Class XP Penalties

[Daywolf]

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

I'm just wondering what sort of percentages of population for classes like ranger or paladin would be viewed as acceptable population saturation. Where would that sweet spot be that would be constituted as satisfactory for optimum server health?

Probably double at least. So maybe 4-6% I'd reckon, at around lvl50-lvl60. Would be better than devastated population levels anyway... 2% at cap??? srsly

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

I'm not sure if you can state with any sense of finality that there is a shortage of hybrid classes at the moment then. If you don't know how many of a thing you need, how do you know that there is a shortage?

Oh... I thought you were asking a serious question. Usually you make sense (or close to it hehe) and often agree with your posts (well...), but you make absolutely no sense here. At least you are not a flat out troll like that sox7d guy, throwing out BS, flames and trying to derail the thread to other issues as usual. I'm guessing he's from red.

2% only shows something is seriously broken... If this had been live, they would have done something to fix the problem already, as they eventually did. What's the point in making a class if no one plays it? Three classes in fact. Unfortunately, the problem - or the result, was multiplied here on p99, devastating three classes making the "classic" experience... well not really classic. And like I've mentioned, imo hard to dispute, effects everyone in the game to some degree even if they just don't realize it... or don't care. That's pretty common these days though, some sort of generational thing.

[sox7d]

Sidenote: it's rather bullshit in DnD as it is. My 5 druid/5 fighter is severely underleveled compared to the uninhibited 7-different-prestige-class-dips-from-every-supplement power gamers in my group.

[Rattle Squirrell]

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

Yep, its definitely related to D&D. The mechanism itself isn't really a bad idea, but it didn't get translated right. In D&D, you really did have a huge advantage as a hybrid. In EQ, not so much. I actually think some amount of penalty is the right way to go for EQ hybrids, but 40% is ridiculous. 5% would be a better match with the actual in game advantages.

And in all cases, it shouldn't be applied to the group, but to the players exp after distribution. The idea that we form long term groups and are desperate to stay even with our groupmates just didn't work out to be true. This is the real invitation killer, if the exp reduction was perceived to be just applied to us, we wouldn't be so shunned. Even though, its been pointed out many times that the group exp is not hurt nearly as much as people think, but yeah anyways.

jeez, that was exactly what I was explaining to my girlfriend about the hybrids. The penalty almost seems like it seriously outweighs even the fun factor.

[sox7d]

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

jeez, that was exactly what I was explaining to my girlfriend about the hybrids. The penalty almost seems like it seriously outweighs even the fun factor.

This game isn't about fun. No one finds pressing "Q" and looking at numbers inherently fun. The fun is in the constant stream of accomplishment.


Leveling a ranger with an experience penalty is just that much more of an accomplishment. That's why I'm not complaining.

60 ranger in EQ > 60 anything in EQ > 60 in vanilla WoW > 60 in WoW currently

It's all arbitrary.

[scythic]

I'm a Ranger and am for the exp penalties. I haven't had issues finding groups and am proud of the badge of honor having a leveled Hybrid bears.

[sox7d]

Seriously, I'll probably quit once they become flavor of the week.

[fadetree]

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

I'm a Ranger and am for the exp penalties. I haven't had issues finding groups and am proud of the badge of honor having a leveled Hybrid bears.

That's true enough. When I see a 60 ranger or knight, I am seriously impressed. When I see a 60 anything else...not so much.

But that doesn't mean that the %'s are appropriate. I mean thats like strapping cinderblocks onto your arms and legs, because you want people to be impressed when you walk around, and then saying thats the way it oughta be.

The %'s are out of line in my opinion with what they were intended to offset. As I said, I am not against a penalty, but the amount currently in place, plus its affects on grouping, are not appropriate. Since we are constrained to be classic, we can't really start modifying the %'s in a way that didnt happen in classic. So, of th epossible alternatives, I am for an 'early' removal of the exp penalties.

[loramin]

Originally Posted by sox7d [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Sidenote: it's rather bullshit in DnD as it is. My 5 druid/5 fighter is severely underleveled compared to the uninhibited 7-different-prestige-class-dips-from-every-supplement power gamers in my group.

Everquest was (loosely) based on Advanced Dungeons and Dragons, ie. v1.0 of the rules. You're referring to v3.0/3.5, where multi-classing works very differently.

The main difference is that a 6th level fighter/wizard in AD&D had most of the advantages of both a 6th level fighter and a 6th level wizard, whereas in 3rd edition that same fighter/wizard would have the powers of a 3rd level fighter and a 3rd level wizard. As you note, it's much better to just be a 6th level wizard in that edition. In AD&D though multi-classing (which didn't allow for druid/fighters BTW) was incredibly powerful, so they needed an experience handicap to balance it.

The Mystic Theurge prestige class in 3.5 is kind of close to a AD&D wizard/cleric, if that helps.

[sox7d]

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

Everquest was (loosely) based on Advanced Dungeons and Dragons, ie. v1.0 of the rules. You're referring to v3.0/3.5, where multi-classing works very differently.

The main difference is that a 6th level fighter/wizard in AD&D had most of the advantages of both a 6th level fighter and a 6th level wizard, whereas in 3rd edition that same fighter/wizard would have the powers of a 3rd level fighter and a 3rd level wizard. As you note, it's much better to just be a 6th level wizard in that edition. In AD&D though multi-classing (which didn't allow for druid/fighters BTW) was incredibly powerful, so they needed an experience handicap to balance it.

The Mystic Theurge prestige class in 3.5 is kind of close to a AD&D wizard/cleric, if that helps.

I think you're misinterpreting multi-classing and theurge-like prestige classes. A level 10 character that is 5 druid/5 fighter uses roughly as much exp as a lvl 15 character that is pure or prestiged.

[kaev]

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

Yep, its definitely related to D&D. The mechanism itself isn't really a bad idea, but it didn't get translated right. In D&D, you really did have a huge advantage as a hybrid. In EQ, not so much. I actually think some amount of penalty is the right way to go for EQ hybrids, but 40% is ridiculous. 5% would be a better match with the actual in game advantages.

And in all cases, it shouldn't be applied to the group, but to the players exp after distribution. The idea that we form long term groups and are desperate to stay even with our groupmates just didn't work out to be true. This is the real invitation killer, if the exp reduction was perceived to be just applied to us, we wouldn't be so shunned. Even though, its been pointed out many times that the group exp is not hurt nearly as much as people think, but yeah anyways.

The problem is the XP penalty is just stupid, it doesn't matter even slightly once you've hit 60 (50 originally.) All it does is delay your trip to max level, once you're there it is nothing. If your class/race is superior to a class/race competing for the same role, the delay doesn't matter at all in the end, if your class/race is not superior to competing class(es) then WTF is the penalty for? It is simply stupid shitty design, there is no other way to describe it.

Likewise, btw, the lack of a decent intrinsic warrior agro mechanism (lolTaunt), which was the root of so much Warrior angst later in the timeline. They fixed Rogue agro before Kunark, (wonder if can still find the newsgroup threads on how awful it was to be a Rogue before Evade went in.) But Warriors were left hanging with nothing but Raid MT as a clear class role for quite a few expansions.

Contrary to the endlessly repeated claims of certain spamposters here, the strengths of EQ were in spite of the stupid shit, not because of it. But go ahead and cling to your beliefs, I'm sure they're quite comforting on those long lonely nights.