[Andy durkan]

What weapons did you use? Did you combine it with Elemental Fury?

Two Daedric Swords that does a total of 98 damage and no. But I was level 81 thus making Alduin level 81 and having a lot more health than what you prolly did it on.

[sam]

Okay. I get annoyed with people who complain about Skyrim getting too easy. And reason I am annoyed is because they make themselves God-Like characters then think they will still have challenges, which is not the case and never will be the case in TES games.

So, to help out, I've made this guide on how to make the game harder by limiting yourself on the things you do, instead of going overboard and become God-Like...

~Weaponry~
-Damage-
Any weapon is fine to use but if you truly wish to keep challenges then best to make sure your weapons deal a damage of 100 or below. You can go a little higher than that if you wish to do so (I use a Daedric Claymore with a damage of 107). Limiting this is by far one of the main things you should do, the 2nd will be spells. Note: Your total damage shouldn't go over 150. I'll explain this more as I go on.

I mainly used a sword or axe and a shield, so my damage wasn't that good really.

-Enchantments-
When enchanting your weapon, most enchantments are fine to use as long they don't do damage. When they do damage then make sure to add your weapon's enchantment damage with your weapon's main damage. My Claymore has two enchantments, one is absorb fatigue and absorb health. The Absorb Health will count as an enchantment damage and it does 25 points. I add this with 107 to get 132 total damage, which isn't above 150 so it is good by my standards. Absorb Fatigue doesn't count and wont truly matter.

Absorb Health was walways on my 1 handed weapon, and absorb stamina was on my bow.

-Potions-
I don't use potions but if you do, make sure they are about %25 - %30 increase max. Maybe lower, if you have enchantments. I'ma use a %25 potion as an example. Times %25 by your weapon's damage, which mine is 107, and then add your total damage. {(0.25 * X) + Y // X being your Damage and Y being your total.} For me, I have to do this: ( 0.25 * 107 ) + 132 ) 0.25 times 107 = 27 (If rounded) then I add 27 to 132 and get a total damage of 159 which is over my 150 limit. Therefore, I need to use weaker potions. Note: When doing this, always round upward. Also, add any damage your poisons do as well but this mainly doesn't matter.

Oddly enough, I had a butt-ton of potions and NEVER used them. Well besides healing ones. But I mainly made them for selling. And a few for dragon abttles.

-Perks-
Any Perk in the 2H, 1H, and Archery Skills are good to use, except those that increases your damage when you do a certain power attack. 2H and 1H has a %25 damage increase when doing a standing power attack so using this may not be the best. If you have to get this perk then don't use the power attack TOO much. 1H's duel wielding perks also has a damage increase. I say don't use them at all!

Never ever used those directional attack perks. Bah, waste of time. How many here actually thought of holding backwards when swinging and not have it happen by accident?

-Duel Wielding-
Duel Wielding is different then using one weapon. One weapon will always be around 100 damage. Duel Wielding weapons should be around 50, since you will add the two together to get a total of 100. I believe all 1H weapons are below 50. Some shouldn't need to be upgraded, so remember this.

Never used dual wielding

~Armor~
-Main Armor Defense-
Your total Armor rating shouldn't go above 500, or at least not by much.

Meh skimping on weapons is one thing, but don't skimp on armor, that is ... well ... silly to me.

-Enchantments-
Don't use enchantments that fortify your weapon skills or armor skills. All other enchantments are fine to use as long you don't have over %50 in some. (Don't go over %50 Resist Magic, Fortify Magic, etc) Count your enchantments from Rings and Necklaces as well!

Only enchancement I really had was to raise my endurance.

-Potions-
It is best not to use potions that boost your armor rating in some way unless your armor rating is very low already...

-Perks-
Use the main 5 perks but using some of the other perks can easily make high level armor go over 500 is be very careful on your perks when using high level armor.

Focused completely on the Heavy Armor perks. Took a long time and I still took damage ... so they aren't a cure all.

~Magic~

Never used magic outside the few staffs like teh Daedric one or one for emergency damage

~Other Skills and Perks~
You can level all Skills as you wish without becoming God-Like. Don't worry about that. Just remember to be careful with perks. Any Perk that increases Damage and Armor Rating you should use wisely. (Like that one perk that allow you to do 15 times more damage with daggers when sneak attacking.)

That is all for now. Contribute your own thoughts and ideas, if you wish.

