I sincerely hope developers will realize, despite all disagreement here, that smithing/enchanting/sneaking can be more challenging and fun than they are in their current state. Perhaps if others argued it was already hard enough but "don't exploit" argument kind of speaks for itself - there is a balance issue and needs fixing.

Question begging much? I don't seem to remember the two things put together in other posts/threads so it seems you may be putting forth a scenario that doesn't even happen.

Ignoring the flamebaiting, I'd like to say that I do have a proposed solution; either increase the difficulty scaling or add harder difficulty levels to the game.

I'll agree that Dragon Age was easy to break (had a rogue with equipment totaling +100% chance to dodge attacks, a mage that couldn't be hit, two handed warriors that chewed through enemies to fast to take damage) but the sequel was considerably more balanced. What I liked about that game is that it had a lot of aspects (level up choices, party composition, gear, companion tactics, quest order) and to play on the hardest difficulty you had to be fairly good at all of them. One thing making it easier for that game's developers though is that grinding is impossible, there's a fixed amount of xp in the game so the devs would know what level you're going to reach and when. Mass Effect 2 was good because the difficulty curve was very consistent, yet it didn't feel like everything was just leveling up with you - you were just entering more dangerous situations as you grew more powerful.

The problem with your argument about Skyrim's intended cap is that it doesn't take level 40 for the challenge to disappear, its more like 25, which leaves 25 to 50 more levels of blah combat. I have no intention of forcing my characters up past level 50, and apart from my first character I'm not trying to become ruler of all Skyrim, but I'm still running into the balance issues with a lot of completely reasonable content to go.

i've used the smithing/enchanting/alchemy "exploit." i play on master and am level 70. running around collecting snowberries and running away from nearly impossible snow animals that had scaled relative to my non-combat skills did not feel like an exploit. But having reached that threshold in previous bethesda games where you just have too much health, i also have decided to artificially cap my health at 200 and do not wear armor. this was also a roleplaying decision. my character is smart and quick but does not like war-hammers to the face. when im surrounded by several arch stormages or bandit marauders i do not feel like the difficulty scaling is broken, but that is probably because my health is so low. i can sure dish out the damage but i cannot take it. a power attack from any higher level bad guy is usually a one hit kill and dragons gobble me up in one bite or incinerate me in one breath. when i don't run into any quest bugs......this very balanced setup has made for quite the enjoyable experience, at least for me.


but yes, people who oversmith daedric armor and put the majority of their points into health should not complain that the games non-magical attackers are too easy, since that is the point of oversmithing armor.

Armor caps at 567, so having an armor rating of 1,000,000 is meaningless.

Created a forum account to agree with this guy.

Although I can't understand why someone would create videos with dramatic music and slowmo typing to highlight the disgusting travesty of creating an 800 damage daedric hammer, I do think there is something to be said about the game mechanics that should be considered for future content. I will say it's difficult to take most of these people seriously though. I can't help believe that the people who complain aren't really concerned with game balance, their real concern is that they aren't special because it's too easy for the 'non-elitist' to stumble upon and exploit the same mechanic.

Considering the ease of leveling skills, I would have liked to have seen "cooldown" timers on skill ups, a cooldown timer that could be modified by the quantity of perk points spent in a given tree. As mentioned by the poster I quoted, it is irritating the rate at which some skills level by using some abilities as intended. For instance I use the 'bound sword' spell in conjuration and have a total of 3 perks spent in the tree simply for the free trap soul. I use the sword in my offhand and can swap it out numereous times in a battle for a ward, heal, ironskin, or enchanted blade. I have seen my conjuration skill go up 2-3 times in one battle. My primary magical focus is in the Alteration and Restoration schools, so it's a little annoying that my conjuration skill outpaces these schools because of my consitent use of a novice spell.

Overall, I am satisfied with the game. Even if the unintentional skill ups bother me it is far more manigible than Oblivion; which I never finished because it would irritate me that I had to limit the amount of sprinting, jumping, sneaking, and lockpicking I did because the combat portion of the game would become too difficult to manage. The scaling in this game is much better and feels a little more realistic, albeit a little a too forgiving at times, but better, and the skills are better tuned with the scaling. Wow, I digress, sorry.

