Change up the ZEM

[onmove_broke]

Could the team change up the ZEM a bit? For the past 5 characters, I have done Unrest>MM>CoM>KC. Reason being is that the population is so low, these are the only zones where you can find pickup groups. I tried guilding up but it seems like people under 55 still just do their own thing. It is easier to just log in and hit one of these zones for a pickup group.

Any suggestions to zones that would be ripe for a ZEM increase would be welcome.

[Infectious]

They have been switching up zems and should be ready by the next update. Check back in 2 years.

[Swish]

That path has been well trodden for over 10 years at this point, it's just where people go.

The only deviation was The Hole but the ZEM change took people out of there and people are just KC'ing.

My enchanter hit 59, my options are KC or trying to band people together for a Sebilis/Howling Stones run.... but you know when you do someone has to log an hour later and it can get difficult to replace there.

[onmove_broke]

It's a shame places like Kaesora and Dalnir are just such garbage. I wonder if increasing Zem to like 300% would bring people there. I think the biggest issue is that all of the zones people take are all outdoor, so for my ranger, it makes the most sense to do CoM then KC.

Maybe a QoL change would be to allow sow etc in indoor zones. CT is a nice zone too but not sure why people do not go there.

[Eisai]

CT is so wonderful. Near a ring and a spire, sow and harmony enabled, Druid charm pets, neat potion drops. Piles of weak mobs with low HPs and no AC. Only down side really is that half the trash are clerics but outdoor so even druid can interrupt with wind.

Wish it was the post Luclin version with all the brownskins that would make it a raid zone because no level 65 or AAs. Amazing loot too.. Not classic i know but sometimes you don't want an eight track in your car just cause it's a '57. I'm just saying...

UPDATE THE ZEM!!

[zelld52]

CT, sol a, Splitpaw and the Hole still have high ZEMs. They're all located close to ports. But they all remain empty in favor of unrest / mistmoore.

They're slightly more difficult (fun) but nobody goes to them. It's not the ZEM, it's the lack of experienced players leading groups in this dungeons

[Swish]

Maybe a QoL change would be to allow sow etc in indoor zones.

https://i.imgur.com/LdCm8tR.gif

[TomisFeline]

CT, sol a, Splitpaw and the Hole still have high ZEMs. They're all located close to ports. But they all remain empty in favor of unrest / mistmoore.

They're slightly more difficult (fun) but nobody goes to them. It's not the ZEM, it's the lack of experienced players leading groups in this dungeons

[Ennewi]

It's a number of things, but ZEM seems to play a part. More than that though, it's the lack of zone crowding. On blue, there used to be semi-regular groups in Sol A, Dalnir, Kaesora, hell, even Plane of Hate at one p oint. Granted, that was pre-Velious but still. With less real estate to work with, players had to work around one another while trying to get xp wherever possible. Having all classic expansions available, not to mention the addition of another PVE server (+Quarm) more of the player base is spread out.

When the Hole received its ZEM boost, KC stopped being the default go-to spot for PUGs and since the Hole could support more players, groups could be had from top to bottom. There are other large, underused zones that would benefit from similar treatment. Skyfire, Skyshrine, Plane of Growth, etc.

[|tda| fatal]

just roll the next server already pls

[onmove_broke]

^^ This

[Wakanda]

CT is so wonderful. Near a ring and a spire, sow and harmony enabled, Druid charm pets, neat potion drops. Piles of weak mobs with low HPs and no AC. Only down side really is that half the trash are clerics but outdoor so even druid can interrupt with wind.

Wish it was the post Luclin version with all the brownskins that would make it a raid zone because no level 65 or AAs. Amazing loot too.. Not classic i know but sometimes you don't want an eight track in your car just cause it's a '57. I'm just saying...

UPDATE THE ZEM!!

