When this game started with dungeons, the tank taunt worked like you would expect and was somewhat consistent with gaming expectations. But as time when by and the newer DLC dungeons came out, devs focused more on the animation sequences that bosses did (to look cool) and bosses started to ignore taunt. In a proper game like Age of Conan, the tank spent their life trying to obtain that ultimate taunt number while DPS had to be weary of not putting on so much damage as a single person that you pull the aggro off the tank (exceeding his taunt ability). In this game, it's just a hodge podge from one boss to the next.
Fast forward to today with this Challenge Difficulty option....chance to get more XP (I'm sure 3600's are licking their chops at that one but heh, we weren't going for inclusion here) and a little more gold (roll's eyes) and for what....one shotting monsters to put on a clinic of 39,000 to 600,000 damage? Oh well you can roll dodge or block, and depending on how fast you press the "oh sh#t" button, it relegates this game down to Mattel's "Simon Says" as a button pressing rotation. Unless this game is recoded to make tank taunt relevant to every boss fight, you are going to have massive monster ground effects running at 200 to 600 percent damage doing constant party wipes.

flyingparchment wrote: »

literally not possible on PCEU. every delve boss has 2-3 people waiting for it to respawn to instantly kill it.

could they take turns? sure, i guess. but this is an MMORPG, not a single player game -- why should they be expected to do that?

It is possible on PCEU - I play there too. Sure, if you're playing at the busiest times you'll find more players around. I think that's a good thing. I don't want to be in a MMORPG where I never see another soul, or my new characters can't get a bit of help from a stronger dd when they're training in delves/public dungeons.

As for why you should be expected to take turns, that's part and parcel of being in an open world area of an MMORPG. None of the spawn belongs to any given player, so a degree of sharing needs to take place. There are beginners and vet players in the same space which means you need to co-operate a little so everyone gets what they need. If areas aren't designed as instances for soloing bosses, players need to be flexible and not get angry because some unwitting newbie came past and killed a boss they're trying to solo.

This thread, in addition to the very long overland thread that was around for ages, exhibits clearly why I, long ago, made my peace with overland difficulty level as-is, and had more concerns with what would break if they tried to address it. There are only so many ways this can be addressed:

1. fully instance the content for each person and/or group
2. fragment out the different difficulty levels via shards per area
3. debuff the players, mimicking what some players try to do such as fight without armor or filling in cp
4. bring back veteran areas (like Craglorn was) thereby, to some extent, reversing the vision and concept of One Tamriel
5. mildly increase overland difficulty, buffing it only to the point that it is roughly equal to what new players experienced back when the game was first released, to offset power creep
6. instance the "bad guys" in story mode and allow a hard mode flag there, while leaving delves, world bosses, and such, alone

Have I missed anything?

What many are missing is that each solution has a downside and will likely negatively impact a portion of players who actively enjoy the way things are today. There really is no good solution because the playerbase is so diverse and, at this point, despite various (though possibly misguided) development efforts, the difference between the ceiling and the floor of the playerbase skillsets couldn't be larger.

Solution #1 would likely be extremely expensive. Solutions #1 and #2 potentially ruin the original vibe of overland experience for anyone who actively enjoys being in an MMO and loves seeing other players run around, join fights, do silly things, whatever. This is not just for people who feel strongly about grouping, but even players who periodically run solo or prefer solo but choose ESO over a single player game for the feel of a living, breathing world. While I'm hoping that ESO will cause some players return and population will rise as a result of some of the new strategies I'm seeing for the game, it's extremely obvious that population levels have dropped and that splitting the population will impact everyone's experience. The Writhing Wall event highlighted this perfectly, as it became harder and harder to clear the fights intended for large scale as player interest dropped off. Game areas already do not feel populated unless there is an event pushing much of the population to one place.

Solution #3 is causing the criticisms currently being discussed. Basically, it "splits" the baby and still results in some players negatively impacting other people's experience just by virtual of the functionality being released. I will, again, use the example of the Ring of the Pale Order, especially before it was nerfed. I am not ever a fan of functionality that actively disrupts someone else's experience in a weird way over which they have no control. It's extremely frustrating and creates strife within the community.

Solutions #4 and #5, to various degrees, cause concern about accessibility for solo players, players who have no interest in hard content, have connection issues, have injuries, and (although I think this is somewhat of a red herring) always brings up the other side of the group vs. solo debate.