Interesting, like I said, never played the sequel. Its interesting that it was more balanced to you, but clearly DA2 was hugely derided as substantially weaker as a game than the original despite these balance improvements. Which is part of the reason I feel it necessary to offer the devils advocate arguments against balancing in threads like this, as it concerns me that if Bethseda focused too much on game challenge, that development time detracts from game content critical to my own enjoyment of the game. In a perfect world they shouldn't be mutually incompatible, but in terms of development time, probably incredibly, incredibly difficult.
Please don't take that as a full argument, as my knowledge of DA2 is from reviews and other opinions, and none of my own, I can't back this view up, simply a possibility.



This is the crux of the argument imo, people say they paid no attention to the skills, I say they paid TOO much attention to them, and guess the average lifetime of a character badly. It felt fine to me, because my personal style obviously fitted with their intentions.
Thats not bragging, or claims of intelligent roleplaying, thats just dumb luck I happened to fall slap into the middle of their expectations with my characters.

I think the only true argument I've seen is the argument that they underestimated the lifespan of a character.

It depends on what you're talking about. Smithing and enchanting are NOT exploits, they are professions built into the game and they are a bit imbalanced.

I used to exploit like you, then I took this thread in the knee

The problem is that half the game feels like an exploit because of how powerful you get.

Light Armor, exploit, it gets nearly just as good DR as heavy armor.

Shield, exploit, you become invisible when you are proficient in it.

Companions, exploit, many of them just won't die.

Going into a dungeon, exploit, a potion around every corner.

The list goes on and on and on. There are so many things in this game one has to ignore to make the game a challenge. It's pretty much a given that you should never enchant or use smithing if you want to have a challenge. For those of us who liked gathering the gems and mining the ore to craft our own gear this is a let down. You're telling people to ignore aspects of a game they bought if you want to have a challenge.

This isn't the sims and it's not always about make beileve or else we would just be using pen and paper.

Oh boy... talk about don't get it. I'm saying it's an open sand box game. You have control of how you react to the environment placed in front of you. Now you could react by complaining about the game, case in point. Or you could just play it.

You could play it by making it very easy for yourself. Case in point.

Or you could challenge yourself by doing things differently.

Fact of the matter is: You're trying to be a game designer for a game that isn't yours to design. By putting the fault all on the game design and not on your own playstyle you aren't taking ownership of your own actions. Yes the game may not cater to the number crunching, every advantage seeking, players who want nothing more than to be super powered. But the company has no obligation to cater to you, nor do they have any obligation to continue to support changes to the game.

But the great thing is, and I know this isn't what you want to hear... you still have control over your own actions.

So you can choose to be satisfied with the game and play it in a way that makes you happy, or you can continue to try to direct someone else's design from the backseat by complaining. Or heck you could choose to go design something better and get into direct competition with Bethesda and put them out of business with your great ideas.

I'm ok with you making your suggestions / point to the designers, but don't be surprised when people get tired of you making this your personal crusade, especially since you have the power to play the game differently.

I would argue the possibility is there to allow for a greater range of characters, but does not have to be matched by your physical skill. It would be redundant if you couldn't survive high level mobs without only heavy. Maybe I misunderstood.



I either missed the shield invisibility exploit or you meant invincible. Once you hit the high levels of perks you can be extremely powerful, rarely overpowered thou, and to me, thats how it should be.



I'm so clumsy, I'm like a companion executioner, they give me criminals because I'm quicker than the execution block.



You're pulling my leg with this one. I have never seen this complaint before.



This makes no sense. Firstly, if we overcome our gamer snobbishness, skyrim actually has a lot in common with the sims, as much as I HATE to admit it, and it is about make believe.. its the central concept to the whole fantasy genre.. I honestly don't even know what you are talking about here. Thats not to be offensive, but I would like a bit of clarification as to what you mean.