I remember how insane the CT exp was on P99 Green. Before Kunark came out it was common to 30-45 in a single day there while in a group. IDK why it stopped being used since it's actually still superior experience, and probably even more face roll with Kunark / Velious gear. I know from first hand experience that it's dramatically faster than leveling 30-45 in UR/Mistmoore/CoM.

[Wakanda]

In my fantasy version of a server Upper Guk and Runnyeye would be used more too.

In early P99 I remember grouping in both of these places and the exp being great. I guess the main reason was that there was a ton of ogres, trolls, and other people from the Freeport area who saw it more feasible to level in OASIS with LFG turned on in hopes of getting a group in Guk. Taking a boat ride to UR would be high risk if you couldn't get a group etc.

Also the loot from Runnyeye is kind of good on a new server. It's common to see people running around in a bunch of blackened iron armor.

A couple of zones I really can't stand not being part of the meta are Lake of Ill Omen and Sebilis though. I started P99 on P99 Green, and I wanted to see Kunark so bad, but it wasn't out yet. For me Kunark was when I started to really get serious about the game as a child. I remember Lake of Ill Omen having close to 200 people in it, and there being dozens of groups in the Sarnak fort. When Kunark first launched on Green the first thing I did was make an Iksar, and once I got high enough level, I rushed to LOIO excited to see all of the players. Was going to be an awesome nostalgia trip. I was confused by how quiet it was, got no /tells after I announced I was LFG, so then I typed /who and was confused that I was the only person in the zone.

Sebilis also. On my server it was considered absurd to stay in KC passed level 52. A lot of people wouldn't even stay that long. I remember Sebilis as being the premiere leveling zone for 52-60, with tons of people at the zone in, and lots of groups throughout the zone. Again on P99, I worked really hard to get my key (lol, the frogs respawn rates are a little over tuned I think), finally got it, and was again, confused that I was the only person in the entire zone.

Like I don't think you would have seen level 59 players grouping in KC on live. Not like you do on P99. I remember trying to farm AA in KC as a 50+ character and it was too painfully slow.

[Wakanda]

In my fantasy version of a server Upper Guk and Runnyeye would be used more too.

In early P99 I remember grouping in both of these places and the exp being great. I guess the main reason was that there was a ton of ogres, trolls, and other people from the Freeport area who saw it more feasible to level in OASIS with LFG turned on in hopes of getting a group in Guk. Taking a boat ride to UR would be high risk if you couldn't get a group etc.

Same is probably true for Splitpaw. The Splitpaw groups I got on P99 (and there was many of them), I usually wasn't even really looking for a group, but would be in South Karana solo'ing when someone would ask me to join. Now those zones aren't near as populous. I guess the side effect of an older server.

[Rygar]

Worst thing about seb here is no one calls it OS. That was what we all called it back in the day (i.e. Old Sebilis). Know your classic roots folks, for fucks sake...

[Wakanda]

Worst thing about seb here is no one calls it OS. That was what we all called it back in the day (i.e. Old Sebilis). Know your classic roots folks, for fucks sake...

I'm not actually sure if this was accurate for each server. Every server seemed to have different rules and names. I've started trying to give popular camps on Pantheon ridiculous names in hopes that they would take off :D like to this day the Disco camps in Sebilis don't make sense to me. but apparently disco is a more common and popular term in the UK or something?

[Rygar]

It was never OS on any server I played on. Rathe, Morell Thule, Vazaelle.

Torvonillous for the win. We were ahead of the curve clearly

[cd288]

UGuk and Seb tend to be pretty populated when the server population is higher. Pre-Green for example when we were all on one server I could pretty frequently find PUGs in Seb and UGuk.

We just need a merge

[onmove_broke]

Merge would be nice, however I think you will still have similar numbers because most of the people will play a fresh server. However, I think a fresh server needs some shaking up or QoL improvements like D2R

[zelld52]

I remember how insane the CT exp was on P99 Green. Before Kunark came out it was common to 30-45 in a single day there while in a group. IDK why it stopped being used since it's actually still superior experience, and probably even more face roll with Kunark / Velious gear. I know from first hand experience that it's dramatically faster than leveling 30-45 in UR/Mistmoore/CoM.

