Those are good ideas and should probably be implemented. There is still a problem for people who do nothing but disable, so perhaps making other disables more difficult to use in succession is another thing they should do. The problem I run into on master is really that it is far too easy to avoid ranged damage and get away from melee position to time attacks. Here is the real crux of the issue, because making it more difficult from there is exactly the opposite of what people like. Always taking damage is bad, always avoiding damage is too easy. Is there ever a perfect mix possible there? Eventually you'll learn how to do it again and the game is easy.

Simply ramping up AI damage, like you said (it is an EXTREME case of always taking damage), is pretty bad way to give challenge. And you are 100% right that once you do it, in retrospect and from that moment on, it'll be "easy". That cannot be prevented as everything in life, once you do it, is just that much easier. The best you can expect from a game is that journey to that point would be long and entertaining.

IMO avoiding range damage by itself should be easy, otherwise facing off range attacks will be frustrating without challenges (real challenge has a solution, unavoidable attacks are hence not a challenge, just frustration). The solution would be to mix these range attacks with melees more often so that you have these 2 aspects to worry about. The game already does this, but in rather pitiful number so that you can quickly dispatch either the range or the melee to make the fight one dimensional. Oddly enough, a very simple and effective solution would be to add more enemies so that the combat variable remains high for longer duration. And another problem is that the game currently directs the player into caves & dungeons too often, meaning that majority of the combat takes place in narrow halls with turns where you can easily negate large number by funneling them into narrow path... increasing outdoor random encounters would help balance this regrettable design choice to funnel players into indoor environment (truly sad decision made by Bethesda especially since they created such a beautiful outdoor world!!!).

And having more deep and difficult character progression goes a long way on this. If character progression becomes more difficult, the active combat element will retain higher value since you cannot ignore many aspects of combat so easily. Like the armor cap. It is currently pretty easy to reach the armor cap, and once you do, the physical damage aspect of the game becomes largely negligible. Simply making armor cap much harder to achieve will keep things like blocking and movement a consideration for longer duration. As an RPG, yes it is unavoidable that these considerations will ultimately become negligible as character becomes too powerful... but the difference is real whether you become this uber hero in first two hours of playtime or after many hours of exploration and research into learning efficient build variations.

Sadly Bethesda did miss the shot in terms of perks, where perks should've been reserved for more active skills instead of just "20% more powerful" passive stat buffs. Like having a perk in each weapon tree that let you "parry" enemy blows for 100% damage mitigation and stagger the enemy by pressing jump while blocking at the right timing would be far more exciting than "20% more damage".

No stake, just sick of 20 threads a day stinking up the forum with the same complaints that can be easily avoided with even the most trivial amount of thought.

My preferences are irrelevant, I provide practical solutions, but people don't like that. No conspiracy theories needed, just a player who's becoming aghast at people who won't do anything to help themselves.

Repeatedly complain about the game, or take my advice and have a good time. Your choice, I'm done with this thread.

I don't even know what to say to this thread... it's profoundly ludicrous.

If you min-max, the game becomes easy. No duh. That's true of most RPGs.

You missed some major parts of the thread where many of us pointed out that you don't even need to min-max. You just have to play with some slight effort into character progression, then the combat becomes trivialized.

I call BS, plain and simple. There's absolutely no way that you just walked through an ancient dragon with no armor or anything, and by only putting perks into sneak.

If min/maxing results in an overpowered character and takes the fun out of the game, just stop doing it.

Not every game is an MMO, stop playing as if they are and you'll have a lot more fun.

It's a single player game and YOU are in sole control of your gaming experience so take some responsibility for it, I'm getting sick of people blaming everyone else when they grind smithing/enchanting for a couple of hours and then complain it's too easy.

Try a jack-of-all-trades type character instead, or place some rules on your experience so that you only use loot you find or earn rather than making your own superpowered gear, great fun and a bit more of a challenge.

It's 2011 and this is an American game. What did you expect?

I will concede that certain aspects of Skyrim balance could use some tweaking to make the game more difficult for normal play. However, even if a game is fairly easy when played normally, if you're min-maxing your character it's guaranteed to become far easier still. This thread is about min-maxing; min-maxing and then whining that the game is too easy is still ludicrous.

OP must be new to Elder Scrolls.. you basically have to pass up half the abilities/tactics/items you find if you don't want to break the gameplay into a billion pieces. It svcks and it's always svcked.

When you can have all the health potions you want, drink 60 all at once, and have them restore your health instantly, that's Bethesda basically saying there's not supposed to be challenge anywhere in the game.

Yes.


From wikipedia:
The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim is a role-playing video game developed by Bethesda Game Studios

Without roleplaying, Skyrim will be as interesting as playing FIFA/NBA games without being into sport, playing strategy games without liking competitive tactical aspect and focusing on villagers picking berries as if it was a simcity/sims.


Now let's look at this from wikipedia:
"Diablo II is a dark fantasy/horror-themed hack and slash, with elements of the role playing game and dungeon crawl genres."

Hack 'n' slash.


As for the difficulty, I do agree that for those of us who are used at optimizing builds the game is easy (I'm playing on Masters). I'm not going to lie. But being a singleplayer game, and as a PC user who can use console, I'm not going to complain either. When my bow is too strong, I will take 2H without any perks and smash away. What easier difficulty does is simply allow me to use more gameplay styles. This is a good thing. Extreme difficulty levels usually force you to use 1 style, the most optimal. Skyrim isn't a game for powerplayers, and although I'm good at that, I don't mind the lack of it here. Just look at the perk trees. Do they seem balanced to you? The balance is horrible, some perks are totally useless and only make sense if you're heavily roleplaying. Persuasion perk? On Master difficulty I might have failed 1 Persuasion attempt so far, easily solved with giving the money. Not worth the perk.
Then look at the main storyline. You're a freakin dragonslaying motherf*****. Sounds terribly imbalanced from the get-go.