Solution #6 addresses one of the biggest immersion complaints, which is that a story builds up but then the big bad boss at the end is not believable because they are such a pushover, and it is the least disruptive to players and the most true to how the game is structured today, but it doesn't address scenarios like delve bosses, which people are also complaining about.

Fwiw, I was always a fan of #5 and #6, but I am sympathetic to accessibility concerns, having my own injuries to contend with, and, eventually felt that #6 or nothing would be best for the game. Not that my opinion is the necessarily the best one, nor does it probably matter since a direction has been proposed.

Nestor wrote: »

Me, if I want a challenge, I go out and find it. DLC WB or Solo Dungeons of various levels for example. If I am bopping around a zone or running story content I dont want protracted fights, that would be annoying to me.

This. This is where I feel we should be at with the game that's as vast as ESO is, with such a diverse playerbase. Even within overland, there are already difficulty levels. A WB is still harder to beat than a delve boss, and a regular enemy in a regular mob is even easier. Content gets increasingly harder as you explore instanced content, all of which can be attempted solo with three paths specifically designed for solo (the two arenas and IA).

I also agree that, as the game is so big now, I would not enjoy overland suddenly becoming more difficult in the areas that I expect to be "quick." Because if I want a challenge, I choose the challenging content. If I want a relaxing play session where I knock off a couple of achievements, I often turn to overland for a play session that isn't really combat focused.

I truly cannot imagine what it must be like now for a player if they are starting, brand new, and want to follow the story line from the beginning as it was written before getting to the newest content. I feel like it would take years if you're someone who has a job or family obligations or anything else to do besides gaming, and increasing overland difficulty significantly would turn those years to centuries.

Lastly, for a while there were some deeper discussions about what is actually satisfying to a player about increased difficulty, and what many players think they want vs. what they actually want. Not a lot of people are discussing that here, yet, but it's still valid. If all a difficulty slider does is decrease player stats or increase a boss stats... it does not take long at all for that to feel arbitrary. In dungeons and trials, hard mode flags to more than bolster armor. They typically add mechanics or additional stages or some other aspect that requires analysis and makes for a dynamic fight. Yes, obviously, there is the problem of the fact that if a light attack kills an opponent, it doesn't feel meaningful, and a difficulty slider can address that somewhat. But it doesn't truly make a fight more difficult or exciting... literally it just makes it take longer. Honestly, I think ZOS is more on the right track as they have been doing things like adding invulnerability phases, healing phases, health bar resets when the boss brings in friends, and so on, to even story quest bosses. These things make the fights feel more dynamic, as opposed to just seeing the same attacks 5 more times because to kill the boss I now need to sustain the same DPS I am doing an additional two minutes but that's it. No need to actually adjust my rotation or learn something new.

tomofhyrule wrote: »

It’s hard not to notice the argument was originally “we want story bosses not to fall over” and has turned into “I want to solo WBs and not have anyone else come by!”

Perfect way to end my observations. I agree. The strife is already starting. ZOS tried to split the baby and suddenly, what "everyone" wants is to experience all content tailored to their playstyle. There needs to be some acknowledgement somewhere along the line that the different types of content within the game are created to appeal to different kinds of players... there is no reason for any of us to expect to be able to do absolutely everything and win every reward while avoiding grouping, playing solo, PvE, or PvP (whatever it is you don't like). You can't have progression without progression. I don't expect to get the title of Emperor by playing Tales of Tribute, and I don't expect the concept of a world boss to be playable the same as a quest portal instance, and I don't expect to pull out a perfected gold piece of gear that drops from a Trial from a fishing hole. If content was designed for a certain playstyle in mind, and for many years it was enjoyed by lots of people as intended, improvements should be made to ensure future players can continue to enjoy the content as intended. That's different than changing the strategy of the game such that all content must be adjusted and recreated so that it all can experienced solo or grouped or at all levels of difficulty. "I think players should be able to have this content instanced and solo because it's my favorite way to play" is just such a different argument than "Ten years ago, this quest line felt meaningful and challenging but now new players are leaving the game because it feels trite and silly." The first lens is trying to tailor the game to one's own preferences, while the second lens is trying to address unintended consequences that have occurred due to the game's growth.

