I've seen many posts about "this game is too easy", "this game is broken", and "bethesda you broke my heart, i'm leaving, good bye", and i usually dont like them cause they seem too dramatic. However, they have good points about changes that could be made to make the game more challenging and funny. I dont agree with all of them, i'm just trying to put togheter some points.

Enchanting and Smithing --> these two when mastered become too powerfull, i think everybody agree. Anyone who wants the game to be challenging (even in master difficulty) need to avoid leveling these skills. It would do no harm to nerf them a little.

Sneaking --> I think a little nerf would be welcome too. I use it a lot, its very effective to my needs and i have only 1 perk invested in it. To people who like being a thief/rogue, it's more interesting when you HAVE TO put more points in sneak skills to become a better thief/rogue/assassin, whatever.

Magic --> I personally think the destruction fire damage is fine, i cant say the same about ice/lighting damage. A lot of people think that the damage is too low overall. I'd like to see more studying needed to be a good mage, i mean that creatures should have more specific resistances/immunities, i can beat almost everything with fire - personally, i didnt find anything that i couldnt beat with fire, it would be cool if i were supposed to try cold/thunder/fire to find the best kind of magic i sould cast against my enemies. The illusion effects could be quicker too, only one cast usually is enough in a fight, and that makes illusionist gameplay a little too easy.


Well, that some points i found discussed in forum and that i found ingame too and i think it would be nice if they were improved.

If anyone think i missed anything, say it and i will edit the post.

Edit: I'll add a few arguments against changes:

1. There are people who like playing as a Godlike character, nerfs would affect this kind of gameplay.

2. Enchanting has an important role in RP, it is required to some people to customize their characters. (i must confess that I thought about making a beggar character that wears rags and dont carry anything, just relying in spells, XD)



thanks

The only one I really don't like much is the Enchantment perk where you can put two effects on one item. For my design taste, it is unbalanced.

It is a single player game. There is no need to nerf anything for balance because the NPC's you are "playing" against will not complain.

The concept of balance is not dependent on multiple players.

No, but it really is.. My product I bought is for me - Skyrim being a single player game. Your concept of "balance" may not match mine, should Bethesda try to balance things in endless wow-like patches and expansions? That is playing with fire.

Adding things is fine, taking things away that existed before or limiting paths once available to be taken is just not gonna happen. Nerfing would be an unpopular fix when looking at large numbers, and time would/is going to be spent elsewhere instead with DLCs.

The beauty of Elder Scrolls games is that if you want the game more difficult, just alter your play style and mold your own game. Like the OP said, don't train certain skills or stay away from double enchanting or, as I have been guilty of, enchanting a free casting outfit. Having multiple players does, in a way, affect balance. If the game were unbalanced to give a more fair advantage to one player and not the other, it would, in fact, matter. Being a single player experience means you can make it more difficult, or not, depending on your choice.

In each one of those you listed, raising the skill doesn't really do that much. It does, but not to any uber scale. It's not until one goes through and selects the perks, does he or she become truly powerful.

Even then, with Smithing and selecting the perk, it is not anything all that mind blowing. You have to use in in conjunction with other skills like Enchanting and/or Alchemy for it to be a god skill.

EDIT : Spread the perks around...

EDIT 2 : Well maybe not each of those. Magic, even with all the perks doesn't need nerfed. IMO

It has nothing to do with my concept of balance or not, it has to do with what Bethesda's concept of balance is when/if they review what is in front of them, along with the possibility of closing loopholes, exploits, and other developer oversights that influence a player's gameplay in ways the developers did not anticipate or desire.

The problem is that when you have to choose not do a thing to make the game more challenging, you lose that "i mastered the game" feeling. I can live without that, but i like it anyway, and i think a lot of people would agree with me. The question is: if they make these arrangements some people are asking for, it would harm anyone gameplay? I said exacly what you said replying to a post about game difficulty, and the guy told me this, and i think he's right, if a change would be good to some people and do not prejudice others, it should be done.

You seem to be insinuating that these things were oversights, whilst completely ignoring the fact ALL TES games have allowed the player the option to become OP. Maybe they were intentional, maybe they weren't, but until someone from beth confirms either way, no one is in a position to say things don't work as intended.

the same old threads popped up about Chameleon in Oblivion and archery in Morrowind, yet here we are years later complaining about more OP skills. Were they or were they not intentional no one will really know.

