Braffin wrote: »

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

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

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Braffin wrote: »

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

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

The people complaining are clearly the minority here. A thousand posts by a small fraction of users doesn't change the fact, that the majority in this thread (as in any other) is fine with difficulty of EA.

Nobody talked about the ratio of forum users to non forum users. It's all about the fact, that the players, which are fine with the difficulty of EA, outweight the complainers by far. Reframing statements others have made won't change that.

Really, I thought for some time you are interested in a open and fair discussion based on facts. It's sad, that this is seemingly not the case.

ComradeBiscuit wrote: »

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

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

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

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

I made a new tank and brought her into the archive to practice, accompanied by a ranged DPS companion to help things go faster. Ran into Molag Kena in arc 1, and she got stuck in the endless shield loop. Obviously I didn't burn her too fast that time. That fight took forever.

Rowjoh wrote: »

Ask them lol

it certainly isn't for anything that'll improve a build like unique weapons or BIS sets.

why are/aren't you doing it then?

I run it to buy weekly monster motif page which I miss. I'd like to play it for fun, but having limited amount of lives isn't exactly my idea of having fun in this game
So if not for the unique vendor I wouldn't even step in there

Braffin wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Braffin wrote: »

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

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

The people complaining are clearly the minority here. A thousand posts by a small fraction of users doesn't change the fact, that the majority in this thread (as in any other) is fine with difficulty of EA.

Nobody talked about the ratio of forum users to non forum users. It's all about the fact, that the players, which are fine with the difficulty of EA, outweight the complainers by far. Reframing statements others have made won't change that.

Really, I thought for some time you are interested in a open and fair discussion based on facts. It's sad, that this is seemingly not the case.

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

That is a fact about forum populations. It's just a counterpoint to the idea you stated. And is my own point.

Quote frankly, an open and fair discussion based on facts should mean that people can bring in counterpoints that disagree with a point, without ad hominem.

You say they are only a few. I'm pointing out that few they may be, but forums tend to skew hardcore and the number of complaints are likely representative of casual players in general.

Necrotech_Master wrote: »

DUTCH_REAPER wrote: »

Necrotech_Master wrote: »

DUTCH_REAPER wrote: »

This right here is something I do not believe the devs intended to happen. Damage from enemies past arc 6 able to be nerfed to 500 a hit total? come on ZOS.


https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/647806/weakening-glyph-can-break-the-endless-archive-bosses-changes-needs-to-happen#latest

theres nothing wrong with that

the enchantment has a cooldown and can only proc on 1 enemy at a time, if your not running infused you cant even keep it up all the time

the add stages become much more of a problem at late arcs than the bosses do

No. It’s not just one enemy that gets it with CP passive that procs to multiple enemies even while blocking. This last update they changed the Vision for enchantments to actually affect this and there is Zero chance it was intended to bring boss arc 7 damage to zero almost. No way.

well, considering they fixed that so it would actually work, and they didnt nerf focused efforts

in addition to the fact that endless archive has basically nothing tradeable except the treasure maps with the currency, i dont see it mattering much

theres literally no reason to push past arc 4 unless your looking to try to leaderboard or challenge yourself

and as mentioned in the other thread, it takes a good RNG to actually get a 4-5 stack of attuned enchantments to even make it do as much as that

unless you specifically build for it, it wont happen, just throwing a weakening enchantment on with infused and getting 4x attuned does like -1300 something dmg, but it doesnt have a lot of uptime without infused

i personally dont want to give up my current gear setup to run heartland, and i would be losing a bunch of armor switching off defending trait

honestly it wouldnt be any different than someone building for permanent magma shell using elf bane, ult cost reduction, and major/minor heroism, combined with visions like additional ult cost reduction and extended major/minor effects and verses like tomefoolery, which is probably just as OP as the weakening enchantment

That’s a very fair point from that angle.

