Uhm yes giants and some other creatures are not scaling with the player. But 95% of the other guys are scaling with you.



WTF is with you. Are you sure you are playing skyrim?

Agree with everything.

Warning, don`t create threads that bash the game that has crushed the reviews and loved by the vast majority to the point where lots of people are calling it the best game ever created unless you can deal with people criticising the hell out of your criticism. Fair enough?

I haven`t been thinking whether level scaling exists or not, I honestly don`t care because I`m enjoying the game. Let`s think about it tough:
The game is set on a huge open world environment where the player is free to travel anywhere right from the start, and the developers have no idea what the players are going to do and in what order. Think about the following scenario: A player just goes on exploring, doesn`t even get properly introduced into the main quest. He can go anywhere he wants, find any location/dungeon he comes across. So what if there was no level scaling? Players would be faced with either overpowered or too weak opponents during the game. Would that be fun? It would force the developers to create a certain path for players to take, in order to enjoy the game as it was ment to be.

I have an example from my own experience: I started following the main quest to whiterun, after that I just got carried way with first the companions, went to say hello to the greybeards and then travelled to riften and joined thieves guild.. soon I had played 30 hours, and after that I continued with the main quest and found the big snowy ruins between whiterun and morthal (don`t remember their name). Anyways, I fought a Draugh Deathlord there. It was the toughest fight I had yet fought during the whole game. He killed me like 20 times before I finally managed to slay him (been playing expert from the beginning, no I didn`t even think about downgrading altough the brutal beating I got). If there was no level scaling I would had destroyed him with a few swings based on the fact that it was not too far on main ques and I was about level 20 and pretty good in two handed!

And about forcing players into being melee combat oriented.. have you figured out what kind of stuff you can do with smithing and alchemy?
In overall the way I see it, people like you venture into the game with a closed mindet full of doubts and lust of finding features to dislike.
This game is pure awesomeness, it`s total epicness and after playing +30 hours (pc) I have to say this experience is way way way worth more than just 42€ I paid from the game.

Oh, so those guys in dungeons that would've left me fleeing for my life 10 levels ago that are now pushovers leveled with me huh?

It makes no sense. Dragons, Wolves, Bears, Sabre Cats, everything is easier now that I've leveled. If what you said was true, it wouldn't be the case.

In Oblivion the same guys at 10 and 30 would be just as hard. It's not now, so you're wrong. They did change it and anyone who plays it can see that.

Facts, get some.

Ok I will try to get some facts and you should buy skyrim and play it.

Oh, I see. Because it's getting rave reviews and "everybody loves it", it must be good. Critical thought isn't just overrated, it's actually the axis of evil.

Ignorance is bliss, hm?

I agree actually. I feel like there's a "pace" and if I want to dike around and train my speech, I'll get left behind.

I don't like it >_<

I have been playing it, thanks.

If what you were saying is true (it isn't) than one guy in a dungeon would do 5 damage per swing at a low level, and 50 or more at a high level. It's not the case.

I can kill wolves in a single hit now. When I was a low level, nope. As a poster above stated some dungeons are high level from the start. Meaning if you go in, and you're a low level, you'll get ransacked.

Draugrs I had issues with before, die easily now. Even deathlords who could smash me can't now.

So where are they leveling up right alongside me again? It's not outside, it's not any animal or dragon and it's not any dungeon so far.

If it wasn`t good would it get superb reviews and make "everybody" love it? No?

Ignorance is a bliss... lol. Read the rest of my post, I explained why I think that the level scaling is a good thing.

Just because level scaling isn't universal like in Oblivion doesn't mean it has disappeared, using the ~Console can easily grant immediate and accurate results on just about any information in the game, try using it sometime.

They're claiming that 95% of the enemies do level with you, that's simply not true. They should post proof from the console as I'm on the 360.

The best proof is that the same enemies at one level die easier at a later level. If they scaled, their health would go way up and their damage would too to compensate for better armor and weapons. They DON'T.

It's that simple. Most are fixed at a certain level.

Funny story, I once wrote an article about level scaling in which I said that "Just about the only bright side to this whole catastrophy is that the situation will eventually balance out - there are only so many combat skills to max out, so you'll inevitably catch up with your opponents".

Of course, that bright light at the end of the tunnel does little to diminish the frustrating sh*t you have to wade through in order to get there - frustrating sh*t that wouldn't have been there if Bethesda had invested some time and resources into understanding balance and learning curve as opposed to making the water look better.



It must be so nice to be able to accept as gospel truth the idea that publishers and reviewers alike don't con the living daylight out of everything you read prior and just after the release of a new game. By the way, have you ever heard of a "poll f***" before? No, I suppose you haven't.

