I don't think there's that big of a discrepancy between solo and group xp, there are just several factors that often cause group xp to be worse if you are a player who knows what you are doing:
1. What I like to call "Lowest Common Denominator" syndrome. The players in the group all play as lazily/poorly as the worst player in the group, because they don't want to carry the group or just don't care.
2. Waiting in line for groups when most dungeons are full. (far less convenient to wait 30 minutes to an hour to find a group than to just start killing stuff on your own)
However, group xp's downside (vs solo) is somewhat mitigated by the following negative factors:
1. Good solo spots are almost always taken at 40+, (Oasis/Feerott/OoT Specs, HGs etc) and often don't open up for many, many hours.
2. Most classes in classic, no matter how twinked, cannot solo efficiently past level 30.
Ultimately, I agree with Reiker on the point of solo vs. group (assuming all players involved are reasonably skilled, knowledgeable, or just able to follow simple instructions) being convenience vs efficiency. Obviously, some classes in classic are just ridiculously good at soloing for xp, (Mage, Necro, Chanter etc) and some classes are just ridiculously bad at it (Rogue, Warrior). But even in the case of Mages, (who are by all accounts incredibly overpowered at solo on P99, far more than they were on classic) put 6 Mages in a group together, and if there are enough mobs to kill, the XP will be better than a solo mage.
|