FallOut 3 had a better level scaling but still not quite right.

The important thing is that you can't just hit the same dungeon over and over again and keep getting better loot; there needs to be some exploration involved, forcing the character to travel further from the 'safe zone' to get further into the game and get better loot.

Instead of creatures turning up at certain levels, they should be there from the start, but exist further away from safe zones.

I use a mod for Obilvion that makes harder enemies spawn further away from cities and in deep forest etc. The Dungeons furthest from cities also contain the best loot, which makes exploring much more fun and dangerous.

I haven't been back on the forums in forever... But anyways, Oblivion level scaling should be completely scrapped. However I think some consideration needs to be given to some minor alterations to the Morrowind system as well. I LOVED Morrowind with an undying passion, and I enjoy playing thieve characters more then anything else in role-play games, thus I really gained no satisfaction from Oblivion as there was nothing to steal that wasn't already on every low life thug wandering the wild at any point in the game. Cracking into the vaults of Vivec for the first time in Morrowind felt like a huge accomplishment, and not being seen doing it, and slowly relieving the vaults of all their valuables and bring them back to your home was an amazing feeling. However, while I enjoyed it with a passion, it is possible to interpret the level at which you can perform such feats as broken, and so from that perspective I acknowledge the need for some limitations or considerations of leveling. On the other hand if no one is offended that thieves have an unfair early equipment advantage that makes most other classes look like beggars in comparison, then I'm perfectly content maintaining the Morrowind system =).

NO LEVEL SCALING
When I voted 86.91% of people agreed... NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO LEVEL SCALING

The only problem with scrapping a level scaling system is it allows characters to be broken at Level 1 when they really should get broken around Level 30. I'm all for tweaking the system the 18+ Goblin Warlords have to go but I don't wanna get into a dungeon I know has powerful enemies and use invisibilty scrolls and find a glass armor set thats going to make my charcter broken for the 1st half of a game. Even if its an accomplishment sneaking past the enemies I wouldn't want a character to be able to do that as it makes the game less fun.

The level scaling of Oblivion was, in my opinion, the biggest problem with the game. The scaling in Fallout 3 was a lot more bearable and I wouldn't mind it too much if it was done in that fashion. That said, this is one area that needs to return to Morrowind.

Hate level scaling, both on items or enemies... Daedric armies composed of scamps and clannfear runts, just because I'm level 5? How does that make sense? Where are the rest of the mighty daedra? Oh yes, just waiting for me to reach level 15 so they can materialize and begin their work... :unsure:

Really like how FNV made the deathclaws fearsome again, if you run into a nest at low levels, its understandable you get crushed to a pulp, they exist in the game world as an entity, populating specific places, where it makes sense to encounter them, not part of some list that spawns them according to my level. In my opinion, its a matter of careful balancing, and being aware of how enemies fit in the game world they try to create, probably more work than just creating a leveled list, but very much more rewarding in the end. There can be a use for some scaling regarding the difficulty of encounters or loot, always considering how they fit in the bigger picture.

Also, in regards to being able to obtain late game items because of no scaling, that's an issue with design, its entirely in the hands of the developers to create ways to prevent things like this, again, a bit more complicated than just creating a leveled list, but I think the benefits justify the extra work. The alternative, at least how is implemented on TES4 is borderline ridiculous.

I think Bethesda has learned a lot since Oblivion was published, and hope they can deliver a game world as interesting to explore as it is to experience visually.

I voted for No, simply because i don't like going into dungeons and mauling everything at level 2.

I wouldn't even go into a dungeon in Oblivion outside of a monster dungeon until Level 3. There is no point in going in before that because of the Level Scaling

Developers can very well implement various things to prevent things like these. Using your example, that armor set sits on a device setting off a trap dispelling all magic effects on you and spawns a few enemies, there to protect such a choice piece of loot from the thieving hands of eager adventurers like you. If you can get around the obstacle, then your rewards are deserved... Or maybe you'll have to wait a bit and hone your skills before you can attempt what others, since the artifact has been collecting dust on that dungeon for so long, have attempted to no avail. Just a bit more complicated to implement than a leveled list, but it makes for a much more coherent experience, don't you think?

Nah it makes it too easy because somebody will find a place where you can horde Invisibility Scrolls and just find item, trap triggers, use Scroll, Sneak Past Enemies, Grab the Item then Reuse the Scroll then get the heck out of that dungeon. Its not that hard to exploit if done correctly. Then again I'll probably be guilty of trying to get the item early because I'll wanna use whatever measures I can to beat the game.

In Oblivion it was dumb, but it can be done well, as Fallout proved

Kinda half scaled, half not. So for the most part you can wander around the wilderness at level 5 but there's a chance you might run into something that'll squish you before you even know it

Well, how about if the mobs spawned have a true-sight ability? Lol, like I said, you just need to be creative, its just a lot more work to the developers, so they take the easier road and try to balance that approach.

Get rid of it all together or at least use it on a limited scale. I don't want to see everybody and their mother with daedric again. And there should be unforgiving moments where you get your ass kicked going into a bandit cave.

Oh yes, the huge daedric wholesale event somewhere on Cyrodill once you hit level 20, where bandits and other scum outfit themselves needs to go... no excuses. :biggrin:

I thought that fallout 3 was a perfect example of how to balance difficulty and progression. Although I liked Morrowind moreso only because I felt a little more in-danger when I encountered something I wasn't expecting. It really felt great when you were able to come back and defeat the encounter.