Finally, I do feel there is irony in the fact that One Tamriel came about because people wanted to play with their friends. The division of the factions between lands, and levels of enemies across areas, was problematic for people as they had new friends join the game. This direction was set, and it came at a cost. As power creep ensued, overland difficulty was that cost. While right now there is a lot of loud feedback about "I don't want to group, I want to play on my own" there would be an equal amount of "I am here to play with my friends, I enjoy teaming up with strangers to fight battles" feedback that would return if ESO fully reversed course. We have BOTH kinds of players in ESO, and we should strive to have BOTH kinds of players enjoy as much of the content as possible.

I do feel that, while my opinion was that "do nothing" would have been best, at this point, but that #5 and #6 would have been the best path forward, #3 is the next best option. I'll have to see it in action but they are trying to implement a solution that doesn't split the playerbase or require grouping, and is fully optional, and I do respect that.

Alastrine wrote: »

Desiato wrote: »

The current plan for hard mode content is terrible. I say this as someone who wasn't only upset with the removal of vet overland content, but also the original vet difficulty nerf during the summer of 2014.

The "feature" is actually a debuff on the character. No one asked for that! We can basically already do that by sabotaging our stats to weaken our characters.

I want a dangerous area to explore where I need to be sharp and pay attention. I don't want to drink a poison that weakens me among other unweakened players while we play together. The idea of that is repulsive to me.

I don't care that hard mode difficulty instances would be less populated. I would see that as a feature because it would allow for a sort of hm community of like-minded players.

I don't think there needs to be multiple hard mode difficulties. Just one would be enough for me. It would be the restoration of a feature we lost in 2014.

I remember when you had to be vet level to even get into Craglorn. When I was Vet1 I would sneak around there in fear of the wasp nests lol. I do miss that. Then suddenly there were baby bots everywhere in Craglorn farming nirn

I also really liked that the overland difficulty ramped up zone to zone as you did the story line. If you tried to jump ahead you did so at your own peril.

And that the mats you harvested in areas were related to the difficulty level that your character was supposed to be going through there - I could farm all level of mats with one character by changing zones.

So much was changed to just make it all a level playing field but it lost a lot in the doing and got a bit more boring imo.

Well said. The game lost a lot with the transition to evenly leveled zones in One Tamriel.

CalamityCat wrote: »

flyingparchment wrote: »

literally not possible on PCEU. every delve boss has 2-3 people waiting for it to respawn to instantly kill it.

It is possible on PCEU - I play there too. Sure, if you're playing at the busiest times you'll find more players around.

the reason more people play at peak times is that's the only time they can play, because they have a job, school, kids, life, whatever. you can't just tell people to play at off peak times. if the system doesn't work at the only time when most players can play the game, then the system doesn't work.

As for why you should be expected to take turns, that's part and parcel of being in an open world area of an MMORPG. None of the spawn belongs to any given player, so a degree of sharing needs to take place.

the only reason it "needs" to take place is that ZOS designed the game to need it. ZOS could design the game in different way (for example, separate players by difficulty) to ensure that it actually makes sense to kill bosses as a group and people do not need to take turns. other games have done this. (GW and GW2, for example; even FF14, a very single-player MMO, has group overland content.)

i have also never seen anyone "take turns" in overland content. the most you see is if several people are waiting for a delve boss, they'll all do a couple of light attacks to make sure everyone can tag it rather than immediately nuking it. if people are seriously suggesting Challenge Difficulty relies on people forming a queue to take turns on the boss, this system will be even more DOA than i thought.

Skorro wrote: »

A long time ago we got story bosses with great mechanics and fitting difficulty - not just tediously high health (looking as an example to the summerset prologue wrath of crows) - people came to the forums to rage that it was too hard and ZOS nerfed it for them.

As much as I also don't like the way they are implementing this (and won't use it), I feel for the devs because here they are in a "damned if they do/damned if they don't" situation.

the whole point of this system is to let people choose the difficult they want, not to force more difficult content onto all players. no one is going to demand that Vestige difficulty be nerfed, they'll just switch to a lower difficulty. so ZOS are not at all damned either way.

Lekjih wrote: »

Although, I'm now amused thinking of difficulties Normal and Realistic, where two hits from an overland bear would drop you.

sounds pretty realistic to me >.> i don't know that i would last one hit from a bear irl