Are these ZEMs accurate?

[Bassracerx]

i think on this server there is only an indoor bonus for zones and mobs themselves have their own bonuses like undead and giants

[Messianic]

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

So now can people finally see that Lake of Ill Omen is actually 60/75 or 80% exp and stop wasting time there?

Seriously the worst leveling zone in EQ.

It's not the worst leveling zone strictly because it had (has?) a negative ZEM. I don't think leveling my monk from 22-30 there in ~10 hours, solo, was some kind of waste of time or inefficient.

It's very safe, easy, and the mobs are adequately spread out yet adequately close to one another. It's also right next to FV. There isn't a comparable outdoor zone for 20s - SK is absolute garbage compared to LOIO because the mobs are far too spread out or erratic in level - you might get an egret or you might get an avocet at the only decent place in the zone for non-bards/kiting classes - KFC. Plus the nearest bind point is much farther away than LoIO.

[guineapig]

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

after looking at that list.. that seems about right.

As a general rule:
cities = bonus.
dungeon= bonus
outdoor = no bonus or pent.

You forgot newbi zones. Hence why you get good exp in places like BB even in your 40's.

[Mardur]

ZEMs are similar to live, they're just not as extreme. For example, on live Highkeep had a ridiculous exp bonus that was definitely noticeable. Here it has a small bonus but nothing like it was.

[Kender]

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

I was always aware of a rumor in my younger days on live that LoIO was the second best exp besides Paludal for lower levels.

Shocking..

they changed loio later on to a hot spot. not sure when they introduced hot spots, but it was done to help utilised under populated leveling zones. hot spots earned an extra 60% (like paludal caves always had)

p.s. loio as has been said was always good xp due to the volume and ease of pulls, especially in the sarnark fort. Velks lab was the same. you gained like 20% less xp *or something like that) but it was very popular and great xp due to the concentration of mobs

[azeth]

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

So now can people finally see that Lake of Ill Omen is actually 60/75 or 80% exp and stop wasting time there?

Seriously the worst leveling zone in EQ.

zem wise, but consider how many simple trash mobs roam in and out of the sarnak fort.

[redghosthunter]

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

zem wise, but consider how many simple trash mobs roam in and out of the sarnak fort.

Ya its kinda like killing Crocs in Oasis... If ya can stack em the exp will be flying.

[Knightmare]

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

Devs are not going to release the actual ZEMs in P99 publicly; they've said this before. It would kind of ruin the game, as Zigfreed pointed out.

The irony of this is that the server is supposed to almost perfectly mimic classic, even to the point of including annoying (and in some cases nearly class breaking) patches that do nothing good but are added for the sake of being purely classic. Sometimes even in favor of actually being enjoyable.

It's interesting to see when/where dev control trumps that supposed purity, and when it doesn't. Not that I agree or disagree with it, I'm sure they do things with the best intentions in mind, just noticing these funny times that it rears its head [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Personally I love LOIO no matter what the ZEM is, plenty of safe spots and never ending pulls. When Kunark was released there wasn't a mob alive in FoB for weeks so the ZEM there just didn't matter as much as zone population.