FierceSam wrote: »

Wifeaggro13 wrote: »

idk wrote: »

Wifeaggro13 wrote: »

Nic727 wrote: »

Kombinator wrote: »

Sometimes i would, and other times wouldn't. I agree, that it let you play with others better, and give some extra challenge for playing lowers zones, or go back, and play quest you have missed.

But it also takes away the "I'm the boss" feeling. No matter how hard you work you have the same work for each enemy. You can't reach a state when you just slaughter everything in your path with a spoon.

It also forces you to go with groups for world bosses. No matter what. So you just keep spamming the zone chat, wait, and pray, that someone comes by.

In overall, if these are the only options, then i would say no. But if i could design any system, then stuff would have a minimum level, and above that would have a low scaling. So if an area is 20 to 30, then below 30 it would be fixed. Above 30 it would stay some levels behind. So normal foes would mean little challenge, but still give loot, and quest reward, and elites would be small challenge. World bosses would be still soloable, but hard challenge.

SWTOR has a similar approach. There the zones are fixed, but instead the players got reduced stats, and levels, if they go a low level area. However the reduced stats are still more, than enough to sweep through the area with ease, if you are overleveled. Not oneshot everything, but hardly a challenge.

I think you have a good point here. I think a mix between what we have now with level scaling and what we had before would be the best.

Like a level 1 would be able to go everywhere, but a max level would have less challenge against mud crab.

I think they could make :
- X scale from lvl 1-10
- Y scale from 1-40
- Etc.

Like that you will always have a kind of challenge or feel stronger, but lower level will always be able to participate.

I think tam one was a mistake in total. A good option would be to have fixed quest lock have the player option to scale up or down to the party or zone. Remember tam one was about allowing players to group up with friends .it was a cheap fix to balancing ' in all honesty the game played way better prior to it

Returning to leveled zones is what would be a mistake in total.

Besides 1T zone changes having absolutely nothing to do with balancing it meant the lower level zones were not utter trash and pointless to return to for 99% of the characters in game. It was about making the lower level zones worth returning to for various reasons. Before 1T we had to do limited content in the zones and move on early or deal with a challenge even more of a joke than I ti snow.

1T is a much simpler solution than what you propose. Who would not choose to lock the content to their level vs deal with trash 20 levels below them? Sounds pointless so might as well keep the current design.

I don't know anyone revisiting zones once they are done with them. It does not matter all the overland content is like dealing with trash 20 levels below you even naked at lvl 1. But they will charge you full price for chapters like they spent a year developing the rehashed garbage . But for the record I dont think they should or could unwind this cluster fook back to a cohesive vertical progession system. Their only competition is games that are 16 years old or the bioware flop.

Aside from everyone who does any of the major Events, where all the locations are in the original zones. Plus everyone doing the Psijiic Order questline or wanting to level up their mages or fighters guild skill lines. And those who are creating, or levelling alts using the original timeline. Or trading. Or doing housing. Or getting their pledges.

Aside from them, you are right, nobody is revisiting zones

My ‘vertical’ progression is about me getting better, not my character becoming artificially more powerful.

Also it's not just about returning to zones you've already completed, scaling caused problems with completing them to begin with.

I always like to complete a map 100% as I'm going through it - I do all the quests (not just the ones required for the main storyline, but all of them, including delve quests) and I fight each world boss, complete each delve, public dungeon etc. as I come to them. The only thing I don't include is group dungeons, because I do those separately with my guild.

Before One Tamriel this approach meant I was always over-levelled for what I was doing, and not only was nothing challenging (I'd pick which attack to use first based on which animation I wanted to see, because I knew I'd only get to use 1 or 2 skills during the fight and it didn't matter what that was) but all the quest rewards and most other items I got were useless for that character and it took a very long time to level up because most of the time I was getting no XP.

Every so often the lack of XP would allow the zone/quest level to come close to my level and I'd get a bit of XP, gain a level or two and then it was back to getting nothing.

Under that system my options were to keep plodding through it doing quests purely for the sake of doing them with pretty much no reward or XP or to skip the majority of content in the game in order to keep up with my level. I choose the first one, but I much prefer not having to make that choice at all.

I miss the sense of danger of getting to Rawl'Kha early in the game having to pass through Greenshade and Malabal Tor. Also, I could choose if I wanted to up the difficulty a bit. The rarity of high-level materials were a problem of course, but hey - I'm not sure the overabundance of todays economy is really a good thing. Also, Craglorn.

I would like to see some variety in difficulty of mobs in overland areas.
At the moment Every mob (unless they're a world boss or a specific named NPC) has the same stat.
Going through Any area is just flat out mind numbingly boring atm. The mobs only look a bit different and/or has ranged/melee attacks.
Mobs should reflect players a bit more; some squishy bit high damage, others tanky but low in damage, and so on.

So, variety to mobs and areas, yes.
But leveled zones, no.