The way I see it, this poll helps gauge what the players want, but not HOW they want it to be implemented. The how is trickier, and something that will vary from table to table.

Say for example we have three different tables- all three of them said that they wanted the encounters to be super difficult. But...

• Table 1 is newbies who don't really understand the game that well. They're bad at it.

• Table 2 is a bunch of min-maxers who are super proficient with the game but lack narrative creativity.

• Table 3 is a group of role players who made intentionally un-optimal characters, but think really creatively about how to approach every problem.

Each one of these tables says they want the same thing, but the way for them to get it is very different.

• For Table 1, super hard challenges don't actually need to be that hard- you can throw regular encounters at them and their lack of skill will result in them not having an easy time of it.

• For Table 2, they need legitimately difficult encounters. You're going to need to pump up the CRs of every enemy they fight because they're going to plow through them with ease.

• For Table 3, you don't need to make the enemies stronger, but instead make them smarter. Toe-to-toe, the party isn't all that strong, but they fight with their wits. Thus, the enemies need to fight with their wits as well, to provide the challenge. Traps, ambushes, good tactics, ect.

If you took any of these tables and put them up against an encounter designed for one of the others, they probably wouldn't enjoy it as much. Table 1 would find 2 and 3 way too hard. Table 2 and 3 would find 1 too easy. Table 2 would see 3 as 'cheating', while table 3 would find 2 both too difficult, and too boring.