I can't really pass judgement on this because somehow it does not seem to bother me. I am a destruction/conjuration/one-handed/alteration/restoration/enchantment mage and I have to admit that fighting a frost troll is allot less harder then it used to be. Dungeons however seem to keep up with me, which really bothers me. Lowlife bandits should be no match for me!!!

You need a certain degree of level scaling to keep the game interesting, without it you basically become a god after a certain point and it trivializes whatever remaining content you have left.

So basically what you're claiming is, if you sit around and level non-combat skills only, they'll be stronger than you?

That's like saying being a couch potato doesn't prepare you for a marathon, no [censored].

Be level 20, go fight a snow bear. Note how tough it is. Now stop leveling combat skills, only level alchemy. Go back and fight a snow bear, if it's significantly harder I'll bow down and apologize. It won't be though.

Original poster insists that other sources of Skyrim data cannot be trusted because they do not have access to the creation kit, but then makes mathematical claims that cannot be trusted because the OP can't have access to it yet either... fascinating.

Actually, what I'm saying is that a game that advertises it can be played "any way you want" shouldn't skullf*** you in response to doing just that.

The point here isn't how I can beat that Snow Bear at Level 20, or whether it'll be significantly easier or harder lateron - it's that being promised you could "play any way you want" and subsequently getting your ass shredded by a Snow Bear because you felt like playing an Alchemist doesn't compute.



Mathematical assumptions?

I feel like I should know what you're going on about, but you've lost me all the same.

Yeah just try it. Do cheat for yourself +20 lvls and add everything to alchemy. Then go back somewhere there and you wont see a normal snow bear, there will be something else. A **** dragon bear (edit: yes there are no dragon bears, i just want to say that there will be something/somebody else whos stronger) or something like that and he will beat you up. Dont forget to do the same things with alle of the dungeons.
1. Make a savegame before you go in a dungeon
2. now go into a dungeon, fight the monsters there. For sure you will have fun, dont forget about the fight.
3. load your savegame (now the dungeon is not lvl-locked), go somewhere else make a lot of lvlups (or cheat +20), add everything to alchemy
4. go back to the dungeon and the monsters will r ape you.

But thats what you like right?

I have the strat guide and it says otherwise. Also, being level 25, I decided to do some quests I haven't done (but initiated) when I started the game. These included dungeons (take note I never entered these areas before). Now, if the creatures level up with me, why was I 1 shotting them? I'll tell you. It was a low level quest. On the other side of the coin, I did a higher level quest and was getting smacked around.

The dungeons are level locked when you enter them. Usually with a 5 level gap 5-10, 10-15 etc etc. But the Creatures ARE static. A bandit stays level 1. And Ice wolf stays level 6. A frost troll stays level 22. They do not level up with you. The only creatures that do... are the town guards. As far as the dungeons go, if it's level 5-10, you enter it at level 4, it's level 5. Now, this is your only argument. If you enter the area at level 6, the creatures are level 6. At 7 they will be 7. 8 will be 8 etc etc. But it will be locked there. So if you level up to 9 when you enter there at 8, they stay level 8. If you enter that 5-10 area 11+ it's will draw the highest level of creatues/loot at 10. But it will draw the appropriate creatues. Instead of bandits, you will see bandit thugs instead. stuff like that. They are higher on the bandit subtype, therefore stronger.

Um, post proof. I'm on the Xbox and I haven't seen a shred of evidence that this is true. Dragon bear? WTF?!

Plus using console commands to level defeats the entire point. If you have the same gear at level 1 and at 20, you're an idiot. Plus if you go up 20 levels, your health can go up too!

What are you people not getting? PROVE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING!



Stupidity makes my head hurt.

So what you're claiming is, play any way you want means not invest any time into combat, try to get into combat and [censored] when you lose? You're not even claiming they level with you anymore, you're just saying your weak ass alchemist can't fight. Well no [censored] [censored] dude.

Once again, it's like saying sitting on your ass all day doesn't prepare you for a marathon, and then you [censored] when the marathon whoops your ass.

You're making no sense whatsoever, and your house of cards has collapsed. You have to do battle in Skyrim. Play any way you want is just a dumb tagline.

If you really want to just be an alchemist, don't ever leave towns and run from dragons. Problem solved, now you're playing any way you want!

I can't believe I'm reading this [censored].

The strategy guide said that?

I'm sceptical enough to say that it wouldn't be the first time I've seen a strategy guide get things wrong - I've donated plenty of them to the fireplace in my time. However, let's not be an ass and respond to the content instead.