I say no to Level Scaling.

There are places in the world that I should not be able to visit due to things that will destroy me. I hated the fact there was never any challenge in Oblivion. I was facing monsters that were designed to be fought by me at that point in the game. Facing off against a Xivalvi should be one of the defining moments of the game, not a run of the mill encounter.

And also: Remove Essential NPCs. Morrowind had it exactly right. You kill the wrong person, you break the main quest. You kill the wrong person, you miss out on any quests that person was attached to. I shouldn't simply knock someone unconscious because they might be important later on.

Xivalvi's are still challenging at level 20 if you don't hit them before they put up that stupid shield spell

I still manage to go through them like a scythe through wheat with any character. About the sole challenge that occurred in Oblivion is when I wandered away from Kvatch after entering the Oblivion Portal the first time and closing that one. I didn't flush the city until I was in my Late Teens. Kvatch full of Storm Atronochs and Spider Daedra is actually quite challenging.

Level scale by shunting me to different areas, or letting me get my ass kicked when I go somewhere that I should be

Treasure gets linked to the monsters' levels, not mine. If I happen to get some lucky breaks and kill a Chuck Norris, then I should get the reward!

Place some random high level treasure that I can bump into. Makes wandering more rewarding

No. I want Morrowind-esque level-scaling. Good if I die when I'm fresh off the boat. And once I become, for all intents and purposes, a demigod, I want to feel like a demigod. I want the challenge to disappear. If the game gets boring after that... well yeah. I've taken care of all the crap, so my life gets boring again. Then I'll go play other games.

If an enemy like Umbra has something thats extremely powerful and can't be pickpocketed then yeah I wouldn't have a problem with something like that its just I don't want people being able to sneak to places that they shouldn't be able to get to at low levels and get extremely powerful because they magically find a set of Glass Armor and a Daedric Sword.

Honestly that would be more of an issue for BGS to address. They would be in charge of what items/armor/weapons would be placed in dungeons and they could really control what players should get. If a low level player is smart and clever enough to go to a dangerous area and get some uber loot, more power to them. At the same time the better the armor/weapons, the more rare and unlikely to find they should be. As many suggested before, Fallout 3 did a pretty decent job of finding a middle ground with level scaling. I remember one of my fondest memories of Fallout 3 was coming across a random raider with an alien pistol (I don't remember what it was called). It didn't make any sense, and I hadn't been playing the game that long, but it turned out to be one of the most powerful weapons in the game and it was a really special moment I had in that game. Now I don't think that should happen a lot, but the more unpredictable things are, the better in my opinion.

I'm glad the community pretty much gets it.

I don't understand why should be such a fight over level scaling, as BGS can make a formula that can potentially satisfy both parties on this debate.

They can have another height map for the entire map of the game world, but in this height map they could define the minimum possible level of the monsters, and they can have another virtual height map for the world area to define the maximum possible level for monster levels, and another two virtual height maps to define the limits for loot level in different areas of the map.

There can be a GMST value that defines the percentage amount of level scaling to the player or the area level, so if it is 100 then the monsters are completely level scaled to the player level, and if the value is 0 then they are completely leveled to the area's defined limits for monster levels.

There can be another GMST value that would define the loot level scaling just like the one above which was about monster level scaling.

So if the first value is 0, and monsters are defined wholly by area limits, then they have a completely random chance to be any level between the height map values defined or the area, and if the first value was defined 100, then monsters would be scaled to the player level just like Oblivion, and for the numbers in between, the monster levels would be between two limits that are drawn toward the level of the player.

The second value would do the same for item levels.

As for the internal/indoor cells, each cell can have a pointer that defines a cell in the outside area, and this pointer links the indoor cell to that outdoor cell, and can be used for spells like jump outside, Divine Intervention, and the like, and can link the inside's environmental ambient sounds to the weather condition of the linked outside cell.

And also the internal cell's minimum and maximum levels for monsters and loot can be taken from the linked outside cell, and adjusted by two values that are added to the outside values.

So an indoor cell can link to an outside cell, and have two values of 10 and 5 for monster levels, and 5 and 0 for item levels, which means, add 10 level to the maximum monster level of outside cell, and 5 to the minimum monster level, and add 5 to the maximum item level of the outside cell, and 0 to the minimum item level.

In Oblivion when a player entered a cell, the random list on that cell would check the player level and depending on that value, select a monster or an item from the list and place that on the ground or inside an inventory.

But this value can be calculated from a formula that checks the minimum and maximum area levels for monsters and items, and the level of the player and those two GMST values that define the percentage of the effect that the player level has on those limits and get a final semi-random result for the level value.

Then the final calculated level value is used for the random list to get the desired monster or item.

This way by changing two GMST values in the range between 0-100 we can have monsters and/or items that are totally scaled to the player level or completely independent from player and scaled to the limits defined by the area, or something in between.

You can keep both parties pleased, and by default we can have a 10 percent player level effect for 90 percent area based scale for the loot and monsters.


All of those are for random lists and do not affect the manually placed monsters and items, and some random monsters and items can be defined as independent from the formula above and define their own specific minimum and maximum levels if the designers like.

Every bandit should NEVER be wearing daedric or ebony or glass, no matter your level.

Oscuro's Oblivion Overhaul got it spot on in my opinion. Though I imagine Beth are well-versed in his work.