Prime time for CT was pre velious when all the raiders rolled twins to carry groups between raids.

Then 24 hour windows started in ST, many more raid targets became available with Kunark and for the past 3.5 years poopsocking raids has been the number 1 time sink for players on green

[zelld52]

More raid targets became available than were available in kunark *

[Sadre Spinegnawer]

CT only works as a full zone. Why incentivize heartache?

[Kich867]

This is gonna be some real conspiracy theory shit but, are we sure ZEM actually does anything? Or, does something to the degree we think it does?

Started duoing with a friend in FOB, eventually got PL'd for a level or two in kurns. According to the wiki Kurns should be a massive XP increase, and our gains didn't reflect that at all. We were still getting 2-3% xp per yellow, 1% xp per blue. That's what we get in FOB. But according to the ZEM chart it should be like, substantially higher.

Maybe it all maths out in the end but I was surprised at how not big of a jump we went from FOB to Kurns when it should've been like, +60% increased XP which should've been incredibly noticeable.

[cd288]

This is gonna be some real conspiracy theory shit but, are we sure ZEM actually does anything? Or, does something to the degree we think it does?

Started duoing with a friend in FOB, eventually got PL'd for a level or two in kurns. According to the wiki Kurns should be a massive XP increase, and our gains didn't reflect that at all. We were still getting 2-3% xp per yellow, 1% xp per blue. That's what we get in FOB. But according to the ZEM chart it should be like, substantially higher.

Maybe it all maths out in the end but I was surprised at how not big of a jump we went from FOB to Kurns when it should've been like, +60% increased XP which should've been incredibly noticeable.

ZEM does something but we don't know what the current ZEMs are. The Wiki could be completely inaccurate. Even the original ZEM values were speculation by the player base based on last available information in the classic era. So adjustments from there are likewise speculation.

[onmove_broke]

Was ZEM even a thing back in 1999? I do not remember people going to a certain place because of that...normally you just found a place that was not crowded with 1500 people without any expansions. LGuk was 50 deep all day..same with SolB

[WarpathEQ]

Was ZEM even a thing back in 1999? I do not remember people going to a certain place because of that...normally you just found a place that was not crowded with 1500 people without any expansions. LGuk was 50 deep all day..same with SolB

Yes the ZEM concept is classic, however the specific ZEMs on P99 would not be the same as they were in era. The goal is zone population management by incentivizing less traveled zones and disincentivizing overcrowded zones.

Would be interesting if they cut the currently leveling path zones in half and doubled all other zones, anything short of that is unlikely to have any tangible impact on player behavior.

[onmove_broke]

ZEM technically should be a risk vs reward concept. For example Sol A should have a higher ZEM being indoors and pretty close quarters. MM should be a bit higher because it is outdoors and is wide open outside of fighting in the castle. However the mob density in MM makes up for it. From what I notice, people take the path of Unrest>MM>CoM>KC because it is outdoors with room to move around, especially for big races. So even if Perma is 225% ZEM, it is far and mob density if pretty crappy, so people do not even bother going there

[loramin]

I think the problem is there's two conflicting motivations here. In general, everyone wants rotating ZEMs, because we're all tired of doing the same zones over and over, and new zones are fun.

But at the same time, it says "Classic EverQuest" in the upper-left. Having everyone on the server in the Hole was fun ... but it wasn't classic. If someone from '01 came to P99 they'd be very confused: why is everyone in the Hole and not the places they remember from live (Seb, KC, Velks, etc.)

I think P99 could straddle that line better. The current P99 ZEMs aren't classic, and when the staff does adjust them they do so rarely and extremely ... so why not fix both at once?