I'm well aware of range-scaled level-locking. This does little to change the fact that unless I visit every dungeon in the game before leveling up a single time, I will still get my ass handed back to me by appropriately range-scaled level-locked critters because I'm playing a pacifistic Alchemist instead of a bloodthirsty Berserker. If Bethesda states you can play the game "any way you want", it would be nice of them to add that "you'll die a thousand deaths unless you level your combat skills first and your non-combat skills second".

Sad thing is, I wouldn't even complain about this if I hadn't played a bunch of games that did get it right when they said you had the freedom to play it "any way you want".



You poor soul.

The existence of range-scaled level-locking does not mean enemies don't level with you at all; it simply means they level with you in a different way than they did in Oblivion. For the record: I never claimed Skyrim is a carbon copy of Oblivion - all I claimed is that Bethesda's made the same mistake again. The mistake being that there is any way, shape or form of level scaling to begin with.

It should go without saying that I didn't actually play as a "weak ass alchemist"; I used that example to underscore the fact that the promise that you could play "any way you want" does not hold true in Skyrim. Actually, I suppose it should be said; I apologize for assuming you would be able to understand that.

That you cannot play "any way you want" is directly related to the level scaling system that punishes you for prioritizing the "wrong" skills, which makes full circle.

Better now?

I don't think a pure alchemist wndering into a dungeon or in the wilderness and getting butthurt a scandal, that's a fairly logical outcome. As a pen&paper RPG player and GM, having a charcter with zero skill in combat wander around unmolested would seem wrong. OF course there would be way more workarounds available (fast-talking, sneaking around and poisoning, hiring some muscle to do the fighting for you...).

Unfortunately a computer games hasn't that flexibility, but I still thinks that non-combat skills should contribute to your leveling - at what exact degre is debatable, but in my opinion they shouldn't be ignored compeltely. If yu invest all your effort into non-combat area, well, you'll svck at combat.

A better solution would be to try to provide the sort of workaround an pen-and-paper GM could let go rather than set the opposition i nsuch a way that no matter how heavily or not the character has invested in combat the player's experience will be the same.

I am not sure if I already posted in this thread or if it was another one but here is my response to this popular topic.

Players claim that leveling, for the lack of a better term, secondary skills over primary (combat) makes the game progressively harder since they level only combat. I have gone the secondary skills route focusing on smithing, enchanting, alchemy, and conjuration (only the reduced mana cost abilities) and have no issue on expert level (no I haven't tried master which may invalidate my post) My character wears light armor since it fits in better with my mentality of the character. Your claim is that doing such I am at a huge disadvantage, while I currently have no issues. Every piece of gear I have is enchanted, my weapons and armor were forged by me and upgrade by me. My bow has Frost damage, my sword has shock damage, and my shield has resist to shock and before I attack I always poison my bow and sword and if my target is extremely difficult I will apply a poison after ever hit..

Naturally my combat skills are pretty much nonexistent but the added damage from crafted weapons, the added damage from enchants, the added damage from poisons, as well as the defense stats from potions and enchants I have make me compete with my other character that completely forgot about those things.

Since I craft all my own gear, the stuff that drops is pretty meaningless to me so I sell all of it, I use the gold to buy any missing parts for my stuff as well as buy soul gems. I soul trap any target that I can stuff into a gem to enchant my stuff as well as keep my charges up.

My 1 hand, archery, and shield skills naturally level from use but I have no put a single perk into them and I have no issues other than with trolls but I haven't had a character that wasn't a x30 dagger assassin that could handle one of them.

So is the challenge only on master difficulty?

So your entire argument is based on semantics and a simple stupid tag line. Wow. Can someone lock this thread now?

Of course you can't play as a pacifist in a [censored] RPG with [censored] dragons you have to kill. I can't overstate the absurdity of your points enough. "I can't throw brooms at the enemy, I can't play it any way I want!!"

A sensible attitude. Never did I claim that non-combat skills should not contribute to player progression, but the current situation is the other extreme of the spectrum. Both lead to ruin. The most obvious solution is to switch to a world-centered experience, but there are many other ways to solve the problem.



You might want to read what I added in the previous post - hell, I'll do you a favor and quote it.



I suppose I could also add that in the classic Fallout, which to the best of my knowledge didn't advertise total freedom at all, you can murder every single living thing in the game (with the exception of the Vault 13 Overseer) and still beat the game... Or you can choose to not to murder a single living thing and still beat the game. That's as fair a case for total freedom as I suspect I'll ever be able to make.