I suggest waiting for mods because Skyrim seems to heavily favor jack-of-all-trades characters (and these are the only ones who can reach lvl81 anyway), and casual players who want to experience everything in one go (which is important because doing most quests with more than one character requires a lot of time).

Bethesda made it this way on purpose, they calculated it's for the best. I will agree with them, and if some other company can do better - cool. But I have tried Witcher for instance and didn't like combat and camera system one bit.

NPCs that blatantly cheat (BB guns that rip off 35 HP through 85DR) was right up there on good idea list as level scaling.

Edit: Every time I think the game is becoming to easy (on Adept no less) I get an Orc with a warhammer in my character's face and then she dies in two hits while blocking with over 400 AR....Or I blunder into a Foresworn camp and get steamrolled by a Briarheart i didn't see just as fast.

I can only imagine those complaining that the game is "too easy" are hanging around Whiterun and Riverwood killing wolves and rabbits. Not fighting things with real teeth.

So I scanned through this thread.

And here's what I learned:

Performing a strong character build that minimizes weaknesses and capitalizes on strengths, and then taking advantage of opportunities to train, result in a very powerful character. And some people don't like it.

[insert insane calliope music here]

everyone saying don't min/max is essentially saying the game is made for ppl who dont like RPGs or cant think clearly (given the ease with which you can break the game's difficulty - accidentally even...)

How many difficulty levels do we need? Make another one and it won't be long before somebody complains it's still too easy. You see this problem a lot in MMO's. Goto to any MMO forum and I guarantee you'll find a thread asking how to become the most powerful in the least amount of time. A little common sense would go a long way here. Anybody should be able to figure out that maxing out smithing/enchanting to get the absolute best armor and weapons is going to make the game a cakewalk. The problem isn't the game. It's a lack of self control and an unwillingness to work your way to the top. Most people want to be the absolute best right from the beginning then complain when the rest of the game is too easy. My question is why does it matter. This isn't an MMO. Being the most powerful person in all of Skyrim doesn't matter much at all since you're not playing with or against other people. It's a single player game. Learn some self control. Even though the developers implemented a system that you can min-max your character there are consequences for doing it.

Do you have the slightest idea how much work it is to min/max a character beyond the breaking point? You don't accidentally do that. It's a clear choice made many, many, many hours before hand. If you make that choice you have exactly no right to be complaining at all. None what-so-ever.

Explain that. Min/maxing is a way to use the game to produce a powerful character. The goal is to be powerful. And yet the people who like that sometimes say the game gets too easy, please make it harder. Which makes the character less powerful in comparison to the situations and creatures he or she encounters. So the min/maxer, being a min/maxer, will now want to be even more powerful so that he or she can 'feel powerful' again. And then the game is "too easy" again, beginning the cycle anew.

Ever hear of "the hole in the bucket"?

Hey here's a thought. Don't smith or enchant. Have fun.

What an incredibly repetitive thread.

You would think that "real rpg players" would be smarter, oh well.

Lmao you're getting mad at a game that gives you the choice to essentially put god mode on in the console? Need I remind you it is a single player game, and if you feel it is too easy, go ahead and use an iron dagger to go kill an ancient dragon. This thread is pointless, that is like saying Oblivion gets way too easy when you enchant your armour to have 100% Chameleon.

I don't get people like this. It is a role playing game. If you decide your character will be role played as a min/max toon, then you will obviously be op. I play this game to role play. In oblivion I once made a traveling merchant that didn't really have any combat skills. On skyrim I have had the min/max character too, it's boring. But making everything perfect for a given role will do that. My guy now is an archer that doesn't use sneak and only light armor. Also backup weeping is a dagger. It's quite hard on expert I won't even try master.

This game will give back to you whatever you put into it.

I'm just playing as a person would do and not grinding any skills. I find the game plenty hard in some areas and easier in others, just as they had intended. I don't want them to make the more difficult on Adept or any of the current settings. It's just fine.

my thoughts exactly. i never realized how irrational "real rpg players" are. the myopia on this board is crazy.

You don't need to pass things up. You just need to make well rounded characters. The way I make characters in an rpg is that for every strength my character has he/she must also have some type of weakness. In other words a balanced character. Picking all strengths is going to lead to overpowered characters. And there's nothing wrong with that if that's what you want to do but the game is going to be incredibly easy and boring. Adding higher difficulty levels isn't going to change that because it isn't the game that's the problem.

I hate how the Master difficulty (just like the higher difficulties were in previous ES games) is imbalanced. It changes only your physical and spell damage but not poison damage and it doesnt change your companions' damage including conjured summons. On Master difficulty damage health poisons become worthless while companions and conjured summons become over-powered relative to your character.

We are not being rude. Well maybe I was a bit, and for that I am sorry, but I am tired of people saying something wich they have the power to control themselves. And that is where lies your problem. You have a playing style (what ever it is, please explain so we can answer what it is so we can answer better without guessing. Since we have to guess we may come off as rude) that exploits the game. This is the way the game is. So maybe you have to change your playstyle a bit different then.

One thing about TES games is, you can play multiple times different ways. If you refuse to change your play style, of course the gmae is going to be the same all the time.