjoyed the exploit. Same thing here... any person can 'downgrade' their character, but players don't want to do it themselves, they want it forced upon them because they have no willpower to do it themselves.

Plus, let's get real, the more you play the game, the better you become, thus the easier the game becomes at any level. So it's tough to accommodate every person and every skill level.

I too have suggested that solution but it is merely a workaround. I was beating delve bosses, DLC delve bosses, on a level 15 in green/blue gear. I hadn't allocated the CP yet as i forgot too. The problem is i already know the bosses and what they do. I know what is coming where and when. I know where to stand, when to move, and how to defend against the bosses attacks and abilities. So even gimping myself, unless i play blindfolded, i can still win and it honestly isnt much more of a challenge. It might take 20 sec to kill the boss instead of 10 but thats about it.

I imagine when i start messing with other boss types such as public dungeon, group dungeon solo, and world bosses, i will acquire the same knowledge and will also be able to do it "gimping myself"

Ive also watched videos of players soloing trial bosses. Sure it took them an hour to dps it down, and its not something i would spend an hour doing. But it shows you the problem that develops with the 1T system. Technically that is an endgame boss, you shouldnt be able to solo it since "everything scales"

Scaling is very misleading though. Mobs dont scale. They are always the same. They are just easier or harder based on how good your gear is until you hit cp160 then that becomes pretty much irrelevant as well. The 1T system has a lot of limitations. There is a reason no one has "invented" this system for an mmo in the history of mmos. it has a lot of drawbacks for a little gain.

datgladiatah · March 2018

Jarryzzt wrote: »

You can't have overland vet and normal modes unless you run separate instances of each overland area.

Well - technically you sort of can, except that it creates all sorts of design stupidity. For example, suppose someone on "normal" and someone else on "vet" attack the same wolf/goblin/whatever simultaneously from two directions. Now what happens?

So what people who want to "split" overland content are really asking for is to double the server load - potentially - for...what reason, exactly? No, not the "I am a player and want X" reason, but how would you justify this in a project management meeting? I don't see how you could.

Delves and public dungeons they could potentially multi-instance, of course, except they've clearly made the decision not to do so from the very outset. I can only imagine it's for performance reasons, because it is utterly stupid to deliberately want to set up boss-camping scenarios. Not that I should ever underestimate human (or manager) stupidity.

The only thing that really leaves - for overland content - is to add a separate continent/country/area/whatever that is all "veteran". Sort of like it used to be a while ago, in fact, low level players go here, high levels over there. Except that they've moved in precisely the opposite design direction with One Tamriel, and again I cannot fathom how one could convince management to allocate the developers to build an area for high levels only if ZOS itself has claimed not too long ago that only a minority of players have hit or approached the CP cap (implying that the majority are lowbies or midbies and so would not benefit from such a "veteran" area in the slightest).

TLDR. This is, what, the 100th thread asking for the same thing in the past year? And the countervailing reasons, both technical and corporate, are still pretty much the same. Dead horse - beaten.

That separate continent you're talking about is Craglorn. It works fine and people go there all the time because the motif rewards make it more rewarding even if it's rather challenging. The sheer amount of repeatable content in it is something that should be emulated. They already had Mirkmire in design but any of the dlc zones they're creating can fit its paradigm. There's also the ability to allow vet delves/public dungeons but I don't necessarily like that as much as instances similar to how Craglorn works for quest hubs. In addition creating Maelstrom Arena-like content is always a nice addition. Again, nothing in my statement approaches 'vet' overland zones as much as content within overland zones that offers more optional challenge, like how GW2 has public bosses and events that are timed, or how Destiny has lost sectors that are technically instanced with the group as well as, since the last update, challenge-tier single player missions. It just adds more content.

Nothing is stoping a group of 4 lowbies from doing the entirety of Craglorn together like the old adventure zone but it's challenging even for most max-geared solo players. That's why it's extra fun with a duo because you can be more interpretive: slot a resto staff, have vigor, use bone shield or other synergies, just do things you want to do. I think it's a lot more fun to do things with a buddy there then it is anywhere else vanilla.

Avran_Sylt · March 2018

If there is a Vet or Normal option, they will need to be different instances.

strangeradnd · March 2018

ADarklore wrote: »

Sixty5 wrote: »

The soloution I came up with was just adding something akin to battlespirit to overland.

Have a momento you get from completing the main quest that lets you deal half damage and take double damage from enemies.
You make overland harder for those that want it harder, and you don't lose the ability to group up with anyone.

The problem is, we already have that option that players DO NOT want to use. They could equip lower level weapons, wear lower level gear or none, remove all CP... they could do this all themselves, but they refuse. Why? Because they want ZOS to force them to use it... it's some psychological issue I think. It reminds me of a single player game (won't mention titles) that had exploits, a large number of players demanded that it be patched... even though using the exploit was never required and it was an offline single player game- so the only person it impacted was the one who chose to use it. However, players complained that it was 'too tempting' and wanted the temptation removed... because they had absolutely no willpower to resist and therefore wanted the 'fix' forced onto everyone- including those who enjoyed the exploit. Same thing here... any person can 'downgrade' their character, but players don't want to do it themselves, they want it forced upon them because they have no willpower to do it themselves.

Plus, let's get real, the more you play the game, the better you become, thus the easier the game becomes at any level. So it's tough to accommodate every person and every skill level.

You used the book didn't you. I never did but I know a lot of people who missed it when it was gone.

AlienatedGoat · March 2018

I made a thread recently exploring some options about Veteran overland.

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/401048/this-is-what-veteran-overland-should-look-like/p1

I honestly think that the best bet is to pursue Veteran options for Delves and World Bosses. I think it adds enough Vet overland to satisfy my craving.