The staff should go back to the EQ Emu numbers, or whatever ZEMs are our best guess for live. Furthermore, they should publish them ... something they've never done in the history of P99. Why? Because everything else classic about the game is published, and knowing "in classic Sebilis was a hot spot" isn't a bad thing.

But at the same time, mystery was also part of the classic ZEMs (live folks might have known Seb was a hot spot, but they didn't know its exact ZEM percentage). P99 should never directly use the published/classic ZEMs.

Instead on server creation, and every year (or two) after, the staff should randomly adjust the ZEMs ... but not too much (no one zone like The Hole would suddenly dominate). Like the classic ZEM change (https://wiki.project1999.com/Patch_Notes#January_14.2C_2001_Producer_Letter), it should be roughly between 10-25%. and only around 10-15 zones should adjust. Then, when the ZEMs are randomly adjusted again, they should restart with the classic ZEMs, not the previously adjusted ones, so the sever stays only one random variation away from classic.

With only those simple changes I think the entire server would be more classic AND still expose players to fun new zones.

[cd288]

If there's not significant difference between ZEM then people just go to the easiest and most convenient dungeon.

[cd288]

ZEM technically should be a risk vs reward concept. For example Sol A should have a higher ZEM being indoors and pretty close quarters. MM should be a bit higher because it is outdoors and is wide open outside of fighting in the castle. However the mob density in MM makes up for it. From what I notice, people take the path of Unrest>MM>CoM>KC because it is outdoors with room to move around, especially for big races. So even if Perma is 225% ZEM, it is far and mob density if pretty crappy, so people do not even bother going there

People do CoM and KC because they are super convenient and not very dangerous.

People don't do Perma because it's far and it's quite dangerous, and mobs heal through walls etc making it a big pain in the ass.

Even really high ZEMs can't always make up for that, as we see with Perma. Since everyone is twinked out and knows everything about the zone, people are chain pulling masses of mobs in dungeons these days...as such the pace of killing can often offset part of the lower ZEM making it a more efficient choice to just go to the most convenient and safest dungeon.

[Kich867]

Did a lot of testing today, gotta say, pretty positive Kurns and FOB have the same ZEM.

Every even con kill in either zone gave 2% XP. Every blue kill that wasn't a super low level blue, in either zone, gave 1%.

This just further improves my conviction that dungeons aren't actually worth it. Why the fuck would you go somewhere like Kurns with 18m 20s respawns when outside its 6m 40s and the same XP and infinite pick of mobs?

[zelld52]

Did a lot of testing today, gotta say, pretty positive Kurns and FOB have the same ZEM.

Every even con kill in either zone gave 2% XP. Every blue kill that wasn't a super low level blue, in either zone, gave 1%.

This just further improves my conviction that dungeons aren't actually worth it. Why the fuck would you go somewhere like Kurns with 18m 20s respawns when outside its 6m 40s and the same XP and infinite pick of mobs?

May be a pretty insignificant difference at low levels but there is a significant difference as you get to 55+.

The difference between killing 10 mobs for 1% and 4 mobs for 1%. And the loot

[Kich867]

May be a pretty insignificant difference at low levels but there is a significant difference as you get to 55+.

The difference between killing 10 mobs for 1% and 4 mobs for 1%. And the loot

Totally, I just think some of these numbers are wrong on some zones. I forgot to mention that was in a duo as well, meaning we'd probably be seeing ~4% per even con solo as iksars with a 20% xp penalty.

According to the ZEM, FOB is 110% XP and Kurns is 171% XP. A 61% difference should be hugely noticeable, no?

It's entirely possibly the XP chart on the wiki is wrong, but assuming its accurate, in order for an even con at level 18 to give 2% XP in a duo of iksars a mob would have to give 44,112xp. According to the wiki, a level 18 mob gives 24,300xp.

