EXP IS SO SLOW!

[Hidn]

Hey guys,

Did you change the zone modifiers or leveling speeds? I'm leveling super slow for no reason.

[Nocte]

Me too.

[Tinino]

Same there, exp seems slower than before.
A patch note would be cool :)

[Soft]

i heard Naggy and Vox deep breath more often D:

[Hidn]

I'm glad that it's not just me then :) thanks guys

[Samuel]

Jboots are slower too!

[feanan]

funny that i see this post now. i was thinking the same thing.

have been out of town since last week, and got to play a bit today, and exp seemed really crappy, and i was in a fairly fast pulling croc group, killing reds.

[Smuuglie]

Exp seemed pretty bad in my full group, yet very good in duo /solo

[pbm937]

Exp seems to be fine to me. It's the way i remember it from way back. of course, i was only like 7 when i played clasic....

[Tajin898]

More info on this would be great.

Was thinking the same thing, but resigned myself to thinking it was just me. Then hopped on the forums, not looking for anything exp related. Then saw this, and now I'm posting!

[Straif]

Thought it was just me... I remember it being bad back in the day but damn.. how long does it theoretically take to get level 3?!

[Cogwell]

If you're killing level 1 mobs, a long damn time.

If you're killing mobs around your level, you'll get to 8-9 pretty fast.

[HippoNipple]

Yeah its all about killing even or yellow mobs until you get past 10. Blues just don't give you enough exp. I saw somewhere people had a calculation and blues don't become efficient for exp until higher levels. If you think about it at level 2 a level 1 mob is 50% your level... at level 20 a lvl 19 mob is 95% your level. Maybe it works that way and maybe it shouldn't work that way... but either way killing blues at low level sucks.

[Swiftsong_Lorekeeper]

The Jboots aren't slower, the mobs just run faster than normal. I have been reading some threads about this and they are going to fix the issue. I had read some bards posting that they couldnt AE or DoT kite because of the wide attack box and the mobs run speed.

[Barkingturtle]

The Jboots aren't slower, the mobs just run faster than normal. I have been reading some threads about this and they are going to fix the issue. I had read some bards posting that they couldnt AE or DoT kite because of the wide attack box and the mobs run speed.

Where did you read it's being fixed? Because as far as I've read over the past eight months there is no intention of fixing mob run speed or their huge boxes.

[holkan]

Well before xp change a lvl 37 grouped with my 50 would get a blue a kill on certain mobs and now they only get a tick *same mobs same levels* , the developers told me this was an intended change. So maybe theres a XP limit on how much a red con mob can give a player.

[Aeolwind]

Where did you read it's being fixed? Because as far as I've read over the past eight months there is no intention of fixing mob run speed or their huge boxes.

We do have intention of fixing anything that is broken. Time is the issue. This isn't just a P1999 issue, it's emulator wide. The hit boxes are broken there as well. We compensated by upping run speed so it isn't completely trivial to try to get away.

Run for your life should mean exactly that; work your ass off or die =).

One thing to realize, for these mobs to even catch players running normally: Player speed 1, Mob speed 1.71. At 1.70 if you take off running while in melee range the mob can hit you 1 time possibly twice depending on conditions, then never even get close again even without strafing/jumping.

[Barkingturtle]

We do have intention of fixing anything that is broken.

Right on. I honestly thought bards were just fancy enough that it had been decided they didn't need to AoE kite, ever. I'll go ahead and roll one, now.

[UrsusMajor]

I can definitely say XP appears to be fine, it's the fact your probably in your low levels, 1-3 and still killing blues.

I took my 19 druid out and helped Plevel a friend to level 5 with him killing mostly whites/yellows and it only took about a half hour.

On the other hand, if you're level 3 and your killing blues that are level 1 or 2, it's going to take you forever to get to level 4. As another poster said, once you get higher it goes faster. I got my necro to 20 last night killing blues/light blues (they drop bronze weapons so I wanted the cash) and it didn't take me that long to get the 2.5 yellows I needed.

[Hidn]

Well, I'm definitely not level 3.

I'm level 33 and was noticing a huge XP hit when grouping with a 36/37.

[zs3000]

XP is most definetly not fine, and much much slower.

Level 11 Warrior in a full group in TR room only getting 1 notch to less than 1 notch of experiance a kill. A week ago I was easily getting half a blue a kill.

[Tajin898]

We do have intention of fixing anything that is broken. Time is the issue. This isn't just a P1999 issue, it's emulator wide. The hit boxes are broken there as well. We compensated by upping run speed so it isn't completely trivial to try to get away.

Run for your life should mean exactly that; work your ass off or die =).

One thing to realize, for these mobs to even catch players running normally: Player speed 1, Mob speed 1.71. At 1.70 if you take off running while in melee range the mob can hit you 1 time possibly twice depending on conditions, then never even get close again even without strafing/jumping.

Another problem with the run speed issue is that the mob "walking" speed is too high. It is almost laughable sometimes trying to run up to a mob just to engage it, because it is walking so much faster than I can run.

[Insedeel]

I just started playing last night for the first time on this server, and to me it seems that the exp is just about right. Killing blues at level 2-3 were giving me a tick or two per skill (like 1-2%), and killing same level mobs would give me about 1 bub of blue, so I think it was appropriate personally to what I remember from classic when I played. The real test for me will be in the 10-40 range though because I remember all too well how difficult it was to level in that range (and I'm really hoping hell levels have made a comback on this server?).

It took me a while to even get part of the way through level 3 last night being a 100% fresh character, which is the way I remember it. I'm happy to see it's difficult. :)

[holkan]

Well, I'm definitely not level 3.

I'm level 33 and was noticing a huge XP hit when grouping with a 36/37.

Yeah I'm pretty sure if you group with someone levels higher then you its gonna hurt your XP by alot. As I posted earlier before the change when a lvl 37 grouped with my 50 he got 1 blue a kill now he gets 1 tick of a blue. Developers confirmed this is intended.

[Ihealyou]

... and I'm really hoping hell levels have made a comback on this server?


45 probably took me 15 hours to get through, so yeah, the hell levels are here :p

[Insedeel]

45 probably took me 15 hours to get through, so yeah, the hell levels are here :p

You made my day Ihealyou! /giddy on

[Droxx]

fwiw I went from losing 6 blues on death at level 50 to losing half a yellow if that's any indicator.

[Stickyfingers]

fwiw I went from losing 6 blues on death at level 50 to losing half a yellow if that's any indicator.


I agree with this.

Same thing happen to me yesterday, had a 2 orange buffer and died. Have a 1 and a half orange buffer now. Typically if that happened like 2 days ago, I would have been afraid of dying again and deleveling, not the case now I guess.

[Bumamgar]

Death should result in a 10% XP hit for most levels. Slightly more if you die the level after a hell level.

Grouping with people at different levels or with class/race XP penalties will result in an uneven XP split, with a larger share going to the higher level party members. The more uneven the group makeup, the more noticeable this will be (ie: a level 34 grouped with a level 50 will receive only a small portion of the XP per mob)

[Stickyfingers]

So let me get this right...

You guys aren't happy you're only losing 10% instead of 24%?

:eek:

Who said that? lol

[Hidn]

That sounds perfectly logical Bum. However, a lvl 35 should not be moving through his level at the same rate as a lvl 34. Which was the case in MM yesterday.

[Bumamgar]

That sounds perfectly logical Bum. However, a lvl 35 should not be moving through his level at the same rate as a lvl 34. Which was the case in MM yesterday.

Actually, someone in a hell level needs more XP to level, so they get a larger slice of the XP pie per mob, just like someone with a race/class penalty.

This is classic per producers letters and other sources: friends grouping together should earn XP at approximately the same rate regardless of class/race/hell level penalties so that friends can group together from level 1 to level 50.

[Droxx]

So let me get this right...

You guys aren't happy you're only losing 10% instead of 24%?

:eek:

I kind of enjoy it.
However, it should be an indicator that something is funny with exp formulas recently.
One day you lose 24% exp. The next you lose 10% exp.

By the same token, I've noticed that exp seems funny grouping as well.

Duoing camp_01 with a 44 ranger last week yielded 1 yellow at level 50 every 30 minutes.
Duoing camp_01 with a now 46 ranger yesterday yielded 1 yellow at level 50 every 2 hours.
The only thing that changed was the ranger's level. The kill rate remained the same (the camp was cleared in the time before it began to respawn).

By Bum's logic, however, I SHOULD be getting less exp as the ranger levels up, due to the level gap closing, however I wouldn't expect the experience to cut to a quarter of the previous rate.

[Ihealyou]

This is classic per producers letters and other sources: friends grouping together should earn XP at approximately the same rate regardless of class/race/hell level penalties so that friends can group together from level 1 to level 50.

Does this only work by decreasing the amount of xp gained, or can it increase it too? If I group with five halfling warriors, will they all receive penalties to match my xp rate, or will I receive a bonus?

[Bumamgar]

I kind of enjoy it.
However, it should be an indicator that something is funny with exp formulas recently.
One day you lose 24% exp. The next you lose 10% exp.

By the same token, I've noticed that exp seems funny grouping as well.

Duoing camp_01 with a 44 ranger last week yielded 1 yellow at level 50 every 30 minutes.
Duoing camp_01 with a now 46 ranger yesterday yielded 1 yellow at level 50 every 2 hours.
The only thing that changed was the ranger's level. The kill rate remained the same (the camp was cleared in the time before it began to respawn).

By Bum's logic, however, I SHOULD be getting less exp as the ranger levels up, due to the level gap closing, however I wouldn't expect the experience to cut to a quarter of the previous rate.

Nothing "funny" is going on. XP was simply fixed during a patch the other night :)

Also, keep in mind that mobs that are significantly lower level than you will yield less reward due to the ease at which they can be defeated.

[Droxx]

Nothing "funny" is going on. XP was simply fixed during a patch the other night :)

Also, keep in mind that mobs that are significantly lower level than you will yield less reward due to the ease at which they can be defeated.

I had no idea that the exp patch was put in. That makes tons more sense.

[Bumamgar]

Does this only work by decreasing the amount of xp gained, or can it increase it too? If I group with five halfling warriors, will they all receive penalties to match my xp rate, or will I receive a bonus?

Both :)

The size of the XP pie doesn't change based on group composition, but if, for example, you duo with a halfling warrior, they might get 40% of the pie and you get 60% of the pie.

* numbers for illustrative purposes only, not to be considered actual values

[VincentVolaju]

So is this like an EXP Buff to race's with EXP penalties basically? Like now when they group with normal people, they get more EXP per kill then before, and the people who dont have exp penalties are getting less per kill?

Like its basically over the same amount of exp per kill, just who gets what is shifted around a little differently according to who has the worst / best EXP modifiers, so that everyone in the group gets an "as close to even" amount as possible?

[feanan]

sounds like a good reason to not have hybrids in your group, or people in hell levels, as it sounds like others are being penalized for someone elses exp penalty.

now this reminds me of the old eq. stealth experience patch with no patch notes. =)

Actually, someone in a hell level needs more XP to level, so they get a larger slice of the XP pie per mob, just like someone with a race/class penalty.