You can 'if' and 'but' until you're blue in the face, but it's true what people are stating, it's a single player game and it really is up to you whether you use them or not.

In a linear game, I wouldn't mind having these balancing decisions made for me, but alas, I am a PC gamer at heart, and have been since the late 80's, and I likes me my customizations. I guess I look at it in a different way. Settings in games can always be changed (difficulty sliders and such) and they way I look at it is changing settings is no different than making gameplay altering decisions. Maybe I am more of a results oriented person.

I simply call it as I see it. Having the capability of becoming godlike beyond what is reasonable within the game's natural environment/enemy design to the point of trivialization, when you can do so much easier by accessing the console commands seems redundant no? At least, I would like to hope that those in charge of development are not so apathetic or incompetent, to intentionally allow such a thing.

For me becoming a virtual god is fun, I like it when my character has difficulty at first and then becomes more and more powerful and capable. It gives me the idea that I actually achieved something. I try to avoid enchanting and smithing at higher levels, best armor I use on my current character is Ebony and then not even up to the max of what I could get out of it. It's why I dislike leveling enemies as much as well. I feel that I should be having an easier time going into the starting dugeons at a later level then somebody that does it right at the start.

This is a personal preference, but becoming a god like character is something I do strive for with many of my characters, and with some I don't. I RP and make my character weaker then he could be if I used smithing or alchemy or enchanting to the max. People should have the freedom to do what they want, but if the challenge remains the same throughout most of the game then it will become worthless to me as advancing has no purpose.

And no console commands don't do the same, they would only do the same if you start speed leveling enchanting or smithing. Which I don't, I only smith when it's worth it, and only enchant when I need to. It's a matter of restricting yourself, or not if you don't want to.

what exactly are your concerns - that you lack the willpower to ignore using enchanting, alchemy and smithing or that others somehow have an advantage over you in a 'single' player game?

Smithing isn't OP on its own, it's OP when combined with the other 2 crafting skills, so no one can accidentally become godlike. You can only achieve this by going out of your way as to abuse 2 or more of the crafting skills.

i'm level 50, i have only increased smithing and my weapons aren't that great on Master. My Daedric bow only does around 80 damage. now, if i went out of my way and abused alchemy and enchanting, no doubt i could get the damage into triple figures, but what's the point as there's no competitive edge in doing that.

I dont understand the "nothing should change" mind, i think games can always change for the better, if they cannot be perfect, they can be improved. If they are going to change anything is up to them, but its our right to ask for changes, and discuss them. So i would like to read arguments against the changes i mentioned in OP, not "everything is fine", "single games dont need balancing".

You're right, things should change. I, for one, enjoy having the power to change them. Skyrim gives me this power.

The issue is internal consistency, determining the "baseline" for a game's difficulty as to how it relates to player difficulty, and trivialization of other systems in the game.

First point, in regards to internal consistency and baselines, it becomes an issue to all players in the area of content design. If some form of census were to be made and it determined the majority of the players play with overpowered gear, in theory they would design around the majority in future content such as DLC, which could have serious balancing issues when things are made too difficult for people who choose not to use such mechanics, however, the choice to use it remains, excusing one from having to do anything about it since you can simply choose to use it to no longer be underpowered.

As to trivialization, it currently makes all quest rewards, found loot, and artifact style items superfluous and worthless aside from collecting purposes. It effectively destroys any reason to dungeondelve and do non-essential quests. You can argue that there are other reasons for which to explore, sightseeing, combat, whatever, my argument is that it is subverting the reward system, intrinsic to all RPGs.

No one has said you haven't got the right to ask for change. I simply don't see it being as large an issue as you see it. Just a differing of opinion. Nothing less, nothing more.

Sorry, i was not talking about you, i got your point, as i got Fishy87's point too. If the changes people are asking for should impair the gaming experience of people who like this range of options, they are not to be made. But you think these changes would do that?