Skyrim is designed to challenge you in a different way than the sims. It has the open world sandbox feel of the sims, yes, but the combat, puzzles, etc. all make for an entirely seperate experience.

But there are available exploits within those legit professions, that's what he's talking about. People exploit them, give themselves equipment with stats that go above the cap and offer free-reduced mana costs, and they wonder why the game is too easy.

I fail to see how the illusion school, or conjuration school fits your criteria above.

I would say that they DO have an obligation to make sure that the spells they put in, via books sold by NPC's are even SLIGHTLY balanced. This isn't crafting, this isn't exploiting, this is walking to a vendor, buying a spell and trivialising most encounters.


I mean sure, my illusion/conj focused mage could not use any of those schools....but that'd be a bit stupid.


It is not unreasonable to expect basic spells to be balanced. It is simple not possible to role play an illusion/conj mage and not use those spells; it is equally simply not possible to have a balanced experience whilst using those spells. So she's shelved until the community picks up the pieces.



Edit: For the record, I don't recall anyone with madly stacked alc and smithing to the point of max damage complaining it is too easy. I DO see people using a single element of the 'bad' professions saying it's too easy.

I might be inclined to agree with you, except that they definitely got Mass Effect 2 very right on all fronts. I think DA2 just did a good job of fixing what user feedback told them was wrong with the first game, but rushed things like environment design that typically take a lot longer to develop. The biggest complaints against that game are that they blatantly recycled the same exact five dungeons over and over, in a game that already had you revisiting the same city over three consecutive episodes, and that they implemented waves of enemies spawning in a way that was sloppy and almost comical.



They've clearly stated the soft level cap was about 50, and really, if you play your character consistently, you'll never get much above that no matter how much you play. You have to start using skills you'd otherwise neglected in order to get much higher, which really has to be goofed because it means using level 10 skills against level 50 enemies. They also boasted about the random quest generation that could make a game last indefinitely. I'd hate to think they went to all that trouble, and then designed the game (even its highest difficulties) to cater to the casual player that does the main quest, a couple of side quests, then puts the game aside at level 25.

What do you really expect Beth to do? Make a difficulty solely suited for the people who Smith and Enchant their armor to the max? Look they give you the choice on what you want to do. You know the consequences of your choices. Smithing and Enchanting are meant to make you powerful. To give you the best gear possible, if you -choose- to go that route. But you have to look at it logically. The man with Dragon or Deadric armor that is double enchanted is meant to be OPed. Your spending time and a chunk of Perk points to reach that level and so its a valid reward. Your taking the BEST equipment and tossing magical boosters on it. Something that takes MASTERY(in game wise) of said skills to do.

What do you expect? For the random thieves and highwaymen to have the same Skills and kit as you, a dragonborn? Does that make any sense? No, not at freaking all. Its called the best because it IS the best. And having the best means your better than the rest.

So no, its not the games fault. Its yours. Deal with it. You powergame by throwing two enchants on each piece of your Dragon or Deadric armor and weapons, so your going to be a juggernaut. Live with it, or tone it down.

Nothing is stopping you from USING the skills, skill level is only an efficiency marker. But you are intentionally taking Perks that you KNOW will give you a ungodly edge over your enemies. You bring it upon yourself. Spread your perks to other places or just don't use them.

Um, no. It's the game's responsibility to moderate a players strength. A game has to provide boundaries. Who wants to play a game where you can be as powerful as you want and therefore need to 'choose' to remain weak in order to have a reasonable playing experience?

How many other games provide content that breaks the game (for the majority) if used?

Forums are funny, as soon as a particular opinion becomes fashionable everyone signs up regardless of whether they have actually given it any thought or not. Such is life.

This is such a stupid argument it isn't even funny. You are telling me to play a game differently than how it is designed to create arbitrary rulesets to play by. Heck why didn't game developers think of this earlier! Why did they ever have Easy, Medium, Hard, and Insane settings when the player can just choose to only run around with a knife in a game or choose not to restore health ever! BRILLIANT!