This is classic per producers letters and other sources: friends grouping together should earn XP at approximately the same rate regardless of class/race/hell level penalties so that friends can group together from level 1 to level 50.

[Bumamgar]

sounds like a good reason to not have hybrids in your group, or people in hell levels, as it sounds like others are being penalized for someone elses exp penalty.
Shared XP penalties in a group are classic :)

[VincentVolaju]

sounds like a good reason to not have hybrids in your group, or people in hell levels, as it sounds like others are being penalized for someone elses exp penalty.

I was thinking something similar like, will this make having warrior tanks now more in demand? Not only because they don't have the 40% penalty, but on top of that they actually have an exp bonus as well? Hmmm =D

[Oogmog]

Actually, someone in a hell level needs more XP to level, so they get a larger slice of the XP pie per mob, just like someone with a race/class penalty.

This is classic per producers letters and other sources: friends grouping together should earn XP at approximately the same rate regardless of class/race/hell level penalties so that friends can group together from level 1 to level 50.

Just for clarification, because I'm not sure I follow what you're saying ... If you have someone that is level 45 in your group, your entire group will level the same rate regardless because they are consuming a larger portion of the experience to compensate for their hell level? I mean, on classic, say someone just hit 45 and someone just hit 43... the person that hit 43 would ding 45 about the same time as the person that was 45 hit 46. That was the reason people dreaded hell levels so bad, it made it bad on that individual, not the entire group. This goes for levels 51, 54, and especially 59... no way people grouped with someone @ 59 moved at the same extremely slow rate as everyone else. If I've taken what you've said out of context please correct me but that's how I took what you said.

EDIT: I stand corrected, did some research. However, when grouped today with just a warrior and cleric, it seemed the EXP gain was much less than before so I'm not sure what that issue is. Duo is now painfully slow as well.

[feanan]

now that this has come up, i definitely remember the group sharing the exp penalties. which ended up being removed in velious, because they realized that its stupid :)

but i don't remember the same being true for hell levels. but what do i know, i spent most of my time soloing as a druid :)

[VincentVolaju]

Well now I guess this could go both ways when it comes to War / SK / Pally grouping. You can have SK / Pally tank for ez aggro, but youll have to suffer some EXP penalties with them. Or you can take a Warrior and have no EXP penalties. I thinks this will put Warriors a little more in demand now rather then most people blowing them off for SKs / Pally tanks. But at the same time, make SKs / Pallys life a little easier because there leveling faster now when in a group from getting the majority of the exp per kill.

[Aeolwind]

now this reminds me of the old eq. stealth experience patch with no patch notes. =)

They'll be up shortly. I think Rogean just forgot =o.

And you think that little old me would stealth patch something? Pshaw.

[Oogmog]

Also I am curious, after reading further, is the 2% per additional member in effect right now as well? If not, it may help battle these exp woes (Because that was classic as well)

[Bumamgar]

Also I am curious, after reading further, is the 2% per additional member in effect right now as well? If not, it may help battle these exp woes (Because that was classic as well)
Yes, this was fixed as well.

Prior to the changes, the group XP bonus was broken and giving out a 10% bonus for being grouped regardless of the number of members (ie: 2 man group got a 10% bonus per kill and so did a 6 man group).

Now it's the correct 2% per member beyond the first, capping at 10% for a full 6 man group. (ie: 2% per kill for a two man group, 4% per kill for a three man group, 6% for 4, 8% for 5 and 10% for six)

So 2 man groups earn 8% less XP per kill than they did before the patch and 6 man groups earn the same XP per kill that they did before the patch.

[Oogmog]

Well as much as I personally dislike the changes, I knew deep down the group leveling was too fast and brought it up many times and everyone discounted it as people "knowing how to play better and where to fight" aka folks being more efficient. I do wonder how much of an effect this will have on rangers, bards, monks and even SK/Pals. I am just curious though, I've been reading this post by Verant.. in no way does it mention hell levels distributing exp throughout the group as far as a penalty. Since levels are based off a total amount of experience, was this an oversight or do hell levels not generate a penalty for the group but in fact it's just an extremely longer level for the person in it?

[VincentVolaju]

I do wonder how much of an effect this will have on rangers, bards, monks and even SK/Pals

Itll be good for them, they will be leveling faster now. Assuming the groups want them >< lol

[Oogmog]

haha that's what I was getting at;)

[VincentVolaju]

To be honest, I don't mind the changes all that much. It can be good or bad depending on the way you look at it really. However, I can say earlier I was in a group with an SK and exp was kinda slow, but it was decent. Im in a group right now with no monk or SK, and I have gained just as much exp in prob half the time.

So when I am grouping now in the future, I am pretty sure one of the first questions I ask is "What class's so far in the group?" lol =P

[Dantes]

I probably wouldn't even notice a change if it weren't for this thread. Do yourselves a favor and stop looking at the bar :) I wouldn't want to allow an experience penalty determine who I group with. Who cares?

[VincentVolaju]

I probably wouldn't even notice a change if it weren't for this thread. Do yourselves a favor and stop looking at the bar :) I wouldn't want to allow an experience penalty determine who I group with. Who cares?

I look after every kill....and I hate myself for it, but I cant help it!!! =( FML.

[Amra]

I don't think SK/Pally will have that much of a problem as everyone always needs a tank, but whats the point of partying with a ranger or bard? Personally unless they were really geared for their levels aka twinks whats the point of bringing said classes?

I know after reading this I don't really wanna group with either of those utility melee dps classes if I didn't have too. Not saying no one will group with them, but if you have a choice between ranger/rogue or bard/enchanter I think most people would pick the later to forgo any xp they might lose.

[Dantes]

What if they tell really great jokes in group chat?

[xinux]

Here is a really good link and explanation of the exp changes they did after velious was released.

http://everquest.allakhazam.com/editorial/011401_EQ_Producers_letter.html


I like this quote from it
"Furthermore, sharing of penalties causes people to reject potential group members on the basis of them "sucking" too much experience. "

[Combo]

That's also when they decided to get rid of class XP penalties, which made perfect sense since the "Hybrid" classes were actually pretty low-powered.

If anything, Mages and Necromancers need the 40% penalty.

[xinux]

Then they finally got around to getting rid of race based exp penalties 5 years later.


September 19, 2006

*** Miscellaneous ***

- Race based experience penalties have been removed.

[Sarkhan]

Here is a really good link and explanation of the exp changes they did after velious was released.

http://everquest.allakhazam.com/editorial/011401_EQ_Producers_letter.html


I like this quote from it
"Furthermore, sharing of penalties causes people to reject potential group members on the basis of them "sucking" too much experience. "

Hmm that is a very interesting post, thanks for the link!
I generally don't play Hybrid classes so it does not affect me much (except when i group with them >.< ) but i wonder if that will give people to argue saying Class penalties were never fully thought out and just a detriment to the game which were eventually removed still in classic???

Just in case people too lazy to click link i'll highlight

1. Race-based penalties are appropriate. An ogre, for instance, does indeed make a better warrior than a halfling. It is not so little that the faction and size problems make up for it, and not so much that it is really unbalancing at upper levels, but enough that the penalty should apply. Secondly, the penalty is not so severe (compared with class-based penalties) that it would cause groups to break up on the journey from one to sixty due to level differences.

2. Class-based penalties are not appropriate. Classes are roughly equivalent in power throughout the level ranges, and the versatility does not make up for that penalty. In fact, the majority of changes made to classes in the name of balance in the last year were based on the assumption that, at the high end, each class should still be roughly as needed and balanced as any other.

3. Penalties, in any form, should not be shared with the group. Players know that no one class is immensely more powerful/valuable than another, and as such it is not fair to ask them to share a burden. If classes with penalties were really more powerful or valuable than the other classes, then it might be right, but that isn't the case here. Furthermore, sharing of penalties causes people to reject potential group members on the basis of them "sucking" too much experience.

4. We're going to fix it.

5. Class-based experience bonuses (which warriors and rogues get) are also not appropriate, as they cannot be so if penalties are not. However, we've decided to leave this as-is, since the bonus is not so severe as to be unbalancing. Bottom line: we don't feel the bonus is enough to warrant a fix that could be interpreted as a 'nerf'.

... Anyways, thanks for the link!

[utenan]

So a certain class has an exp penalty, because in theory, they are superior..?? But when the class groups, the class gets more xp to counter the penalty, but everyone else gets less exp....? So instead of the class with the penalty recieving less exp, they are getting more?? This seems illogical lol, unless I am miss interpreting what everyone has said : D Are race penalties included as well?

[Dersk]

So a certain class has an exp penalty, because in theory, they are superior..??

I think it's a throwback to dungeons and dragons with multiclassing.

[Sarkhan]

I think it's a throwback to dungeons and dragons with multiclassing.

Ya, I think that might have been it. Original class penalty given not because of it's "superiority" but more because that's how things used to be. Getting spells/skills from two different classes caused you to be "special" and get penalties... In time the view probably switched and such. Whether or not exp penalties for classes ever actually balanced stuff I have no idea..

In fact this whole post is just speculation haha.

[utenan]

Wasn't really the point I was trying to make.... : /

[Sarkhan]

Sorry, was more talking to myself outloud... I should stop that...

yes, race penalties would get factored in along with class penalties

[mimixownzall]

Shared XP penalties in a group are classic :)

Yes, and were removed once the secret was out (the much greater population did not know that it was a group shared penalty till some time after kunark release). Hybrids did not make a group so strong as to warrant such a huge penalty, and no one was grouping with, which is already being seen. I have already been refused to group on my SK due to the exp penalty 5 times today in a short time. I simply can not find a group. Guess what... /bye SK.

I spent a better part of my day at work tonight trying to find the epic post I read back in the day where a GM slipped out that the penalty was shared in group, but to no avail.

I mean, if you're going to make it "classic" then make it classic:

-I want my sword of runes to proc while in the hands of an NPC.
-I want my pet to be able to tank a mob with a rogue in melee range and not getting hit. (this was an easy-out fix for verant in SoV when pets were dying a lot due to getting a lot of aggro; they made it where if a PC was in melee range it would attack the PC with no exception).
-Mobs/pets that don't disappear into the wall/drop through the floor and aggro the entire zone.

I mean, there is a reason you kept the Vellious UI and didn't revert to the old one: it was an improvement to the game and made it more enjoyable. .

[Gorgetrapper]

Well in that case Mimi, I want pets to take 50% exp if they do 50% damage to the NPCs.

On the note of exp being shared/ruined in groups, guess I won't be grouping with any SKs, Pallies, Bards or Rangers anymore.

[Sarkhan]

To Mimi...

I'm not sure if this affects some of the things you've said, but there are many issues that just can't be changed (without spending incredible amounts of time) that are due to the client they are running. They are using a version of EQ Emu but modded it but some things just can't be changed unless they want to spend LOTS of time which could be better spent other places.