The ZEM in FOB should put that mob to 26,730. The ZEM in Kurns should put it to 41,553xp, well within the expected range of consistently providing ~2% XP on your bar per kill (would give ~1.9% per kill so you'd regularly roll over to 2%).

So either the ZEM in FOB is wrong, the ZEM in Kurns is wrong, the XP chart is wrong, or they're all wrong which is probably more likely.

On the flip side, killing blues in Gfay vs CB, I had a blue in CB give me 3% and a white in CB give like 7%, so it seems clear there IS a difference between those two zones as I never came close to that in Gfay.

[onmove_broke]

Totally, I just think some of these numbers are wrong on some zones. I forgot to mention that was in a duo as well, meaning we'd probably be seeing ~4% per even con solo as iksars with a 20% xp penalty.

According to the ZEM, FOB is 110% XP and Kurns is 171% XP. A 61% difference should be hugely noticeable, no?

It's entirely possibly the XP chart on the wiki is wrong, but assuming its accurate, in order for an even con at level 18 to give 2% XP in a duo of iksars a mob would have to give 44,112xp. According to the wiki, a level 18 mob gives 24,300xp.

The ZEM in FOB should put that mob to 26,730. The ZEM in Kurns should put it to 41,553xp, well within the expected range of consistently providing ~2% XP on your bar per kill (would give ~1.9% per kill so you'd regularly roll over to 2%).

So either the ZEM in FOB is wrong, the ZEM in Kurns is wrong, the XP chart is wrong, or they're all wrong which is probably more likely.

On the flip side, killing blues in Gfay vs CB, I had a blue in CB give me 3% and a white in CB give like 7%, so it seems clear there IS a difference between those two zones as I never came close to that in Gfay.

I leveled my monk in Kurns a bit going back and I agree that I noticed almost no difference leveling in Kurns vs FoB. And even though Unrest is supposed to be higher ZEM than MM, I seemed to level way faster in MM than Unrest. I think the numbers are just way off or simply incorrect.

[loramin]

Measuring ZEM is really, really hard.

Let's say zone A has a ZEM of 100%, zone B has a ZEM of 120%, and at your level it takes 900 XP to be able to measure anything (ie. see the XP % change). In both zones you kill mobs of the same exact level worth 360 XP.

(Now of course, you usually can't know the exact level of the mob you're killing, just whether it's blue or green con. That pretty much rules out any measurement whatsoever in most zones, because to measure, both zones require mobs that always have the exact same level. Otherwise, zone A might not have a better ZEM, but it might seem like it does because it has a higher average-level of mobs.)

But for the sake of argument, let's pretend both A and B have mobs with the same fixed level, and you kill 10 of them in each zone; your XP will increase like so:

A: 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10
B: 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 9

Notice that both zones have the exact same number of XP increases, and the two are identical for the first six kills! Even when there is a difference, it's only a single kill apart. If you're just casually observing, the two zones would be indistinguishable.

TLDR; IF you can find two mobs in both zones of the same consistent level, and IF you kill a lot of them (more than ten, but the exact number will vary), AND you meticulously record whether each kill increased the percentage or not ... AND you're willing to do some math ... THEN you can actually meaningfully comment on a zone's ZEM.

Otherwise, you're just kidding yourself.

[loramin]

P.S. The above is why the wiki ZEMs are so awful. It's not that anyone likes the outdated ZEMs there ... it's just that they're better than no ZEMs at all, and no one wants to do what I described above to correct them.

[cd288]

If you want to determine if KC actually has a good ZEM you need to be killing equivalent level mobs in a different zone, not lowbie mobs in FOB lol

[Kich867]

If you want to determine if KC actually has a good ZEM you need to be killing equivalent level mobs in a different zone, not lowbie mobs in FOB lol

Kurns, not Karnors.

[cd288]

Ah my bad misread since people had been talking about KC.

In any case, make sure you are certain of the level of each of the mobs you're killing. That's one thing that can account for things.