/sarcasm off

There is a big difference between complaining, and offering up suggestions to improve a game so the game experience can be enjoyed by a wider audience. For you to object against a system that has no adverse affect on you is silly. To not find fault with the current system is ok, that is your opinion but do not impose your view and how YOU play the game onto others.

Most players I would venture to say approach RPG games in the manner I do. It is all about progression. This means not tying your hands behind your back, intentionally not leveling up, intentionally using inferior gear etc. The whole point of an RPG is progression. Whether it be focused on storyline progression or character development. To tell everyone they need to go AGAINST progression is unnatural and a terrible suggestion.

Not sure why I'm arguing this so vehemently, I'm playing on PC, there'll be increased spawn mods and crafting tweak mods within a week of them releasing the CK.

Agreed.

Problem I have about exploits is that they tend to explode in my face when all I wanted to do was play the game. I suddenly find out that "oh hell, this is really bad - I can't keep using this feature anymore". I have no problems with people grinding for the sake of grinding, as long as the rules for it matches the activity. But currently they don't really add up, and you end up grinding even if you didn't intend to. Nobody gets to became a master car mechanic even if they change tires for a living the whole life (ref iron daggers), if you catch my drift. The rules are plain bad.

Why did I craft? For the money. I know you can grind armor skills by doing stupid things, but I'm strong enough to withstand the temptation and rather pay for the training, so I crafted the good stuff well aware I could have simply crafted iron daggers.

So, I don't exploit the game (at least not intentionally), I don't complain about it being possible. I only complain that the rules can make you exploiting certain things when you didn't even want to, and have to keep nerfing yourself instead of getting the most out of the game.

Separate experience yes, but I would argue that challenge, like the sims, is not in beating the game by maxing your skills. The option to do so is there, and you can easily max out your job, but I would never complain that because I spent a week on charisma and became president, I was overpowered for the game.

naturally as an anology, its extreme, but you don't seem to understand the point I am making. The game is not designed to be beaten in a traditional sense.

Absolutely. But suggestions have to be tempered by discussion. I have yet to see a suggestion that did not have an adverse effect on my own style, even if is as simple as diverting development time from the type of game I like into something petty and simple like a super-l33t hardcoe mode with one-shot killer mudcrabs, and why shouldn't we defend what we like. So I have to argue my point, simply because I would hate for developers to think this was the prevailing and unopposed view. Judging by the threads on this matter, its appears to be a vocal minority on those that care about perceived inbalances etc. Without an unbiased poll however, with sufficient sample, theres no way for us to really compare.

Nobody is arguing for no reason whatsoever.. well okay, some people are, but those who have spent the time to write a response on a subject they care about, clearly do have reasons, and its arrogant to dismiss it because it does not match your own views. Thats is twice as bad in my book, since we should encourage debate, whereas this quote seems to want opposing views to be quiet.

If we get to the point where every sentence starts with "in my opinion" we should hang our heads in shame, we craft responses to display our opinion, and by definition it cannot be any more than that.. we shouldn't have to spell it out.



I can honestly say, over 2 characters, I have not intentionally tied my hands behind my back, and this concept of "self-gimping" is a new one, since Gimping in the first place was always a roleplaying social faux pas. There was a reason for this, the munchkins got shunned, those that cared only about progression and statistical gain for damage per second were not particularly well liked.

I completely agree that progression is essential to any story, and rpg, and not one person said you should go against progression. But the case in hand is about deliberate mechanic exploitation, and that utterly denies character and story progression with a "give me it NOW" mentality.

Nobody said anything against progression, so the capitalisation is confusing. Nobody said "don't level". They simply said, if you level up your skills in a manner that exceeds the requirements of the story, you sidestep the development of character through adversity, and without character, no wonder their game is soulless.

Sometimes this is accidental, I grant that, but those voices have been drowned in the complaints of deliberate munchkins, and their points made shallow due to the silliness this thread was apparently created to combat.

EDIT: As case in point, I've bashed heads with flooble who posts above in numerous threads, and I have come to respect their views and complaints.. I'm not convinced by them, but I do respect them, and its a shame they are often drowned by the less reasonable posts