[mimixownzall]

Well in that case Mimi, I want pets to take 50% exp if they do 50% damage to the NPCs.

On the note of exp being shared/ruined in groups, guess I won't be grouping with any SKs, Pallies, Bards or Rangers anymore.

I do more dmg than my pet, so I don't care really. And when did they do that change? Oh yea... that was after SoV

[Sarkhan]

Hmm, i swear, any more posts and this thing could be thrown into the "Rants/Flames" section XD

[mimixownzall]

To Mimi...

I'm not sure if this affects some of the things you've said, but there are many issues that just can't be changed (without spending incredible amounts of time) that are due to the client they are running. They are using a version of EQ Emu but modded it but some things just can't be changed unless they want to spend LOTS of time which could be better spent other places.

Yeah, I guess screwing over Hybrids is included in the latter.

[Gorgetrapper]

I do more dmg than my pet, so I don't care really. And when did they do that change? Oh yea... that was after SoV

I don't know exactly if you're trying to say if the change of pets doing over 50% damage was done after velious, or whatever.. but I've already proven that when pets do 50% damage, they take 50% exp was during or before Kunark.

[mimixownzall]

I don't know exactly if you're trying to say if the change of pets doing over 50% damage was done after velious, or whatever.. but I've already proven that when pets do 50% damage, they take 50% exp was during or before Kunark.

K show it again. Also, I do more dmg than my pet, so I really don't care. Now, imagine if my entire group took that same amount of penalty hit. That would be lame, which applies here.

[Gorgetrapper]

http://www.project1999.org/forums/showthread.php?t=10603

[BeelzeBob]

Shared XP penalties in a group are classic :)

Thanks for coming out and verifying this. Sadly, it does affect my grouping choices.

[zs3000]

Thanks for coming out and verifying this. Sadly, it does affect my grouping choices.

I have to agree with this. Great, that's fine that it's classic, and it's fine that it's in the game. I just won't invite Paladins, SK's, Bards, or Rangers to any group I have control of *shrug*.

[Gorgetrapper]

I have to agree with this. Great, that's fine that it's classic, and it's fine that it's in the game. I just won't invite Paladins, SK's, Bards, or Rangers to any group I have control of *shrug*.

Yup, already talked to a bunch of people in my groups, they agree also that they wont' be grouping with SKs, Pallies, Rangers or bards... even monks too because of the 20% penalty they get.

[Arriva]

Everquest is the greatest, they sure know what they were doing back then.

[Sarkhan]

Sounds like we have a bunch of "L337 Ub3r lvl3rz" that like to "pWnz mobz f@s7" on this board...
Though it hurts us, it is beneficial for hybrids to group because it will help negate some of their exp penalty.

W/e, I won't be turning away people just because I'm too selfish for my own experience.. A group is for the betterment and enjoyment of everyone and I'm certainly not the one to look at my exp bar after every kill... I still do once in a while, but its not my soul focus of playing this game.

[utenan]

Sounds like we have a bunch of "L337 Ub3r lvl3rz" that like to "pWnz mobz f@s7" on this board...
Though it hurts us, it is beneficial for hybrids to group because it will help negate some of their exp penalty.

W/e, I won't be turning away people just because I'm too selfish for my own experience.. A group is for the betterment and enjoyment of everyone and I'm certainly not the one to look at my exp bar after every kill... I still do once in a while, but its not my soul focus of playing this game.

This.
Actually i'll take it one step further and only group with hybrids! : D

[Smoo]

The exp does seem a lot slower.. I don't expect it to be fast but this is to slow and I don't believe classic was quite like this..

Not fun.

[Ropethunder]

Welcome to EQ classic! :)

[Maurk]

so when I, a (level 28) Paladin, duos with a 27 druid, I am in fact getting more of the xp?

in that case would the druid be much better off soloing?

if so then will I be doomed to be sad and lonely?

oh and does anyone here use ninjavideo?? its not working, dont know if its my internet..
im sad I have no tv today :[

this makes me lonely..

Edit: okay I realize higher levels get more exp, but assume we are BOTH level 28..

[EvilMallet]

druids need groups until 34 :P

[Smuuglie]

Low level exp is ridiculous... close to half a blue for an even con kill at level 2 with no exp malus (eru mage) This is dumb...
This is probably going to make a lot of newcomers leave...

[Cronoclops]

Was playing an alt and grouped with a pally 2 levels below me.We were pulling dark blue mobs. Exp bar was hardly moving even though we were chain pulling. Everyone in the group <which was full> seemded to notice the same. Pally left bar started moving nicely with replacement warrior. Not much point in grouping with a hybrids now it seems. Even though it's classic it doesn't seem to be a healthy thing for the game.

[SpartanEQ]

Low level exp is ridiculous... close to half a blue for an even con kill at level 2 with no exp malus (eru mage) This is dumb...
This is probably going to make a lot of newcomers leave...

I seem to remember lvl 2 or 3 being slow, but once I got past that mini Hell level, it went much faster. I don't know what race/class you are, but obviously a troll sk would lvl even a bit slower. Like I said though, one of those early lvls seemed slow to me, but I was lvl 5 or 6 before I knew it.

I have alt-itis and have created a new character about once per month for the last 4 months and the exp gain seems the same to me now as it did 4 months ago.

[Modus]

One thing to realize, for these mobs to even catch players running normally: Player speed 1, Mob speed 1.71. At 1.70 if you take off running while in melee range the mob can hit you 1 time possibly twice depending on conditions, then never even get close again even without strafing/jumping.

In classic, jumping twice would put enough distance between you and a chasing mob for that mob to never hit you again, unless you bumped terrain or lagged.

You could hit an orc pawn on one end of EC, run off and jump two times, and that orc would never strike you again as you ran all the way to WC zoneline. On P99, mobs runs significantly faster than "normal" character run speed. This is not classic.

[Tronjer]

Can't play all day anymore due to work restrictions, but with with the previous knowledge about EQ I most likely hit max level in 3-4 months. Should be perfect for Kunark.

So from my point of view the exp rate is ok. Don't want to get bored while waiting for expansion release.

[Smuuglie]

I seem to remember lvl 2 or 3 being slow, but once I got past that mini Hell level, it went much faster. I don't know what race/class you are, but obviously a troll sk would lvl even a bit slower. Like I said though, one of those early lvls seemed slow to me, but I was lvl 5 or 6 before I knew it.

I have alt-itis and have created a new character about once per month for the last 4 months and the exp gain seems the same to me now as it did 4 months ago.

I didnt get a blue for killing a fire beetle at level 2 in an exp bonus zone on my paladin.... and my paladin had the exp malus.
As I've stated, I'm an erudite mage, so no exp minus there....

[BeelzeBob]

As I've stated, I'm an erudite mage, so no exp minus there....

Int casters are at -10%

[Landis]

i feel really bad for rangers

[fastboy21]

The Group Exp Penalties change is a classic example (pun intended) of something that was in classic and was not a good idea. Eventually, in SoV, the devs changed this because they got saw the problem of groups rejecting certain classes because of it.

My comments:
1. This is a classic server, so in the pure mission of the server it should be included.
2. This change will make the server "more classic".
3. This change will disgruntle many players for a variety of reasons.

Over all, I think this change does more bad than good to the community. While it certainly makes the server more classic, it is going to have a greater net negative impact on groups and individuals.

I also think, from a fair-play point of view, that it is not the most fair decision to spring this major change on the community without discussing it first.

I was very impressed with the community discussion regarding keeping/removing the global channel. The dev team here, in that case, actually did a better job of communicating, discussing, and explaining the change than any PAID mmo I have ever played. I recall thinking, even though I was on the side of the debate to keep OOC, that I understood and felt included in the dialog well before the change took place and, therefore, felt fine about the change when it finally came.

With this change, I feel like it was just thrown at the community. It's your play pen so I respect the right for you to change what you like whenever you like, but it would have been a good thing for the community for you to have handled it more like the global chat channel example imo.

***
On top of all that, I also think you have gotten the formula wrong/coded it wrong. I was grped for 3 hours last night in MM at gy, and got 4 blues during that whole time. I recall 1 hour per blue only going from 59 to 60. We were pulling and killing the entire time. There is something wrong here. Was this tested well enough and long enough? Did the GM who made the changes sufficiently tap the community as a resource to make sure the new calculation was accurate?

It feels like this was a quick shot from the hip...and its wayyyy too important to implement that way.

[Bumamgar]

On top of all that, I also think you have gotten the formula wrong/coded it wrong. I was grped for 3 hours last night in MM at gy, and got 4 blues during that whole time. I recall 1 hour per blue only going from 59 to 60. We were pulling and killing the entire time. There is something wrong here. Was this tested well enough and long enough? Did the GM who made the changes sufficiently tap the community as a resource to make sure the new calculation was accurate?
What class/race/level were each of the members of your party? What con/level were the mobs you were killing?

The base XP formula was not changed. A 20th level mob still gives the same XP it used to give. A Human Cleric still needs the same amount of XP to ding each level as they used to.

[Nlaar]

I am quite disappointed by all of this.

As a level 35 SK life is difficult enough as it is.

No transportation spells. No walking speed spells (SoW, Selos). A 40% exp penalty. Not great dps. No Gate spell. No bind spell.

Above all else: constantly dying while the casters in the group safely gate out and then I get to walk X zones to get back to my corpse and regroup.

Despite all of this, despite dealing with lazy casters all the time, I was still ready and willing to go through all the BS because I simply love playing a tank class. Many of you have seen me around lately (just started playing ~3 weeks ago or so) and I like to think that my participation in groups has had a positive effect on everyone. I try to keep everyone in the group happy and am always on the "reorganizing" end of a group when replacements are needed. In other words: I also love to group.

And.... this is the thanks I get for playing a class that isn't even unbalanced. I had a 35 Mage almost not join the group as a replacement last night because of me. Given the tone of this thread, I am expecting several more rejections. Great.

According to the links posted, all of this was changed (hybrids no longer soaked up exp) mid Vel. because the devs realized that they had made an oversight. Can we learn from history and make the changes right now?

[Harmonicdeth]

Being a Half Elf bard with a 40% negative XP run, it is hard for me to find groups. I do remember it being hell to level in old EQ live from back in 1999-2000. But, I don't remember it being this hard to level.

Purists will bitch, because they themselves have leveled up and gotten where they are this way. Part timers like me will bitch because its impossible to level appropriately.

I just want to enjoy places I used to, but I don't know honestly if I have the time to enjoy them if I level this slow.

I might just make a Warrior and be done with the penalty.

Flame me all you want, that's just how I feel, and I have even noticed that with people I have grouped with recently.

[Landis]

I was in your group for a little while last night Nlaar. You're a great SK and the group was very smooth... and exp crawled. Almost two hours and less than a yellow. It's sad.

(for the record that's not why I left, I did have to get up for work this morning!)

[Kreigore]

Why were there no patch notes regarding the XP rates?

You knew people were going to catch on and say something about it.

What's the purpose of the Test server if it isn't utilized to test game changing elements?