The other is simply that we're using UIs that show EP bars in flat percentages. You might be getting a flat 2% in FOB but getting 2.5% in Kurns.

The only true way to determine is to take two characters of the same level (and with the same racial EXP penalties and/or bonuses) and kill mobs that you know for a fact are the exact same level as each other for an entire level and see how many kills it takes to go from 0 to 100%.

[Bukowski]

I don't think I've ever once looked up ZEM for a zone. I just go to new places on new characters.

[cd288]

Measuring ZEM is really, really hard.

Let's say zone A has a ZEM of 100%, zone B has a ZEM of 120%, and at your level it takes 900 XP to be able to measure anything (ie. see the XP % change). In both zones you kill mobs of the same exact level worth 360 XP.

(Now of course, you usually can't know the exact level of the mob you're killing, just whether it's blue or green con. That pretty much rules out any measurement whatsoever in most zones, because to measure, both zones require mobs that always have the exact same level. Otherwise, zone A might not have a better ZEM, but it might seem like it does because it has a higher average-level of mobs.)

But for the sake of argument, let's pretend both A and B have mobs with the same fixed level, and you kill 10 of them in each zone; your XP will increase like so:

A: 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10
B: 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 9

Notice that both zones have the exact same number of XP increases, and the two are identical for the first six kills! Even when there is a difference, it's only a single kill apart. If you're just casually observing, the two zones would be indistinguishable.

TLDR; IF you can find two mobs in both zones of the same consistent level, and IF you kill a lot of them (more than ten, but the exact number will vary), AND you meticulously record whether each kill increased the percentage or not ... AND you're willing to do some math ... THEN you can actually meaningfully comment on a zone's ZEM.

Otherwise, you're just kidding yourself.

Went back and re-read and Loramin explains this in much more detail than I did, and he's exactly right. Using the Kurns and FOB example, you'd need to basically take two characters of the exact same class, race, and level...you'd level one in FOB and one in Kurns for 1 level starting at the beginning of that level (i.e., 0% EXP earned). You'd have to be absolutely sure that each of those characters is killing a mob of the same level each time (tough to do that, at least in an outdoor zone where mobs will have a level range more often than they will in a dungeon IIRC, and there's no way to fully know just based on /con). And then you'd have to track how many kills it would take to go from 0% to 100% on both characters.

I think another commenter noted something else which I think is correct: When you're talking about the lower levels where you don't need as much EXP to level and where mobs don't give as much EXP per kill, a ZEM difference is going to be much less noticeable. It's going to be much closer to Loramin's A vs B example above than it would be, say, in the 40s or 50s.

And all of this is assuming the Wiki ZEMs are accurate, which we still don't definitively know. IIRC, the current percentages are based on numbers that were originally somewhat speculation. So the staff says "We increased the ZEM by X% in zone A" and we edit the Wiki, but the base number we're using we have no idea if that base number was accurate in the first place.

[loramin]

Yup :)

That being said, I do have a plan for a crowd-sourced "Project ZEM". We'd start by finding a "zone zero", ie. the zone in the game with the most fixed-level mobs (a perfect zone would have a fixed level 1, level 2, ... all the way to 60 ... but since such a zone doesn't exist, we'd want the next closest).

If we then killed each fixed level mob in that zone a bunch (50 times?), we'd have a baseline. We could then calculate any zone with a fixed-level mob of the same level (as one in zone zero) by killing that mob a bunch. We could then calculate other zones, that don't overlap a zone zero mob, by using a mob of the same level in a zone that does overlap (eg. if A has 120% of zero, and B has 120% of A, we'd know B has 144% of zero).

I don't have the bandwidth (IRL) to start this project quite yet, but if anyone wants to get the ball rolling, I'd love to hear ideas for what zone would be the best "zone zero" ... ie what zone has the most (and best distribution of) fixed-level mobs?

[TomisFeline]

The fact that people aren’t leveling in old seb anymore for 55-60 is a travesty.
KC is truly garbage.

