|
|
|
|
#3
07-13-2010, 02:03 PM
|
||||
|
Quote:
| |||
|
|
||||
|
#4
07-13-2010, 02:06 PM
|
||||
|
Quote:
| |||
|
|
||||
|
#5
10-10-2010, 01:50 PM
|
|||
|
This bug:
http://everquest.allakhazam.com/edit...rs_letter.html _________ "When EverQuest player characters were being designed, it was immediately apparent that some races and classes would be more powerful than others given versatility and other factors. Later, it came to light that the concept of being "more powerful" began to break down at the upper levels, given that everyone capped at the same level. We could not let any one race or class be immensely more powerful than another at that final point, as it would essentially put parts of the game off limits to those who chose the less powerful classes. While we did a good job of making races vary in power, but not so much as to be unbalancing, the same could not be said for classes. Still, though classes would be roughly equivalent in regard to the compelling reason to play them through versatility, the experience penalties were kept. In regards to the sharing of the experience penalty, it was apparent in beta, before the penalty was shared, that those playing characters without an experience penalty leveled faster than those that did. It was obvious that this would occur, but it was to the extreme that a group of friends, all playing together, would become separated to the point that they could no longer group efficiently in the mid to upper-mid levels. So we chose to distribute experience in the group on the basis of the total experience of each member rather than the level, in order to keep groups together. As such, a level 20 Troll SK, having more experience total than a Human Wizard of the same level, would get more experience from each kill, while the total experience for the kill was unchanged. Essentially, the SK would take part of the Wizard's share were everything distributed equally to begin with. Experience Penalties - Resolutions Over the past week the EverQuest team has been considering experience penalties in all their forms. We had many meetings where the issue was hotly debated from both sides. We had to consider not only the effect on the individualplayer, but also the effect of any changes on the game as a whole. Eventually, we nearly unanimously decided the following: 1. Race-based penalties are appropriate. An ogre, for instance, does indeed make a better warrior than a halfling. It is not so little that the faction and size problems make up for it, and not so much that it is really unbalancing at upper levels, but enough that the penalty should apply. Secondly, the penalty is not so severe (compared with class-based penalties) that it would cause groups to break up on the journey from one to sixty due to level differences. 2. Class-based penalties are not appropriate. Classes are roughly equivalent in power throughout the level ranges, and the versatility does not make up for that penalty. In fact, the majority of changes made to classes in the name of balance in the last year were based on the assumption that, at the high end, each class should still be roughly as needed and balanced as any other. 3. Penalties, in any form, should not be shared with the group. Players know that no one class is immensely more powerful/valuable than another, and as such it is not fair to ask them to share a burden. If classes with penalties were really more powerful or valuable than the other classes, then it might be right, but that isn't the case here. Furthermore, sharing of penalties causes people to reject potential group members on the basis of them "sucking" too much experience. 4. We're going to fix it. 5. Class-based experience bonuses (which warriors and rogues get) are also not appropriate, as they cannot be so if penalties are not. However, we've decided to leave this as-is, since the bonus is not so severe as to be unbalancing. Bottom line: we don't feel the bonus is enough to warrant a fix that could be interpreted as a 'nerf'." ________________ I bolded the parts that indicate Verant/Sony recognized the class-based XP penalties and the group-sharing of the XP penalties were WRONG and a design flaw made during the original design of the game. Therefore... a bug. They fixed it. We have the opportunity to fix it in advance, just as other bugs found well after their time were fixed here in advance.
__________________
Another witty, informative, and/or retarded post by:
 "You know you done fucked up when Yendor gives you raid commentary." - Tiggles | ||
|
|
|||
|
#6
07-13-2010, 01:48 PM
|
||||
|
Quote:
| |||
|
|
||||
|
#8
07-13-2010, 01:48 PM
|
|||
|
6 players killing 6 mobs.
let's say a mob is worth 1000 xp. one person killing one mob gets 1000xp. six persons killing six mobs should produce 6000xp (which equates to 1000xp per player). Even more considering there was a grouping bonus in classic. But on this server it looks to produce only 4800 xp (800xp per player). | ||
|
Last edited by Arclanz; 07-13-2010 at 01:52 PM..
|
|
||
|
#9
07-13-2010, 03:51 PM
|
||||
|
Quote:
Example mob worth 1000 xp. One person killing one mob gets 1000xp. Six people killing six mobs get 6600xp (which equates to 1100xp per player before normalization). If all six players are the same level and are class/race combinations without any XP modifier then all six players will get 1100xp each. However, if the group is again the same level, but has some penalties etc, it works out like this: Code:
Race Class Per Mob For Six --------- ------- ------- ------- Human Cleric 162 974 Ogre Warrior 174 1042 Halfling Rogue 142 851 Erudite Wizard 180 1083 Barbarian Shaman 171 1026 Half-elf Ranger 271 1624 --------- ------- ------- ------- Total 1100 6600 The benefits of solo'ing vs. grouping depend on a lot of factors, but from a raw XP perspective, if the group can consistently kill 6 mobs in the amount of time the solo'er kills one mob, the group will earn faster XP over time.
__________________
-Bumamgar
| |||
|
|
||||
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