[fastboy21]

major change, not tested long enough, never put before the community, implemented too soon without even a patch note.

if you want a recipe for how to aggravate the community you have one.

[Ihealyou]

I played classic for several years, and I never had a max level character. I started around velious, and was level 59 by the time the cap was 75. Granted, I probably played a lot less back then, and I was definitely a huge noob, but I always remembered leveling being a slow process. Having a main in the 30s or 40s didn't mean that you started playing 3 weeks ago.

I agree that leveling sucks now, but it feels a lot closer to how I remember it. Once people chill out, I'm sure SKs, pallies and bards will be fine getting groups. They all bring a lot to the table that a warrior or whatever cannot. I'd rather play with good players than a bunch of halfing warriors and rogues anyways.

The game may seem like a race to 50, but its really about the journey. I don't raid, so I barely play my 50 cleric anymore. Even the people who raid spend a lot of their time sitting around waiting for respawns. Its a lot more fun to kill crocs in oasis than it is to sit in EC showing off how leet your level 50 is.

[Smuuglie]

Its a lot more fun to kill crocs in oasis than it is to sit in EC showing off how leet your level 50 is.

Thats what YOUUUUU think D:

[Bumamgar]

Why were there no patch notes regarding the XP rates?

You knew people were going to catch on and say something about it.

What's the purpose of the Test server if it isn't utilized to test game changing elements?

http://www.project1999.org/forums/showthread.php?t=10530

[Kreigore]

http://www.project1999.org/forums/showthread.php?t=10530

Read it when it was posted, but it was never specifically mentioned that the changes were made on the live P99 server -- only the Test server.

[fastboy21]

Bum,

With all due respect, how long was it on test? how many ppl tested it? the purpose of test servers isn't just to say to the community, "we tested it, you had your chance" (ala Silius over at Vanguard), but to actually get the changes working properly before hitting live.

Additionally, it was pushed to live from test without any patch notes, or am i wrong about this?

Anyways, I've said it so many posts that I've made about the devs here: I have tremendous respect and thanks for the work you do.

In this case, I just think you could have sold the community on the changes if you had introduced them in a more open way. I guess you have your reasons for doing it this way, and I will respect that.

[Nlaar]

http://www.project1999.org/forums/showthread.php?t=10530

From the link you shared:

The exp changes are to make sure nothing, like Bumamgar said, would ding you 11 levels in 1 kill. You'll most likely not notice a change at all. There were some subtle changes to make of already existing mechanics.



"subtle changes." Ha!! That whole thread was vague with most of the comments being about the AC changes.

I would hardly say that announcing a game changing group experience penalty in that poorly worded and vague thread constitutes a perfectly fine warning for the rest of community.

[Arriva]

Good gameplay = more players = more work.

So we go backwards instead.

[Danth]

I play hybrid characters exclusively. I support this change and wish it had been present since the server opened. It's hell trying to stay the same level as my friends with the broken system; at least now that won't be an issue. Leveling my Paladin to 50 was a constant headache, trying to stay roughly even with the wife's character. To heck with that, it wasn't fun, wasn't sensible, and wasn't classic. No advantages, just nuisance.

If it was up to me, I wouldn't have had those class/race penalties at all--they're dumb (I'd keep the good, throw away the bad)--but if they're going to be present, do 'em right. That's what the fixed experience setup does. The prior system was half-assed, neither logical *nor* classic, and as such--all bad, the worst of both sides.

Some groups won't take penalized races/classes due to that. Once again, a dumb feature of EQ, but it's classic. Still beats having to play half again as much as my friends to keep up (or worse, watching them have to kill themselves repeatedly).

Unfortunately this change, which should have been working from the start or very early on, is only being applied after ~9 months. I have mixed feelings on that, but I suppose 'better late than never'.

Danth

[Amra]

Purists will bitch, because they themselves have leveled up and gotten where they are this way. Part timers like me will bitch because its impossible to level appropriately.


I think this quote is funny cause all the "Purists" Already have a 50 or multiple 50s cause this server has been out almost a year with the xp the other way. So why change it so late? I just started here as well and I don't remember exactly how fast I leveled the first time around. It does feel slower, but why punish the new player population when there are already so many max levels on the server?

[zeval31]

I certainly remember the first levels being much faster in EQ. Took about 2 hours to get to level4, I know this I have alt-itis too.
I made a bunch of lowbies this time around and level 2-3-4 are really slower.

My second point is, what's the point in having xp penalties on certain race and class if said class/race get more xp than the other, ultimately reversing the penalty.

[rioisk]

All I know is I'm no longer playing my pally/bard alt or grouping with classes with penalties. My halfling druid was grouped with an SK and a bard last night in oasis and the xp did not move per kill....and this is red crocs.

Bard/SK leave, rogue + warrior join. Guess what? Smooth sailing.







I think it's ridiculous. Absolutely ridiculous that devs put in things like xp penalties but don't leave in known bugs like sword of runes proccing on all mobs or being able to exploit pathing to ones advantage. I'm OKAY with leaving in the negative features of the game.......but for christ sake leave in the good features too that made experience players have an advantage.

[Danth]

Keep in mind that some of those 'purists' who started in October and have a character at 50 (such as myself) leveled *slower* than they would have otherwise, due to experience not being correctly averaged out.

EQ isn't well-suited for rushing to the top anyway. If you want that, you're playing the wrong game. There's practically nothing fun to do at 50 (unless you like sitting on Nagafen's spawn point for 12 hour shifts), hence why some of those guys have multiple 50's to begin with. Don't expect Kunark to fix that issue, either, because it won't.

Low levels, for some strange reason, always did seem extremely slow on P99; certainly I could never do 1-7/8 on P99 at the same rate my many low-leveled character did during the 'classic' era. I'm unsure why that's the case exactly. The general rule since the server opened has been, 'don't kill blues at low levels if you can help it.'

------------------------------

"My second point is, what's the point in having xp penalties on certain race and class if said class/race get more xp than the other, ultimately reversing the penalty."

Sony did that because it was found, during EQ's beta, that players of penalzied classes couldn't keep up with their friends otherwise. The idea--rubbish, as we all know--was that the shared penalty was still appropriate since the penalized classes added more to their groups. Maybe it even would have made sense if said penalized classes didn't include some of the weakest classes in the game (hello, rangers!). That's EQ for you though. That being said, I'll take a dumb but classic feature over the previous implementation, which was both dumb and NOT classic.

Danth

[holkan]

Keep in mind that some of those 'purists' who started in October and have a character at 50 (such as myself) leveled *slower* than they would have otherwise, due to experience not being correctly averaged out.

EQ isn't well-suited for rushing to the top anyway. If you want that, you're playing the wrong game. There's practically nothing fun to do at 50 (unless you like sitting on Nagafen's spawn point for 12 hour shifts), hence why some of those guys have multiple 50's to begin with. Don't expect Kunark to fix that issue, either, because it won't.

Danth

This is a good point I have a 50 and I hardly log on it anymore so it taking longer to get to level isn't necessarily a bad thing especially with kunark so far away.

[Landis]

There's practically nothing fun to do at 50

at 50, you have/can get the resources to twink out your alts

[Ripcord]

Guess its back to soloing light blues and greens cuz no one will want a ranger, I will still get from 40 to 50 before kunark but its gonna be a close call!

[azeth]

There's practically nothing fun to do at 50 (unless you like sitting on Nagafen's spawn point for 12 hour shifts), hence why some of those guys have multiple 50's to begin with. Don't expect Kunark to fix that issue, either, because it won't.

I def. disagree Danth. Kunark is an enormous expansion. Yes capping max level may only take a month (and beyond for some) I don't know if i need to illustrate Kunarks content to the community to make the point that if you run out of stuff to do, you're not looking very hard!

I will give you this though, I fully plan on doing Kunark content on a twinked character so a lot of the content I'm thinking of isn't 50 friendly.

edit: i need to get out of fohguild.org anger mode

[Danth]

I fully expect it to take me more than two weeks to do 50-60. If I'm remembering correctly, the level curve for 50-60 was roughly the same as for the entirety of 1-49 or something to that effect. Beyond leveling, Kunark has about one and a half dedicated raid zones (VP and the harder portion of Sky), a fair number of random targets elsewhere, and...not much more. For the number of guilds active on P99, that's not a whole lot to keep them occupied, though the increased number of static spawns may preclude the 'camp it' mentality that's so plagued the high-end scene on P99 thus far.

That being said, if you disagree with my assessment, no problem. We're talking in fairly relative terms anyhow so I fully respect an opposing viewpoint. Particularly Kunark is a good time for those players who enjoyed kunark-style features (iksars, etc).

Danth

[Dantes]

Some folks made decisions on what class/race to play based on exp penalties. My decision was related in part to that, I was dissuaded from going Troll or Ogre because of the penalty. If that penalty doesn't exist or is broken -- then anybody who picked a race or class based on what we know about those penalties from classic was wrong.

[fastboy21]

I fully expect it to take me more than two weeks to do 50-60. If I'm remembering correctly, the level curve for 50-60 was roughly the same as for the entirety of 1-49 or something to that effect. Beyond leveling, Kunark has about one and a half dedicated raid zones (VP and the harder portion of Sky), a fair number of random targets elsewhere, and...not much more. For the number of guilds active on P99, that's not a whole lot to keep them occupied, though the increased number of static spawns may preclude the 'camp it' mentality that's so plagued the high-end scene on P99 thus far.

That being said, if you disagree with my assessment, no problem. We're talking in fairly relative terms anyhow so I fully respect an opposing viewpoint. Particularly Kunark is a good time for those players who enjoyed kunark-style features (iksars, etc).

Danth

Just because there aren't dedicated raid zones doesn't mean there isn't much to do...Epics, dragon raids, VP key, VP, spell farming, faction, etc...there is tons more to do in Kunark than there was in old world....and even in old world, unless you are satisfied with just having a bare bones lvl 50 there was tons to do.

[Maurk]

you know whats not classic?
being able to link items in EQ
this is unacceptable.

*sarcasm off*

this sorta sucks cause never before had I been rejected to groups like this.
this made me very sad
and lonely...
but its what the devs want, suppose they cant make everyone happy..

well... off to soloing things.. n stuff

/sad cheer

[Isphet]

Both Hybrids and players in hell levels are going to be completely ostracized from most pick-up groups with this code in. It's already happening. Especially hell level players.

[Harmonicdeth]

I think this quote is funny cause all the "Purists" Already have a 50 or multiple 50s cause this server has been out almost a year with the xp the other way. So why change it so late? I just started here as well and I don't remember exactly how fast I leveled the first time around. It does feel slower, but why punish the new player population when there are already so many max levels on the server?

Wait what?

Maybe I am drunk or something, but it seems your contradict yourself.

[Maurk]

what really bites is that the whole point of me playing
is so me and my bro could duo to level 50.
now it seems were both better of soloing.
so now it seems like i should roll a new character

[holkan]

what really bites is that the whole point of me playing
is so me and my bro could duo to level 50.
now it seems were both better of soloing.
so now it seems like i should roll a new character

you can still duo to 50 albiet slower , but isnt the point to have fun together leveling up not race to the end alone and bored lol?