When I was active on p99 (2016/2017) Old Seb was packed with groups claiming all camps at different times - bugs, ent, ABC, disco, CE, juggs, king, there were even jabronies at the jail.

Groups would even go to charasis which is still the most wtf exp zone with the right group comp and zone knowledge.

To level in KC is to pay a constant tax, due to lack of zone knowledge, on your exp and it pales in comparison to other end game exp zones.

[TomisFeline]

Loramin -

Highpass hold or the freeports combined might be decent baseline zones. Iirc they both have quite a few killable, single level, mobs in a variety of ranges.

E.g. your tarn bearcrushers of the world
https://wiki.project1999.com/Tarn_Bearcrusher

[kjs86z2]

The fact that people aren’t leveling in old seb anymore for 55-60 is a travesty.
KC is truly garbage.

When I was active on p99 (2016/2017) Old Seb was packed with groups claiming all camps at different times - bugs, ent, ABC, disco, CE, juggs, king, there were even jabronies at the jail.

Groups would even go to charasis which is still the most wtf exp zone with the right group comp and zone knowledge.

To level in KC is to pay a constant tax, due to lack of zone knowledge, on your exp and it pales in comparison to other end game exp zones.

this 100%

the average p99 player is lazy and bad, and the KC-only active leveling zone showcases that

[zelld52]

this 100%

the average p99 player is lazy and bad, and the KC-only active leveling zone showcases that

Just need to get to 60 so I can soak DKP and outbid active, good players for my monk twink thst will also level in KC with barbarian legs and tuna fist.

[cd288]

I wouldn't say the average player is bad. The average player has done seb a million times. The server is mudflated so there's plenty of seb loot out there available for purchase.

So when the person is on their 6th alt, they don't see the need to go to seb.

[PatChapp]

Seb xp isn't great,but struggling through 58-60 in crypt groups you'll make some loot at least.
Travesty that the hole doesn't have groups unless you bring your own. Only benefit being it's super fun to crawl when every mob is up.
I remember being able to run from ce to docks when it was busy and not getting any agro

[loramin]

Loramin -

Highpass hold or the freeports combined might be decent baseline zones. Iirc they both have quite a few killable, single level, mobs in a variety of ranges.

E.g. your tarn bearcrushers of the world
https://wiki.project1999.com/Tarn_Bearcrusher

Good suggestions. Highpass is a solid option with 25 different levels of mob, but East Freeport just beats it with 26:


1: ["A stonesnake"],
3: ["Lyda Nasin"],
4: ["Lydl the Great"],
5: ["Jak Sindin"],
8: ["Olunea Miltin", "Zenita D`Rin"],
10: ["A prisoner", "Brunar Rankin", "Imxil Tbrow"],
14: ["Gren Frikniller"],
15: ["Canlan Talespinner", "Trolon Lightleer"],
16: ["Guard Fentallin"],
19: ["Gregor Nasin"],
20: ["Branis Noolright", ...],
21: ["Henna Treghost", "Tykar Renlin"],
22: ["Palatos Kynarn"],
24: ["Prasen Rusgor"],
25: ["Bait Masterson", "Fabian", "Harg Tonicka", "Palana Willin"],
28: ["Banor Raglesin", "Guard Orpheen"],
30: ["Bronto Thudfoot, "... ],
33: ["Sir Edwin Motte"],
34: ["Guard Dreikin", "Guard Xyxax", "Guard Yandellen"],
35: ["Guard Nekropo", "Guard Popal", "Lenka Stoutheart", "Tarn Bearcrusher"],
36: ["Guard Goemin"],
37: ["Guard Zeph", "Guard Zintrin"],
40: ["Guard Hirazen", "Ralfson Gerositan", "Saxarivza Zaxun"],
45: ["Ainla Yurimar", ...],
47: ["Tenni Kohern"],
50: ["Guard Chirven", ...],


However, I've been looking into other zones, and a few go even higher. Lake Rathe has 28, Ak'Anon has 29, Swamp of No Hope also has 29, and South Qeynos has a whopping 32!