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

Toxic_Hemlock wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

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

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

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

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

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

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

Edit: clarity

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

Nice furnishing, nice sets totally not worth it.

jaws343 wrote: »

HalfDragoness wrote: »

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

Personally, I only think Mauraders and the blobs in ARCs 4+ are disproportional to the rest of the content. The Mauraders are straight forward imo, the blobs are oddly out of sync from my experience.

Take ARC 6 for example:

One cycle you get the ice AOE. Easy to avoid, almost a not existent problem as long as you are mobile.
One cycle you get the laser, also easy to avoid. Not a problem.
Once cycle the tentacles. Again, easy, no problem.

But the blobs. They just keep spawning. And it is pretty much endless. And they are disproportionally more difficult to manage than the other hazards. In the thoat fight, the blobs are equally as harmless as the other hazards because only a few pop up at a time. But in the cycles themselves, they get pretty overwhelming.

Those two things would be the only difficulty changes I would recommend. Bosses are fine outside of bugs. Difficulty ramping is fine. Just the blobs with ads and the mauraders a small bit of toning back.

yeah i would agree the blobs are my least favorite tho'at mechanic that occurs in the cycle 3-5 add stages on arc 4+

there is always a minimum of 3 blobs active and they respawn immediately as soon as you kill them, there is no way to keep them under control, so i usually just try to make sure they are interrupted and finish the regular adds as quick as possible

the low health blobs can also combine into larger higher health blobs if they are not killed, which also deal more dmg and harder to kill

the other 3 tho'at mechanics in the add stages are easier to manage, but still provide challenges depending on the size of the arena

i will note that it is 100% totally random which of those 4 tho'at mechanics happen in the add stage, and it can even be totally different if you wipe and restart the add stage

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Braffin wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Braffin wrote: »

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

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

The people complaining are clearly the minority here. A thousand posts by a small fraction of users doesn't change the fact, that the majority in this thread (as in any other) is fine with difficulty of EA.

Nobody talked about the ratio of forum users to non forum users. It's all about the fact, that the players, which are fine with the difficulty of EA, outweight the complainers by far. Reframing statements others have made won't change that.

Really, I thought for some time you are interested in a open and fair discussion based on facts. It's sad, that this is seemingly not the case.

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

That is a fact about forum populations. It's just a counterpoint to the idea you stated. And is my own point.

Quote frankly, an open and fair discussion based on facts should mean that people can bring in counterpoints that disagree with a point, without ad hominem.

You say they are only a few. I'm pointing out that few they may be, but forums tend to skew hardcore and the number of complaints are likely representative of casual players in general.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Braffin wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Braffin wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Braffin wrote: »

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

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

The people complaining are clearly the minority here. A thousand posts by a small fraction of users doesn't change the fact, that the majority in this thread (as in any other) is fine with difficulty of EA.

Nobody talked about the ratio of forum users to non forum users. It's all about the fact, that the players, which are fine with the difficulty of EA, outweight the complainers by far. Reframing statements others have made won't change that.

Really, I thought for some time you are interested in a open and fair discussion based on facts. It's sad, that this is seemingly not the case.

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

That is a fact about forum populations. It's just a counterpoint to the idea you stated. And is my own point.

Quote frankly, an open and fair discussion based on facts should mean that people can bring in counterpoints that disagree with a point, without ad hominem.

You say they are only a few. I'm pointing out that few they may be, but forums tend to skew hardcore and the number of complaints are likely representative of casual players in general.

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

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

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

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

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

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

If even some hardcore players are asking for a nerf that means most casuals, who are the majority of playerbase, would feel the same, no?
It's ,like, basic logic.

HalfDragoness wrote: »

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

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

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

LouisaB75 wrote: »

HalfDragoness wrote: »

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

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

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

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

LouisaB75 wrote: »

HalfDragoness wrote: »

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

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

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

I think making them more likely to appear at stage 1 lowers the odds you get a verse at all. It's why I have been keeping a few mystery verses on hand for them when I do a serious run. i have generally not gotten a useful one (mystery verse I mean) regardless of which I took, and I've tried each box..