[Amra]

Wait what?

Maybe I am drunk or something, but it seems your contradict yourself.

I'm just saying why make this change now when so many people have gotten 50's on the old way of xp.

I didn't play a hybrid cause I don't have enough time to play to make up for xp penalty. I know leveling is part of the game and I'm having a fun time leveling. I just think its unfair to the new players coming in cause they are on even more of an un-leveled playing field trying to catch up with players that have been here for 9 months already.

[Braelyn]

I play a paladin and my friend plays a shadow knight :(

[Maurk]

you can still duo to 50 albiet slower , but isnt the point to have fun together leveling up not race to the end alone and bored lol?

ya but it takes hours longer in the duo then it does soloing for the same amount of exp.

FOR EXAMPLE
when me and my druid friend killed 12 tesch gnolls, i got the same exp from soloing just 3 avaik rooks. the rooks conned blue, the gnolls were conning white/yellow.

this is not right
HYBRIDS SHOULDN'T HAVE TO SOLO!!!!!!

this is shitty week for me - my favorite tv sites have been shut down by feds, now its simply too painful for me to play my paladin.

[holkan]

ya but it takes hours longer in the duo then it does soloing for the same amount of exp.

FOR EXAMPLE
when me and my druid friend killed 12 tesch gnolls, i got the same exp from soloing just 3 avaik rooks. the rooks conned blue, the gnolls were conning white/yellow.

this is not right
HYBRIDS SHOULDN'T HAVE TO SOLO!!!!!!

this is shitty week for me - my favorite tv sites have been shut down by feds, now its simply too painful for me to play my paladin.

I guess you'll just have to decide whats the most fun for you leveling with your friends slower or leveling by your self faster or re rolling or quitting.

[Maurk]

this is actually making me want to stop playing.
Im sorry but i had fun with my paladin, and playing with my bro.
now that its not worth it to duo im prbly gonna wait it out to see if things get better.
was fun while it lasted, but im not going to roll some frodo looking halfling cause then duo'ing is actually effective.
I know im bitching
but ya
im bitching.

I play paladins. next was going to play ranger for first time.
not gonna happen now.

[holkan]

this is actually making me want to stop playing.
Im sorry but i had fun with my paladin, and playing with my bro.
now that its not worth it to duo im prbly gonna wait it out to see if things get better.
was fun while it lasted, but im not going to roll some frodo looking halfling cause then duo'ing is actually effective.
I know im bitching
but ya
im bitching.

I play paladins. next was going to play ranger for first time.
not gonna happen now.

I fully understand your plight I was trying to help my friend who rolled an SK level and before i could just stick him in my group and let him leech some xp while he was afk to catch him up but thats no longer worth doing.

It sucks and classic eq definitely is not for everybody but it is what it is.

[Troluna]

this is actually making me want to stop playing.
Im sorry but i had fun with my paladin, and playing with my bro.
now that its not worth it to duo im prbly gonna wait it out to see if things get better.
was fun while it lasted, but im not going to roll some frodo looking halfling cause then duo'ing is actually effective.
I know im bitching
but ya
im bitching.

I play paladins. next was going to play ranger for first time.
not gonna happen now.

It's okay, you're better off but you won't realize this before you ding 50.

There is much better games out there now that P99 is being ruined step by step.

[Aeolwind]

Bye bullet!

[Extunarian]

It's okay, you're better off but you won't realize this before you ding 50.

There is much better games out there now that P99 is being ruined step by step.

One post wonder. Thanks for stopping by trolsomething.

[Gubb]

If you're bitching about a change that brings p99 more in line with classic eq, then I think you've missed the point.

Say, would you like a chocolate covered pretzel?

[Maurk]

well I for one am pretty damn sure this is not classic EXP..
I mean I dont have old archived videos n pics from classic
but I did level a Paladin to level 50,
and did so in a similar duo with a druid.
It was in no way as slow as it is now.

then again who the fack am I?
sigh... i love eq too much to ragequit.. guess ill just solo.. beg my bro for buffs while he kites.. so much for our dynamic duo super kiting fun... :[[

and yes I would like a chocolate pretzel...

[Aeolwind]

this is actually making me want to stop playing.
Im sorry but i had fun with my paladin, and playing with my bro.
now that its not worth it to duo im prbly gonna wait it out to see if things get better.
was fun while it lasted, but im not going to roll some frodo looking halfling cause then duo'ing is actually effective.
I know im bitching
but ya
im bitching.

I play paladins. next was going to play ranger for first time.
not gonna happen now.

We've implemented nothing that wasn't already planned: We fixed a bug (off by 1 table error) & implemented classic shared hybrid penalties & fixed another bug in group XP & fixed a bug that caused light blues to give more XP to a solo player than a red would to a full group. I call that a ton of broken stuff and 1 implemented classic feature.

But I do see why everyone sees it as one empire state building sized nerf bat. We just unbroke a ton of Sony's ideas & poor coding.

[Aeolwind]

One post wonder. Thanks for stopping by trolsomething.

That was Bullet....again....lol.

[nilbog]

What the fuck is this doing in Server Chat? If you want to complain about something, do it in Rants and Flames.

How dare we fix classic everquest mechanics! It's as if we were trying to create classic everquest or follow the mission goal of this server. Ludicrous!

How dare we make it so paladins and rangers don't level as fast as warriors! Those devs must think its 1999 or 2000 or something. If only they made the game easier on everyone. Maybe in 2004 a game will come along where paladins and hunters level at the same speed.

I leveled a half elf paladin to 60 on Erollisi Marr during these trying times known as classic. There's a price to pay for being a hybrid, and that price is a well-known feature of classic everquest.

Don't play a paladin now, and you won't have a superpowered melee class at the end of Velious. No worries.

[Stickyfingers]

Solo exp is slower than it was before. I made a new Necro, and was soloing Whites and Yellows yesterday, getting probably about 20% of the exp I would have before, so like an 80% drop.

[VincentVolaju]

But I do see why everyone sees it as one empire state building sized nerf bat. We just unbroke a ton of Sony's ideas & poor coding.

win

[mimixownzall]

I play hybrid characters exclusively. I support this change and wish it had been present since the server opened. It's hell trying to stay the same level as my friends with the broken system; at least now that won't be an issue. Leveling my Paladin to 50 was a constant headache, trying to stay roughly even with the wife's character. To heck with that, it wasn't fun, wasn't sensible, and wasn't classic. No advantages, just nuisance.

If it was up to me, I wouldn't have had those class/race penalties at all--they're dumb (I'd keep the good, throw away the bad)--but if they're going to be present, do 'em right. That's what the fixed experience setup does. The prior system was half-assed, neither logical *nor* classic, and as such--all bad, the worst of both sides.

Some groups won't take penalized races/classes due to that. Once again, a dumb feature of EQ, but it's classic. Still beats having to play half again as much as my friends to keep up (or worse, watching them have to kill themselves repeatedly).

Unfortunately this change, which should have been working from the start or very early on, is only being applied after ~9 months. I have mixed feelings on that, but I suppose 'better late than never'.

Danth

So you want to go from watching your friends out level you to getting in no groups at all... Check. This is what will happen when word spreads around.

"hey, why does my exp seem so slow?"
"you grouped with a hybrid?"
"yes"
"that's your problem, shared group exp penalty"
"oh, I guess no more groups with hybrids in them"

[Maurk]

I guess im just upset cause xp wasnt so bad when I duo'd with my bro.
now its worse then soloing
but if this is how it was truly supposed to be
then jokes on me.
I thought briefly, "im going to make new char cuz im in nerd rage"
but dont have the heart to do so.

I shall grit my teeth and continue on with my paladin.

and hey answer my petition for my trivial surname change!!
:]

it haunts meee

[Aeolwind]

I guess im just upset cause xp wasnt so bad when I duo'd with my bro.
now its worse then soloing
but if this is how it was truly supposed to be
then jokes on me.
I thought briefly, "im going to make new char cuz im in nerd rage"
but dont have the heart to do so.

I shall grit my teeth and continue on with my paladin.

and hey answer my petition for my trivial surname change!!
:]

it haunts meee

Another part of that problem was fixed as well. One of the group bugs gave you flat 10% xp bonus as soon as the group was formed instead of scaling like it should have.

If you're online now I can flip on and fix it for you.

[Dantes]

Fuck that noise, I'll group with 5 rangers. Anybody who wouldn't group with somebody because of an experience penalty is a dick.

[Aeolwind]

Fuck that noise, I'll group with 5 rangers. Anybody who wouldn't group with somebody because of an experience penalty is a dick.

I like you.

[Alawen Everywhere]

Bye bullet!

God I love it so when Aeolwind goes on the warpath. I wish I didn't realize that eventually I'm going to step over the line and catch the hammer right upside my own head.

[Yoite]

Fuck that noise, I'll group with 5 rangers. Anybody who wouldn't group with somebody because of an experience penalty is a dick.

this is so true, i dont know why yall even gripe so much about all the crazy shit yall do when we are emulating a 11 year old game for the fun of it b/c we loved it.

i dont care how fast i lvl, or if i die from a bug, where else am i gonna play classic EQ?

[rioisk]

What the fuck is this doing in Server Chat? If you want to complain about something, do it in Rants and Flames.

How dare we fix classic everquest mechanics! It's as if we were trying to create classic everquest or follow the mission goal of this server. Ludicrous!

How dare we make it so paladins and rangers don't level as fast as warriors! Those devs must think its 1999 or 2000 or something. If only they made the game easier on everyone. Maybe in 2004 a game will come along where paladins and hunters level at the same speed.

I leveled a half elf paladin to 60 on Erollisi Marr during these trying times known as classic. There's a price to pay for being a hybrid, and that price is a well-known feature of classic everquest.

Don't play a paladin now, and you won't have a superpowered melee class at the end of Velious. No worries.


Fix magician proccing sword of runes on all mobs not just summoned and I'll agree with you 100%

[Xenephex]

Fix magician proccing sword of runes on all mobs not just summoned and I'll agree with you 100%
This has got to be my sister-in-law. I didn't even know you played this game.

[Hidn]

My original post was neither a rant or flame. I was asking a question tyvm.

[Combo]

Fuck that noise, I'll group with 5 rangers. Anybody who wouldn't group with somebody because of an experience penalty is a dick.

Please do this and make a stop-motion video of the XP bar. Guarenteed 5,000 hits on YouTube with that mofo.

Anyway, the cat's already out of the bag on the server about the fix. I figured it'd hurt my SK the worst -- but SKs can still get groups as they're the only class that can hold aggro to any degree prior to dual SSoY procs.

What it's really hurt is my Rogue. I can't solo on him short of begging for a full suite of Cleric/Druid AC buffs + a damage shield + chloro. That means I have to group, and inevitably every group has at least one (often more) hybrids in it. And the XP is pathetic.

