Quote:
Originally Posted by loramin
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Honestly, I don't care whether or not you like me bringing up topical information in a public discussion: I'm going to do it anyways.
The ZEM thing long predates me. I've only been here about half a decade, and it was in the wiki since before that. I'm entirely too lazy to do so, but I'm sure if you wanted you could check the wiki history and see who added it. Or you could go through the old forum posts where it's been discussed many times, because it's not like this is the first time anyone's thought to talk about ZEMs.
But just because you gained part of a level in a handful of zones and went "yeah these feel about right", that does not in any way disprove anything I've said. For one thing, it takes far more work than that to determine ZEMs, because there's so many other factors. For instance, a zone might have lower HP mobs, for their level ... which will make you earn XP faster there, but have nothing to do with the ZEM. You have to properly isolate all of those, then earn enough (to be statistically significant) XP in two places.
We do have a very good idea that certain zones are off though, like say Kedge, which by all reports has a lower than classic ZEM. In fact, while I think this happened before my time, it apparently once had a classic? (higher than classic?) ZEM, and for some reason was specifically changed on Blue. Again, if you read the forum history, this has all been discussed before.
So while I can't point you to an exact quote from Nilbog, it's the long established consensus here that P99's ZEMS are A) deliberately not known and prevented from being known without great effort (ie. no ShowEQ), and B) presumed to be a mix of classic and unclassic.
Until you've done the painstaking research to prove otherwise (and it will be painful without ShowEQ), or found a quote from a developer here saying otherwise ... maybe don't attack people who seem to know what they're talking about and are just trying to share relevant facts?
|
I'm going to try to make a few points that hopefully you can address - why did guk frequently have 80 players while ct had usually 5 at the beginning of green? From personal experience, as well as the vast majority of the playerbase's experience, you get more exp per kill in guk than ct. On the wiki, guk is stated to have 150 zem while ct is stated to have 85 zem.
What basis do you have to think guk does not have 150 zem and ct 85 when looking at the in game evidence? What basis is there to think the staff changed the zem of guk and ct when the only thing that has ever really been talked about was kedge keep being previously nerfed?
I really don't want to debate you on this because the core problem is that some zones have better zems and they are overrun with players. This is the problem that most people have - the "mystery" aspect has nothing to do with that. The mystery of zems is not why guk is packed and permafrost empty. If something is better exp the playerbase will figure it out and go there.
The reason I say it's derailing the topic is because the core problem is that the player base has figured out the best zones(which basically all correspond to the wiki zems) and overcrowd them.