Granted, the above was all on my PS3 character that went kapoot with the glitches (I play on pc now). But even with all HA perks, 1H and shield perks ... he still got smacked around by magic users. He was in no way a god-like character. He was a challenge to play and I enjoyed it.

[flora]

If the developers nerf/balance things down, people would still complain anyway...

(wahhh waaaaahhh this game is too hard wtf were they thinking can u even beat this game)

[Bird]

If the developers nerf/balance things down, people would still complain anyway...

(wahhh waaaaahhh this game is too hard wtf were they thinking can u even beat this game)

And that is why balance is impossible. There will always be one person complaining about it being too easy or too hard.

[Jason Rice]

And that is why balance is impossible. There will always be one person complaining about it being too easy or too hard.

Right, so instead of balancing it for all the possible play styles we include in the game that we are giving you, we'll just pick one side over the other.

[Lance Vannortwick]

And that is why balance is impossible. There will always be one person complaining about it being too easy or too hard.

Achieving balance isn't about pleasing everybody so that no one will ever complain, it is about actually knowing what sort of balance you want (which can be measured objectively through playtesting and figuring out just how successful different builds will be) and then establish that balance, then people can complain all they want about it, but if you achieved the balance you aimed for, then you have succeeded no matter what people say.

[Miss K]

Achieving balance isn't about pleasing everybody so that no one will ever complain, it is about actually knowing what sort of balance you want (which can be measured objectively through playtesting and figuring out just how successful different builds will be) and then establish that balance, then people can complain all they want about it, but if you achieved the balance you aimed for, then you have succeeded no matter what people say.

However, if they aimed for making players actually have to choose between "fun" and "challenging," for all builds, they have a horrible idea of what balance is.

[Amber Hubbard]

If the developers nerf/balance things down, people would still complain anyway...

(wahhh waaaaahhh this game is too hard wtf were they thinking can u even beat this game)

This is a false choice. All they have to do is add an optional higher difficulty.

[Valerie Marie]

However, if they aimed for making players actually have to choose between "fun" and "challenging," for all builds, they have a horrible idea of what balance is.

Well, yes, I have not judged whether the actual balance they achieved in Skyrim is fun or successful, or if it was intentional on their behalf that people could grind out weapons of mass destruction by simply using the craft system (seems like a poor choice of design to me...). Merely pointing out, that it is not impossible to achieve balance, I would say that it is something you should expect from a decent game design, because it can be calculated, evaluated and tested.

[Czar Kahchi]

This is a false choice. All they have to do is add an optional higher difficulty.

Or they could simply give all enemies a boost that is completely based on the player's stats.

If 200>
Enemies gain +X

Which is basically what an extra difficulty setting should do, without having to actually make a whole new difficulty.

Well, yes, I have not judged whether the actual balance they achieved in Skyrim is fun or successful, or if it was intentional on their behalf that people could grind out weapons of mass destruction by simply using the craft system (seems like a poor choice of design to me...). Merely pointing out, that it is not impossible to achieve balance, I would say that it is something you should expect from a decent game design, because it can be calculated, evaluated and tested.

Yes, it is a poor choice of design and something I will never do in any of my projects.

[Marina Leigh]

Back in the golden age of PC gaming, from which the Elder Scrolls series was spawned, one didn't have to "limit" theirself to enjoy the game. Difficulty was fun because success then felt rewarding.

[u gone see]

This is a false choice. All they have to do is add an optional higher difficulty.

Hey actually that idea isn't half-bad. Instead of a difficulty slider, have a "difficulty factor" which is basically a text box where you can input the... difficulty factor!

For example, Master would be 2.0. What, still too easy!?!? Try 100.0!

[Taylor Tifany]

The problem with all these difficulty settings is that all they do is boost enemy health and damage, they don't add any layers of complexity to the challenge, such as figuring out how to use an alternative strategy against an enemy that is immune or very resilient towards your character's area of expertise or that has a distinct advantage that you must somehow neutralize first by luring them away from their position or something like that...

I am not that interested in making battles into endless wars of attrition between two tanks, I'd rather have battles which can be won very quickly and easily if you did the right thing, but which can also end very quickly and badly if you didn't.

[MR.BIGG]

The problem with all these difficulty settings is that all they do is boost enemy health and damage, they don't add any layers of complexity to the challenge, such as figuring out how to use an alternative strategy against an enemy that is immune or very resilient towards your character's area of expertise or that has a distinct advantage that you must somehow neutralize first by luring them away from their position or something like that...