So yeah, I'm absolutely /who-ing everyone in the group when I join it and leaving if there's a superfluous hybrid (Bard, Ranger, Monk at this level) present.

At the low level (pre-20), the classes that are getting driven away from even logging on are the non-hybrid non-soloers -- Rogues, Clerics, and Warriors. I haven't seen one of those in a group since the change was made.

[Aadill]

I am a Ranger.

[Ihealyou]

... if there's a superfluous hybrid (Bard, Ranger, Monk at this level) ...


Monks are hybrids of kick and punch?

[Goobles]

If I can recall correctly, paladin, ranger and sk penalties didn't apply to group exp rate - only individual xp rate.

[Combo]

If I can recall correctly, paladin, ranger and sk penalties didn't apply to group exp rate - only individual xp rate.

They applied to groups in classic up til a Velious patch when everyone ran the math and figured out the absolutely ridiculous mechanic existed and called for Verant's heads on pikes. Then Verant said "you're right, this is stupid and it's causing hybrids to get passed over in groups since the group doesn't want its xp gimped." And so it changed.

I personally hate the mechanic and am spreading word about it on the server in hopes the same thing will happen here. It's silly, and just because it took until Velious for the change to happen doesn't mean the delay has to happen here. The change occured because people called Verant on its bullshit mechanic and they said "yeah you're right." Chronological order doesn't have to be sacrosanct -- keeping a mechanic in place that actively hurt the game by Verant's testimony seems to be putting the carriage before the horse.

I know the p99 staff doesn't do this for us (I'm not really sure why they do it, but I'm happy they do) and we don't pay them any kind of money outside of donations, so really they owe us absolutely nothing. But we as a playerbase want this to work. We're here because we don't want to see the mistakes of the past get repeated. And this setup was a mistake, as the creator of the game itself admitted.

People keep bringing up technical issues as a comparison for a reason -- the team seems to swing back and forth between a hard stand on chronological order of events and the elegant recreation of the Classic experience.

We as players care more about the latter than the former. We want a world without the PoK, where factions really matter, grouping is crucial, factions matter, and travel is a dangerous adventure. We want legit progression so we have time to enjoy each era of the trilogy as it evolved. We care about the "spirit." The fact that we can play in 1900x1200 and use number keys to cast spells and don't require a video card that uses the Glide API and can meditate without opening the book, which is really irrelevant since we're playing in 1900x1200 anyway, really doesn't bother the vast, vast majority of the playerbase. Some of these original ideas were just products of the time, some were just outright bloody stupid (a UI that takes up over half the screen = totally moronic, even for 1999).

The p99 dev team is split between the two goals, mostly because it's comprised of individuals doing their own thing and not quite working and communicating as one unit. This shitstorm started because one guy as an Ogre was outleveling his wife, a Dark Elf. The tables clearly needed to be fixed because they were wrong (off by one as it turned out) but while he was digging around, he found that Hybrids weren't gimping group XP. So he "fixed" it by chronological standards.

This "fix" does nothing to recreate the good aspects of the EQ Classic spirit. For instance, was anyone really angry that Rangers aren't (well, weren't) being shunned like they were in 1999-2001?

That's the whole point here, and why the technical stuff keeps getting brought up by players as a counter-point to this change. It doesn't *feel* right. It *feels* like a godawful decision, chronologically correct or not. Everyone knows that it's going to damage and divide the community in a way that something like a technical regression to forced 800x600 or 640x480 resolution and a UI that takes up 3/5ths of the screen would.

No one (except the real noobs) is asking for race or class XP tables to get removed. Rather, I think alot of people are up in arms about this issue because, as history showed, it's going to be actively detrimental to the community. Verant programmed this shared penalty and forgot about it. There was no malice or anything involved, they basically just copied over their AD&D campaign and custom GM rules and forgot about it.

In short, we know the effect that the original discovery of this mechanic had, and it simply was not a good one. The community was furious and four classes were suddenly relegated to the dustbin. The Ranger actually never really recovered.

I don't know. It just feels like you've recreated the Titanic for us to walk around and admire its original splendor, decadence, and design. Then you realized you forgot to put an iceberg in its way because, well, that's what happened to the original Titanic, right? It was an unmitigated disaster that no one in their right mind thought was a good thing, but hey, it happened, so it has to happen again.

You don't have to recreate mistakes out of blind adherence chronology. You're not going back and implementing bugs and exploits. You're not going to overlook ShowEQ and MacroQuest users because the technology wasn't there to detect their use in classic. You're making meta-game decisions all the time that aren't consistent with the real, buggy, exploitable classic version in order to improve quality of play for everyone, since, face it, cheating and exploiting and bugginess sucked and hurt the community. But, like it or not, those things were classic.

You can't go home again. Honestly, no one really wants to go home again. We want the home cooking, the familiarity, the friends, the fresh experiences and wonder. You're giving us those things. We love you for that. But then, out of the blue, you're slapping acne on our face and making our voices crack because "that's the way it was."

There's more to this than a innocent "fix" to make things more "classic." You're throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

[mitic]

since exp penalties are STILL in game i want spell books in front of my face now too so those casters especialy necros and mages have some incentive to play their classes since hybrids are OP rite now with their neg exp...

sk, pal, and especialy rng are way to overpowered since they can solo moss-snakes at lvl 50...do it devs!

equal rights for all, rite?

[JayDee]

I leveled a warrior to 60 in 6 days played or so without a PL initially. I am glad if they modified exp. No way anybody could do that back in the dzay.

[astarothel]

since exp penalties are STILL in game i want spell books in front of my face now too so those casters especialy necros and mages have some incentive to play their classes since hybrids are OP rite now with their neg exp...

Spellbooks are client.UI based there superstar. Care to try again?

[Combo]

Spellbooks are client.UI based there superstar. Care to try again?

troll'd

[Oogmog]

Combo, that was a very well thought out post that expressed the opinions of many in a mature and civilized manner and I applaud you.

I realize there are supporters and people against this, however, how many of these supporters would be for this if they were still leveling up and not level 50 and fully geared? Also, as one dev explained to me in a PM, they were thinking of doing a rollback of the entire server to fix this "experience" problem. Just an assumption, but I would say all the level 50's would become level 35-40 if that did in fact occur. Should we force people who have achieved 50 in an easier manner to experience the level grind again because when they leveled the code was wrong and in order to keep it true to classic they should be required to experience the hellish grind that this change is making? I am 50 myself, however, it is not on a toon I wish to raid with. If I were capped on the toon I wished to raid with, I probably wouldn't be complaining much either. I know this project is to recreate what was once as good as gold to us but there is an issue at hand. Players didn't know about this penalty until Velious. We know about it now and it's going to cause a huge stir now and even worse come Kunark.

[Haynar]

I went and fired up the wayback machine, and pulled up some of the original hackersquest exp tables they figured out. I will run some numbers in the next day or so, and see how we compare to back in 1999-2000 time range.

We may be right on. We might be off a bit. But I will see about putting together some hard data to prove it one way or another.

In my spare time .....

Haynar

[Zithax]

ROFL, so wait, someone implemented the 40% hybrid-group penalty?

Jesus, that was fucking stupid. And lame.

[Qaedain]

They applied to groups in classic up til a Velious patch when everyone ran the math and figured out the absolutely ridiculous mechanic existed and called for Verant's heads on pikes. Then Verant said "you're right, this is stupid and it's causing hybrids to get passed over in groups since the group doesn't want its xp gimped." And so it changed.

SNIP...

Fantastic post. Seriously. Probably one of the best I've ever read on a forum.

[AWOL]

This is just another example of the devs having their heads up their asses. Instead of focusing on fixing what is broken they focus on breaking what was fixed. It's just dumb to remove features like interface improvements and adding xp penalties. They should focus on game content that is where the classic experience is.

[Ropethunder]

It's a hybrid class. If you want to feel special then you get a penalty.

[Haynar]

This is just another example of the devs having their heads up their asses. Instead of focusing on fixing what is broken they focus on breaking what was fixed. It's just dumb to remove features like interface improvements and adding xp penalties. They should focus on game content that is where the classic experience is.
I do not program content.

I pinch.

[Gorgetrapper]

This is just another example of the devs having their heads up their asses. Instead of focusing on fixing what is broken they focus on breaking what was fixed. It's just dumb to remove features like interface improvements and adding xp penalties. They should focus on game content that is where the classic experience is.

Yeah, we should also go up to the current EQ live expansion because apparently their game isn't broken and it's already fixed. They don't have problems with their interface and xp penalties...

So how about you go fucking play with them instead?

[AWOL]

Yeah, we should also go up to the current EQ live expansion because apparently their game isn't broken and it's already fixed. They don't have problems with their interface and xp penalties...

So how about you go fucking play with them instead?

Fail. Let me guess... You are one of the selfish pricks who think they will benefit from this.

[astarothel]

Fail. Let me guess... You are one of the selfish pricks who think they will benefit from this.

Fail. Let me guess... You are one of those lazy pricks who think they will benefit from crying about this.

[Haynar]

There are nerfs I am for. There are nerfs I am against.

I do not have bias, because I do not play on the server. My decisions are not self serving. I am an ass. I don't care.

I did not nerf exp. I did not try to make it so noone wants to group with hybrids. The difference now, compared to classic, was in classic, people did not know they were getting screwed by grouping a hybrid. Now they do, which is not fair in my opinion. That puts certain classes at a bigger disadvantage. But I will make sure it is not totally out of balance with how classic was.

The classes that are at a disadvantage now, RNG, PAL, SK, for example ... will get more of my attention. So hopefully I can get things working better for those classes, so if they do want to solo, they can do it better.

I spend more time fixing bugs, or exploits, than making improvements lately.

This is my entertainment. Programming on the code, making it better, one line at a time.

Haynar

[nilbog]

This is just another example of the devs having their heads up their asses. Instead of focusing on fixing what is broken they focus on breaking what was fixed. It's just dumb to remove features like interface improvements and adding xp penalties. They should focus on game content that is where the classic experience is.

This is just another example of someone getting banned for insulting developers.

[Bones]

This is just another example of the devs having their heads up their asses. Instead of focusing on fixing what is broken they focus on breaking what was fixed. It's just dumb to remove features like interface improvements and adding xp penalties. They should focus on game content that is where the classic experience is.
Maybe you should start submitting some fixes for what is broken. Fucking jackass.

[ClamSmasher22]

I understand why the original intentions of Sony for the exp penalty to be shared by the whole group. Friends who group together level at the same time. Makes sense to me if you play with the same people every time you play. How often does that happen? Some people do it. I play with my brother almost every time I play. Almost. And I don't play as often as he does, so he isn't playing with me every time he plays.

If this -feature- is intended to make friends who group all the time level at the same time, who really benefits? Seriously, how many people group with the same people every time? Maybe a poll could give us some insight in to this (I understand how unreliable the polls are, but could illuminate if this is really a relevant fix or not)

[ClamSmasher22]

Italics kick ass!

[JayDee]

A lot of things in EQ are inconvenient. Thats the beauty of EQ.

