Why I don't like to group

[yaeger]

That's why a lot of people are angry over this issue. It only takes 1 person in a group to mess it up for everyone. Not only that, but things have a way of getting very ugly, very fast in some cases wiping everyone.

There's all this extra risk, but where's the benefit to counter-balance it? A couple posts ago I gave evidence from patch notes and people doing exp calculations that group exp may not be what it once was during Classic.

In classic, solo players would usually get more experience than grouped because it was a consistent, relatively safe way to gain experience. You wouldn't have to sit around for 20 mins trying to find a replacement healer.

Now solo players are stating that they can earn around TWICE the experience that a group member can, even if the group can chain pull with a perfect group composition.

Something's off, we'd be neglectful if we didn't try to find out what's wrong with the system, and why these discrepancies exist.

[Reiker]

Originally Posted by yaeger [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Now solo players are stating that they can earn around TWICE the experience that a group member can, even if the group can chain pull with a perfect group composition.

Something's off, we'd be neglectful if we didn't try to find out what's wrong with the system, and why these discrepancies exist.

No, there's plenty of people who play solo classes who rightfully believe that group exp can be way faster than solo. You all just choose to ignore those people so you have something to cry about.

[yaeger]

Originally Posted by Reiker [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

No, there's plenty of people who play solo classes who rightfully believe that group exp can be way faster than solo.

If that were true we'd see more mages, druids, necros and such in groups instead camped out solo all over the place.

Sure, if the stars align and the moon is full, the group that chain pulls and AOEs might edge out a solo player. But it's not a typical group setup.

Again, evidence please.

[Reiker]

Originally Posted by yaeger [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

If that were true we'd see more mages, druids, necros and such in groups instead camped out solo all over the place.

Sure, if the stars align and the moon is full, the group that chain pulls and AOEs might edge out a solo player. But it's not a typical group setup.

Again, evidence please.

Right, cause I'm fulfilling some sort of anti-solo agenda by making up lies about my grouping experiences. Hold on while I level 2 more mages to 50, one soloing and one grouping and mspaint some charts and graphs for you.

The thing is, most people roll mages/druids/necros so they can solo. But for the convenience, not the extra exp. Many people have jobs and social lives and can't commit 6 hours a day finding / maintaining a group. This is the benefit of solo classes, not experience.

And it's not a "stars aligning" thing. The crux of my sorta perma group (although it was more like a small guild of "skilled enough" players with which we could find members) was a mage and a paladin. I don't even remember ever grouping with an enchanter or cleric, we usually had the paladin and a druid or shaman on heals. A good puller (the paladin) was all we needed, as stuff dies fast enough solo and if you know what you're doing there's never more than 1-2 mobs in camp. Our groups were sub-par as far as class makeup goes, and it was still way faster than soloing. I could plow through high DBs in a large ZEM zone solo and the exp rate was painful compared to what I could get in a group.

Stop the penis envy and play the game.