I am not that interested in making battles into endless wars of attrition between two tanks, I'd rather have battles which can be won very quickly and easily if you did the right thing, but which can also end very quickly and badly if you didn't.

Yep.

I have been saying that for quite some time.

[Ruben Bernal]

The problem with all these difficulty settings is that all they do is boost enemy health and damage, they don't add any layers of complexity to the challenge, such as figuring out how to use an alternative strategy against an enemy that is immune or very resilient towards your character's area of expertise or that has a distinct advantage that you must somehow neutralize first by luring them away from their position or something like that...

I am not that interested in making battles into endless wars of attrition between two tanks, I'd rather have battles which can be won very quickly and easily if you did the right thing, but which can also end very quickly and badly if you didn't.

I agree but one of the main problems is they use standard grade weapons and armor while the player uses Legendary or Flawless grade equipment. They also dont have perks like the player.

[Manuela Ribeiro Pereira]

I agree but one of the main problems is they dont do enough damage cause they use standard grade weapons and armor while the player uses Legendary or Flawless grade equipment.

Enemies usually don't (or never?) get Perks either.

[Floor Punch]

Enemies usually don't (or never?) get Perks either.

Yeah, I added that. They have to level the playing field before worrying about the AI.

[Naughty not Nice]

Yeah, I added that. They have to level the playing field before worrying about the AI.

Then you need better levels for enemies based on region, character milestones, and better choosing what enemies scale with the player and which don't.

[Kirsty Wood]

Hey actually that idea isn't half-bad. Instead of a difficulty slider, have a "difficulty factor" which is basically a text box where you can input the... difficulty factor!

For example, Master would be 2.0. What, still too easy!?!? Try 100.0!

100.0 would be too hard... at 1.0, Ancient Dragons do 300 Max. 2.0 is 600..... 100.0 would be a max hit of 30,000... Decreased by 80%, for player's armor, and it will still be over 1,000... Seriously, you wanna get killed in one hit every time you fight an Ancient Dragon?

[Kayla Bee]

Then you need better levels for enemies based on region, character milestones, and better choosing what enemies scale with the player and which don't.

I know what you are getting at. You want tougher enemies as in ones that have more abilities and the such so they can be more of a "Think Right and Win Easily but Think Wrong and Lose Easily.".. This will be hard to do because there are no scripts, as I know, that can read the player's armor rating, perks, and other such stuff. Thus, it is impossible for the game to know what you actually have. That is why it is set on your level cause that can be calc'd and easily set your enemies to that level with w/e health, fatigue, and magicka.

Now, if Bethesda updated their scripts so they can calc what perks you have, your resistance to damage, etc then give your foes other perks to combat that those stuff then yes, I can easily see this happening but currently, there is no such scripts that can do so and I don't think it is even possible. The only way to give enemies special abilities is to let them have such things at the start of the game which can cause a lot of issues when it comes to having combat.

So we are kinda stuck at just making our foes have higher combat level, more health, and such. Personally, I don't mind this and I would wish that Bethesda could've made the level system from 1 to 80 instead of 1 to 50. Would give us a lot more harder enemies to fight, that's for sure.

[Rich O'Brien]

If you actually treat it as an RPG rather than a straight game the notion of easiness should not even come into it.
IMHO people approach, nowadays, games like this with entirely the wrong idea of HOW to play.
It's not a question of completing it, it's simply a question of being IN it.

[Sasha Brown]

If you actually treat it as an RPG rather than a straight game the notion of easiness should not even come into it.
IMHO people approach, nowadays, games like this with entirely the wrong idea of HOW to play.
It's not a question of completing it, it's simply a question of being IN it.

Agreed. That is another problem I've seen in people with games. They don't get into RPGs that much. Seriously, I can get into TES so much that I may actually say something like "By Talos!" while on the forums instead of "Oh God...".

Kinda prove how much of a RPer you are, if you ask me.

[Stephanie I]

I don't think it is even possible.

It is very possible, it's actually the exact same way the game judges what level you are.

If X>
Spawn X enemy at X level

So

If X>
Enemy X gains X

[Poetic Vice]

It is very possible, it's actually the exact same way the game judges what level you are.

If X>
Spawn X enemy at X level

So

If X>
Enemy X gains X

There is NO command for "Player Armor". That's the thing. There is one for player's level but not armor rating.

[candice keenan]

There is NO command for "Player Armor". That's the thing. There is one for player's level but not armor rating.

That's part of the problem. But it's not impossible to have the game be balanced in this fashion.