Besides, achieving level 50 as a troll sk now is a huge accomplishment.

In the end, all it means is that you grouped with some friends for an extra day or two. If you plan on playing this char for years to come, it essentiallymeans nothing in the grand scheme of things.

[ClamSmasher22]

Haynar, your edits give me boners.

[Haynar]

Haynar, your edits give me boners.

Easy there cowboy.

[Halladar]

There are nerfs I am for. There are nerfs I am against.

I do not have bias, because I do not play on the server. My decisions are not self serving. I am an ass. I don't care.

I did not nerf exp. I did not try to make it so noone wants to group with hybrids. The difference now, compared to classic, was in classic, people did not know they were getting screwed by grouping a hybrid. Now they do, which is not fair in my opinion. That puts certain classes at a bigger disadvantage. But I will make sure it is not totally out of balance with how classic was.

The classes that are at a disadvantage now, RNG, PAL, SK, for example ... will get more of my attention. So hopefully I can get things working better for those classes, so if they do want to solo, they can do it better.

I spend more time fixing bugs, or exploits, than making improvements lately.

This is my entertainment. Programming on the code, making it better, one line at a time.

Haynar

I think that would work for rangers. Bards... don't seem to compete with anyone for any one particular role they seem to be able to adapt themselves to do something no matter the group. Or some of them seem able to anyway.

Personally I think you guys ought to take the hybrid penalty away, and keep the same balance that was in place before level 50. If you do one very important thing I'll mention in a minute.

That is a lot more complicated statement than it seems. In this era, come Kunark warriors are on a different offensive and defensive table than the hybrid tanks. ie, if a warrior and paladin were the same level, and had the same weapon skill, a warrior would do more damage using the same weapon.

Conversely, with the same AC, with equal defense skill, equal dodge/parry/riposte a warrior takes less damage. I'm not referring to the max hit thing, where a warrior is one step below everyone else as that came later. They were on a different mitigation table, one that Pals and SK's were put on later.

You really aren't going to ever see this sort of comparison in a real game environment, because level plays a big role, and equal level warriors cap higher on most of the defensive skills, and have 5 defense more than the hybrid tanks.

The skill caps were a huge deal for the pals and sk's in kunark, because they were capped so much lower than the warriors, the class they compete with for group roles. Pal/SK melee was horrible for a long time (several expansions), and I don't remember when it was changed. Eventually their post 50 caps were significantly raised (though not as high as warriors) and they were put on the same mitigation table, though not the same offense table.

Rangers had the inverse problem. I think they were on the same damage table as warriors, but had a worse mitigation than sk's and pals. In addition they had a low defense cap, though I think some of the skills like dodge were higher than what sk's and pals got.

I have no idea how you guys have this working on this server now, or what you have planned for kunark.

If it was me doing this, I'd remove the xp penalty from all the hybrids. Raise skill caps for the hybrids so the knights can actually hit something, and Rangers aren't the butt of jokes. I would keep the 3 tiers of mitigation, and 3 tiers of offense (monks, rogues, and I think beasts were on the highest offense table).

Then I'd do something else. Fix warrior taunt, or give them a separate skill that actually does what it is supposed to. You know the taunt button is still broken on live last time I checked? I mean they have one and it can be clicked, but it really doesn't do much. They bellow and use anger augs and whatnot now.

Someone might make a comment about this trivializing encounters and raids. As soon as Kunark opens and someone gets a pair of jsticks warriors (at least raid warriors) aren't going to have any aggro problems at all.

At least till you nerf them sometime in Velious. Well, that is assuming of course that Tash has the same insane aggro it did in 1999 here.

Did I mention I don't think monks need a penalty either?

[mitic]

A lot of things in EQ are inconvenient. Thats the beauty of EQ.

Besides, achieving level 50 as a troll sk now is a huge accomplishment.

while this is true, what about those lvl50 sk-trolls that leveled before this change with their guises baged?

[mitic]

The classes that are at a disadvantage now, RNG, PAL, SK, for example ... will get more of my attention. So hopefully I can get things working better for those classes, so if they do want to solo, they can do it better.


you have good intentions but since we are 2 months late on PoA and i highly doubt that we will see kunark - let alone epics - this year if you continiue to "fix" stuff like this, i would srsly consider to revert exp penalties and focus on the important stuff

[nilbog]

you have good intentions but since we are 2 months late on PoA and i highly doubt that we will see kunark - let alone epics - this year if you continiue to "fix" stuff like this, i would srsly consider to revert exp penalties and focus on the important stuff

1. Late on PoA?
2. Haynar doesn't develop content
3. None of these things are related

[Hidn]

I'm a little sad about what this post has turned into.

I did not start this as a rant and flame. In fact, it was more of a question asking if anyone was seeing a change in experience because there were no patch notes.

It's great that everyone has an opinion about the group exp configuartion. However, the gms have explained that this was the classic implementation of the code. As much as it pains me to see my exp bar move slower, unless you have proof it was different I would ask that we don't continue to beat this topic up anymore.

At the end of the day, I appreciate the work that the developers have put into this server and hope that everyone can empathize with the position the developers have taken on this topic.

regards

[Bumamgar]

The p99 dev team is split between the two goals, mostly because it's comprised of individuals doing their own thing and not quite working and communicating as one unit. This shitstorm started because one guy as an Ogre was outleveling his wife, a Dark Elf. The tables clearly needed to be fixed because they were wrong (off by one as it turned out) but while he was digging around, he found that Hybrids weren't gimping group XP. So he "fixed" it by chronological standards.
No changes were made without full discussion with the rest of the dev team including Nilbog. The p99 dev team work and communicate as one unit quite well, thank you.

[Oogmog]

No changes were made without full discussion with the rest of the dev team including Nilbog. The p99 dev team work and communicate as one unit quite well, thank you.


Could you explain why hell levels are penalizing the entire group? Sorry to nag, but I've brought this up 4 times now myself along with others. Racial penalties did penalize the group, however, hell levels did not.

[Oogmog]

And I meant racial and class penalties did penalize the group. I just woke so brain isn't firing on all cylinders yet:)

[Bumamgar]

So we chose to distribute experience in the group on the basis of the total experience of each member rather than the level, in order to keep groups together

Now you'll notice that we are dividing up experience based upon the LEVEL makeup of the group. For instance, if a level 20 and a level 21 group together, the level 21 will get more experience per kill. That is however only fair since the level 21 does actually contribute more value to the group.

From the producers letter in 2001 that explained how XP worked before and after the changes.

Specifically, the XP share in p1999 was changed to depend on the total experience of each member. This change made it so that higher level members take more XP than lower, characters with class/race penalties take more XP than those without, and people in hell levels (which require more XP) take a larger share than those not in a hell level. Per Gordon's Producers letter, this is how it was done on live before the XP changes in 2001. A group members split was determined based on total XP, which included class/race/level and of course hell levels. Now, keep in mind, back in 2001, the EQ devs hadn't even acknowledged the existence of hell levels yet. So while hell levels aren't specifically mentioned in the producer's letter, it is easy to infer, based on his description of how XP was split, that hell level XP was factored into the overall split.

Link to producer's letter... One of the main resources I used when coding the XP changes :)

http://everquest.allakhazam.com/editorial/011401_EQ_Producers_letter.html

[Oogmog]

I get what you're saying, however, in classic hell levels did exist ... Now, they really do not. The only way you can tell you're in a hell level is if you are soloing. I'm not trying to be rude, but did you actually level in a hell level on classic? Someone that was 45 would level much slower than someone in the same group at 43. Also, the dev post only speaks if class/race penalties and level of worth.. nothing about a group penalty for hell levels.

[Combo]

No changes were made without full discussion with the rest of the dev team including Nilbog. The p99 dev team work and communicate as one unit quite well, thank you.

If this is truly the case, you should have been more clear about this in your testimony about the change. It really read like you said "My wife and I discovered I was outleveling her, so I told the dev team and they gave me carte blanche to do what I wanted to XP. I found the code mistake, fixed it, but found something else that I knew was classic and changed it too."

Further is the problem with the feeling that "I went in to fix something with the blessing of the staff, but I found something else I wasn't actually looking for, changed it, and then got the blessing of the dev team after the fact."

Maybe that's how it went down, maybe it's not. Maybe you had a conference call and discussed repercussions of this change, maybe you just did it and everyone else said "yeah that was in classic."

All I want to say is that the reason you specifically are getting so much flak from the community is due to the whole under-the-table, undocumented feel this change (I can't in good faith call it a fix anymore) has. We were all around when Verant pulled these tricks, we all got mad and complained because we all felt cheated. Sometimes it was an innocent mistake (Martin in customer service had strep and didn't write the patch notes), but the vast majority of the time it was either totally under the radar or expressed so vaguely in order to delay the firestorm that the developers knew the change would cause.

They weren't stupid. You're not stupid. It's Friday afternoon, you can either write patch notes that are going to result in you getting bombarded with hate mail or you can just do it and deal with it after your weekend. After crossing your fingers that no one notices, of course -- which is a complete joke as any software developer can tell you. Your users will *always* know your software better than you do.

Please don't take this as an insult as I'd rather not get banned, but it also doesn't help the situation that you've gotten so defensive, arguably smug, about what has become "your" change. I don't blame you for it -- stubbornly sticking to your guns is a common and effective thing to do. But it also leaves you stubborn and unwilling to reconsider the wisdom of your decision.

No matter how many times you say it, this isn't a binary choice. This isn't "This was classic, get frustrated and lash out and you're banned, end of story." You're implementing what the producers would come to admit as a design flaw.

There are plenty more of those you could implement. If you'd like, I'd be happy to dig through patch notes and break things that the patch ahead of where we are in the timeline fixed. I'm good with C++ and Java and dabble in several other languages. I would be happy to implement bugs and exploits, because bugs and exploits are classic and can be fun. They added the broken zaniness that caused many of us to have a sick love/hate relationship with the game, that, 10 years later, those famous rose goggles have changed into just love, kind of like the old girlfriend we've all had that was on that lovely border of gorgeous and plain, flawed and perfect, and was prone to outbursts of batshit insanity. We miss her more than the one or two barbies we got lucky (or so we thought at the time) with, the intellectuals, the emotionally dependents, or even are (hopefully) well-balanced, loving wives.

I don't know. Do what you want. Just try not to delude yourself or the rest of the staff into thinking this change is anything but actively harmful to this server and its community. Even the great stubborn Verant knew that was true when it was discovered -- that is, when Verant was reminded they'd implemented it.

[Combo]

Wow, I typed "are" instead of "our."

[JayFiveAlive]

Great post Combo, I couldn't agree more.

Sadly, I find myself not logging in as often, though I do have a lot of RL stuff going on. I definitely don't like shady changes and I don't like when devs aren't upfront and open with the community that really makes their game what it is. Bad community = bad game. I am not saying p99 has reached this, but I do see it's possible downfall coming/starting. It was a lot of fun for awhile though... maybe it's time to move on.