I dont think its a large an issue, i just think i would make gameplay more enjoyable. I love playing skyrim, i'm not that "i'm done playing this broken game that is not morrowind and it should be" guy, but i would enjoy even more with these changes.

If you wish to create characters with Godlike power levels, fine. But that's what cheats, hacks and Mods are for.

Balance is just as important for a single player game as it is for a multiplayer. It has nothing to do with other players complaining, it has to do with striking a balance of a game which should always remain a challenge, but not ridiculously so.

Balance in a single-playe RPG isn't nearly as important as in a game where people are paying thousands of dollars to fight other humans. But if you talk to the devs, I bet they say they spend many hours trying to get the balance right nonetheless.

It will always be possible to make overpowered characters in TES if you take all the most powerful abilities. There is no way to avoid that, because if you make it that the combination of all the best abilities still makes the game a struggle, then eveyone will have to take that combination to be able to progress normally. This just comes from the fact that there is so much variation in character design.

However, there are still balance questions to look at in the range of abilities you give the player. Nothing should stick out like a sore thumb, it's just not elegant for one thing. IMO the "dual effect" perk isn't good because it is exponential, you multiply the power of all your items at their max. It is a much bigger jump for one perk than the usual "20% more powerful" perks or even the smithing ones which only apply to AR or damage, and don't result in a full doubling. Myself I would not have put it in.

@Nordski

Arguing your opinion against mine will not get us far.

Lets consider this- there is also a large RP section of this game, there are people who really crave envisioning their character a certain way.
Some of the bemoaned skills like enchanting and smithing have non-OP uses in this case. For example- fur armor can be capped, so an RP player who wants a "barbarian from the north" as their dragonborne can use the OP skills to create a playable charactee exactly as they see fit. Now should beth come along and say - nope this could be utilized by some other players to make themselves too powerful? If the argument doesn't seem a little sillier now i may be wasting my time.

This game came out in november. Many have already "done" what there is to do within the current ruleset, and await DLCs to continue. Wont they be thrilled if bethesda were
To gimp their current choices in the name of balance? Good for business? Hardly.

I only argue against "nerfs." Additions and further
Expansions are greath, but taking options off the table for people who need to feel their character in their single player game is == to someone elses character. Who will never meet and are not in the same "universe" is preposturous.

Sorry for the many spelling/grammar errors above- using the phone to post is terrible. I hope my meaning gets through

dont nerf just cap 100 skill + perks is like saying your a master of the ability you just maxed, so why be allowed to go past that peak with gear and pots ( only for the crafting skills )

It's hardly just 'my opinion' though. It's a fundamental principle of game design. Not just in an RPG. In pretty much ever genre and discipline. Balance matters. Without it there is no game.




And within the boundaries of the game's design they have a shedload of options for customisation. Which is great. Perks allow them to customise a heck of a lot of elements within the game, and the way they wish to play it.

However, if they wish to chuck out the rule book, and eliminate any element of challenge, they can. Every game has a God Mode. It's a standard testing tool during game development. They can make use of that or somebody will produce a Mod whch suits them.

What you are suggesting is that Bethesda redesign the game for all users. That would be crazy.




To be honest, it's a little difficult to work out exactly what your argument is here. Are you saying that you think Bethesda should chuck out all the parameters of their Enchanting and Smithing design, and just let everybody create God-Level gear without having to earn it through game progression?

If you work up both sets of skills to a high level your reward is that you can create some very heavy hitting potions, armour and weapons. But that's your REWARD for your character specialising in that area. If you could do that from day one it would utterly defeat the point.




The game has been balanced by Bethesda's design. They won't be changing it unless there a really serious exploit there which breaks a system for EVERY user. Like the magical resistances bug which came up with the second patch. That needed a fix.

YOU may have played the game to death since November, but that doesn't mean there AREN'T new players picking up and starting Skyrim. Gimping the difficulty so long time players can become GODSSSSS would be a stupid move. One which is never going to happen regardless of if you want it or not.




Also something which I never suggested at any point. My entire argument was that this is a single player game. The only experience that is important is that of the User, and if you take out the designed systems whch allow staggered levelling and progress through a skillset you screw up the overall enjoyment of the game. You remove the sense of rewad and achievement for them.

There's a reason the difficulty is balanced.