1: ["A rodent"],
3: ["Den Magason", "Faren", "Lomarc"],
5: ["Gharin", ...],
6: ["Guard Dunix", "Guard Wenbie"],
7: ["Guard Jerith", "Guard Urius"],
8: ["Gash Flockwalker", "Guard Kwint"],
9: ["Guard Calik", "Guard Oleph"],
10: ["An investigator", ... ],
11: ["Voleen Tassen"],
13: ["Earron Huntlan"],
14: ["Menkes Tabolet"],
15: ["Guard Beren", "Nug Rellash"],
16: ["Danaria Hollin Pet", "Willie Garrote"],
18: ["Behroe Dlexon"],
20: ["Danaria Hollin", "McNeal Jocub", "Nesiff Tallaherd", "Rucio Divella"],
22: ["Lysric Loresinger", "Raffy Conticede"],
23: ["Anehan Treol"],
24: ["Hanlore Escaval"],
25: ["Dionna",... ],
26: ["Bisdlo Ravtahm", "Vicus Nonad"],
27: ["Drawna Opimsor", "Sansa Nusk"],
28: ["Caleah Herblender", "Chalea Volesga"],
30: ["Adax Rhengst",... ],
32: ["Bogen Chazel", "Daedet Losaren"],
34: ["Ghul Rustem", "Rabley Trumend"],
35: ["Bruno Barstomper", ...],
36: ["Chalios Bensted"],
37: ["Barthal"],
38: ["Khensol Undesta"],
41: ["Neapha Vesturo"],
45: [ "Bassanio Weekin",... ],
50: ["Belious Naliedin",...],

South Qeynos would seem like the best "zone zero", but it only has three 40+ options (41, 45, and 50). Lake Rathe has 4 less options overall, but it has a better spread at the high end (seven options 40+):

"1": ["A fish"],
"6": ["A froglok (Lake Rathe)","An algae snake","Brundar"],
"7": ["A water snake","Grinda"],
"8": ["Hruthgar"],
"9": ["Aija","Rondel"],
"10": ["An Aqua Goblin","Jorna","Turgan"],
"11": ["Aqua goblin shaman","Deillia"],
"12": ["Tabitha"],
"13": ["Lorud"],
"15": ["Guard Rianna","Guard Treal","Gunhedra","Jonah Brucker"],
"16": ["A crocodile (Lake Rathe)","Tralinda"],
"17": ["A Gnoll Embalmer","A freshwater shark"],
"20": ["A Royal Fish"],
"22": ["Cyanelle"],
"25": ["Turga","Webclaw Murkwave"],
"26": ["Princess Lenya Thex"],
"30": ["Dunndrylla","Shmendrik Lavawalker"],
"32": ["A goblin net master"],
"35": ["Abrod","Derg","Dreana","Grud","Kyralynn","Prince Kyrmt Keroppi","Punga","Srynda","Trug","Vrynn"],
"36": ["Tainted Aquagoblin"],
"37": ["Kanthurn","Rykas","Taia Lyfol"],
"40": ["A Spirit of Flame","Corrupted shaman","Lord Bergurgle","Natasha Whitewater"],
"48": ["A failed apprentice"],
"49": ["Eldreth"],
"50": ["A Boat"],
"51": ["Misty Tekcihta"],
"55": ["A Bone Golem","A tortured soul","Emkel Kabae"],
"59": ["Kazen Fecae"],

So its looking like one of those two will be the best candidate ... but I'm still digging!

[TomisFeline]

Nice - sounds like a good list. I assumed the Freeports could be combined. Perhaps there is no guarantee of same zem - but that would be easy to assert.

In any case don’t forget respawn speed and ease of solo pulls when considering :)