[rioisk]

If this is truly the case, you should have been more clear about this in your testimony about the change. It really read like you said "My wife and I discovered I was outleveling her, so I told the dev team and they gave me carte blanche to do what I wanted to XP. I found the code mistake, fixed it, but found something else that I knew was classic and changed it too."

Further is the problem with the feeling that "I went in to fix something with the blessing of the staff, but I found something else I wasn't actually looking for, changed it, and then got the blessing of the dev team after the fact."

Maybe that's how it went down, maybe it's not. Maybe you had a conference call and discussed repercussions of this change, maybe you just did it and everyone else said "yeah that was in classic."

All I want to say is that the reason you specifically are getting so much flak from the community is due to the whole under-the-table, undocumented feel this change (I can't in good faith call it a fix anymore) has. We were all around when Verant pulled these tricks, we all got mad and complained because we all felt cheated. Sometimes it was an innocent mistake (Martin in customer service had strep and didn't write the patch notes), but the vast majority of the time it was either totally under the radar or expressed so vaguely in order to delay the firestorm that the developers knew the change would cause.

They weren't stupid. You're not stupid. It's Friday afternoon, you can either write patch notes that are going to result in you getting bombarded with hate mail or you can just do it and deal with it after your weekend. After crossing your fingers that no one notices, of course -- which is a complete joke as any software developer can tell you. Your users will *always* know your software better than you do.

Please don't take this as an insult as I'd rather not get banned, but it also doesn't help the situation that you've gotten so defensive, arguably smug, about what has become "your" change. I don't blame you for it -- stubbornly sticking to your guns is a common and effective thing to do. But it also leaves you stubborn and unwilling to reconsider the wisdom of your decision.

No matter how many times you say it, this isn't a binary choice. This isn't "This was classic, get frustrated and lash out and you're banned, end of story." You're implementing what the producers would come to admit as a design flaw.

There are plenty more of those you could implement. If you'd like, I'd be happy to dig through patch notes and break things that the patch ahead of where we are in the timeline fixed. I'm good with C++ and Java and dabble in several other languages. I would be happy to implement bugs and exploits, because bugs and exploits are classic and can be fun. They added the broken zaniness that caused many of us to have a sick love/hate relationship with the game, that, 10 years later, those famous rose goggles have changed into just love, kind of like the old girlfriend we've all had that was on that lovely border of gorgeous and plain, flawed and perfect, and was prone to outbursts of batshit insanity. We miss her more than the one or two barbies we got lucky (or so we thought at the time) with, the intellectuals, the emotionally dependents, or even are (hopefully) well-balanced, loving wives.

I don't know. Do what you want. Just try not to delude yourself or the rest of the staff into thinking this change is anything but actively harmful to this server and its community. Even the great stubborn Verant knew that was true when it was discovered -- that is, when Verant was reminded they'd implemented it.

Just want to add to this that mimicking classic mechanics and classic mindset are two different equations to creating the classic experience. The EQ community as a whole was pretty ignorant about all this XP penalties/group sharing etc etc (as they were with a lot of issues) back in 1999 but here we are same game same mechanics but now we suddenly have a problem with it.

We know devs here work very hard to provide for this server at no pay and we know what the "vision" of the server is. However, I think a majority of players don't like how "fixes" to make the game more classic are done months after the launch of the server. Trying to make a game more classic everyday only to see some of these changes reversed in an expansion (kunark/velious) not long after they're changed (or issues being totally ignored because they're patched out in kunark/velious) is highly aggravating.

[Haynar]

I am 99% sure I have found why EXP is off. The early on model for exp, differs slightly from what it is now. The formulas that Bum used are reasonable, and seem to work perfectly fine. We just might need some changes to the overall exp modifier. As soon as I finish my writeup, I will submit it for review by management and see if I can get it adjusted.

Haynar

[Astropunk]

I know that Nilbog is trying his best to keep this server exactly as he remembers it and since he played a paladin exp penalties were part of it. I have always disliked that the penalties were put in, but dealt with it since was part of classic.

However, there is no way that hell levels were a part of a group shared penalty. Groups did not level at the pace of the slowest person. My main problem with all of this is the hell level shared penalty.

I read that developer's letter and I don't see it say that hell levels are shared. I DO see it saying that hybrid penalties are shared. It seems to say that because an ogre sk has more exp total and has a penalty he gets a larger share, I DON'T see it saying that every group member gets the same percentage of their level per kill (which appears to be how it is currently coded). Hell levels were clearly noticeable because you didn't level as fast in a group as people around your level in the group.

My level 35 ogre sk now cannot possibly find a group ever as I turn every group I join into the worst group ever. My ranger alt might as well be deleted. I'm very frustrated because I wanted to play my character in groups and now I can't. Certainly the devs can understand my plight here.

[Oogmog]

Astropunk... I feel you man. I've said multiple times hell levels were not penalized by group in classic and I'm almost to the point of assuming the devs that support this didn't actually level through a hell level in classic. I'm not trying to be rude, but if you're going to make such harsh changes that were classic, it would be nice to make an assumption decision based on experience.

[mimixownzall]

The classes that are at a disadvantage now, RNG, PAL, SK, for example ... will get more of my attention. So hopefully I can get things working better for those classes, so if they do want to solo, they can do it better.

Wha???? Wait. If this is sarcasm I'm sorry for being so dense. But, if what you are saying is true...

If thier ability/inability to solo right now is in line with classic, then "fixing" them to be able to solo is getting away from classic (which is the sole reason this problem exists in the first place). This does not make sense... or is that the whole point of the post... which would be sarcastic... ugh.. brain melt.

[Halladar]

Not to mention that if they were made capable of soloing, it would make them overpowered in groups.

Pretty much if you can solo well, you are useful in a group. The opposite isn't true, but that is. There used to be a lot of reticence to add a necro to a group, that I never understood. Those guys were great in groups.

(Note that SK's and to a lesser extent in this era Rangers can solo, but it is no where as easy as for a caster class sans clerics. And bards as always play under their own ruleset as far as that goes.)

(Well if Rangers get the fear animal spell in Kunark it will help, but I think that one was later.)

[Halladar]

Actually let me amend that. They can technically solo. Three or 4 backpacks of arrows and Mr. Ranger has the hill giant's plat.

Anyway I'm getting tired of this whole thing. So well I'm out of here.

[Quitis]

Will I ever get a Erudite Paladin out of Toxx? Wow now I know what playing a hybrid feels like. The xp is slower than a slug in a snow storm. Definetly gonna put that twink on hold until I can maybe get a friend to PL me or just go buy a ton of CB belts and somehow find him a port to BB. But wait, why the hell do I wanna play a Erudite Paladin anyway? Lol.

[RKromwell]

Actually let me amend that. They can technically solo. Three or 4 backpacks of arrows and Mr. Ranger has the hill giant's plat.

Anyway I'm getting tired of this whole thing. So well I'm out of here.


Rangers solo just fine without arrows. No, we are not quading like the druids but we do just fine. Sure, it is a bit slower than others but we do solo fine.

[Lazortag]

Right on. I honestly thought bards were just fancy enough that it had been decided they didn't need to AoE kite, ever. I'll go ahead and roll one, now.

BARDS CAN ALREADY AOE KITE. LEARN HOW TO PLAY.

[Dumesh Uhl'Belk]

I get what you're saying, however, in classic hell levels did exist ... Now, they really do not. The only way you can tell you're in a hell level is if you are soloing. I'm not trying to be rude, but did you actually level in a hell level on classic? Someone that was 45 would level much slower than someone in the same group at 43. Also, the dev post only speaks if class/race penalties and level of worth.. nothing about a group penalty for hell levels.

I'm not sure what you think a hell level is, but it sounds like you don't understand the mechanics involved. There is no "hell level penalty." Hell levels are levels where the last modifier in the "xp required to level up" function incremented. This happened at 30 35 40 45 and 51 52 53 twice at 54 55 56 57 58 twice at 59 and at 60. This just means that those levels take more xp to get through than most others.

If a level 43 human cleric was grouped with a level 45 troll sk, a ranger, 2 int casters and a dwarf rogue, all killing level 45 mobs, then he would level in about half the time as the level 45s would. He has much less xp that the other members of the party, and gets a lower share of the xp, BUT he needs MUCH less xp to level, so he does level faster.

[h0tr0d (shaere)]

lol there were hell levels... I think 29 39 49 were brutal. 49 was hell, then the second half of 49 was worse. It existed.... and I even petitioned in 49 to ask bout it..

Oh yes there most definitely hell levels back in the day.

[Oogmog]

I'm not sure what you think a hell level is, but it sounds like you don't understand the mechanics involved. There is no "hell level penalty." Hell levels are levels where the last modifier in the "xp required to level up" function incremented. This happened at 30 35 40 45 and 51 52 53 twice at 54 55 56 57 58 twice at 59 and at 60. This just means that those levels take more xp to get through than most others.

If a level 43 human cleric was grouped with a level 45 troll sk, a ranger, 2 int casters and a dwarf rogue, all killing level 45 mobs, then he would level in about half the time as the level 45s would. He has much less xp that the other members of the party, and gets a lower share of the xp, BUT he needs MUCH less xp to level, so he does level faster.


Again, not trying to be mean, but you need to read through what the devs said earlier in this thread. What you posted is how the mechanics SHOULD work but that is not how they are actually working. Right now, if a level 43 and a level 45 are grouped, they will level at the same rate because the level 45 is taking more experience to compensate for the penalty they bring to the group just as a hybrid is now doing. This is what I am trying to bring to the dev's attention that it is not classic to behave this way in terms of hell levels.

[Aeolwind]

I am 99% sure I have found why EXP is off. The early on model for exp, differs slightly from what it is now. The formulas that Bum used are reasonable, and seem to work perfectly fine. We just might need some changes to the overall exp modifier. As soon as I finish my writeup, I will submit it for review by management and see if I can get it adjusted.

Haynar

One of the adjustments that Haynar mentioned here went in with the patch yesterday.

[Oogmog]

One of the adjustments that Haynar mentioned here went in with the patch yesterday.

Was it a fix for how characters in a hell level effected group xp? I haven't seen any word to see what was changed, however, I just got back into town so hadn't even noticed there was a change until you posted this.

[Oogmog]

Was it a fix for how characters in a hell level effected group xp? I haven't seen any word to see what was changed, however, I just got back into town so hadn't even noticed there was a change until you posted this.

Also wanted to point out another thing. I know major modifications were made to light blue mobs giving next to no experience anymore, especially in a group. However, if you take a look at patch notes - http://everquest.allakhazam.com/history/patches-2001-2.html - Under November 7th, 2001, we can see that light blue mobs were not even introduced until that time -- this was right before Luclin. Something else that might needed to be considered since all the experience adjustments are going around. While the "light blue" con was designed to give higher level people experience, if someone just dinged while in a dungeon and the majority of the mobs begin to go light blue, I'm fairly certain they would still be blue on live (Following the same formula for whether a not a someone of a certain level can get xp with you I'm assuming is the same formula to determine if a mob yields experience)