Numerical Proof of Kunark Experience Discrepencies

[Sabin76]

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

I consider green mobs who give exp to be "light blue" mobs.

Right. I get that. My point is that we don't know (or at least I don't know) what the GAME considers "light blue" or if there is even a distinction between "light blue" and an even lower form of "XP green". Here is the relevant quote from the wiki:

Originally Posted by Wiki

The formula for the amount of XP earned for soloing a dark blue or higher mob is as follows:

XP = L^2 * C

Where:

L = Level of mob being soloed. (If the mob is light blue or green, the xp earned will be 50%, 25% or 0% of the stated value.)

*Emphasis added

My point is that it's possible that the game considers a few levels above green to be that 50% category, and XP Greens to be the 25% category. And I guess the larger point I'm making is that we probably don't know enough about the XP system in EQ (even after 20 years) to claim that something has changed from Blue.

The only way you could really show that is if you did the exact same thing on both Blue and Green and got different results.

[loramin]

Originally Posted by Sabin76 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

And I guess the larger point I'm making is that we probably don't know enough about the XP system in EQ (even after 20 years) to claim that something has changed from Blue.

I'm pretty sure (but we'd need an expert researcher like Dolalin or Rygor to confirm) that the mechanics of light blue XP never changed. The only thing that ever changed (right at the end of Velious IIRC) was the coloring: mobs who conned green, but gave XP, suddenly started conning light blue (but continued giving the exact same XP).

So again "under the hood", both before and after, I believe things worked identically. And the people that are knowledgeable about this sort of thing (Dolalin, Rygor, Nilbog, etc. ... but not me) are likely very clear on how it all works. That wiki page just needs someone like them to update it.

P.S. One more thing: keep in mind that on live people used a packet sniffing cheat program called ShowEQ, which let them see the exact numbers for things like XP that were sent to the servers. That program (and the records people kept from it) was a huge source for much of the data here (and our understanding of classic EQ in general) ... and so it's really not true to say that we "don't know enough about the XP system".

[Sabin76]

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

I'm pretty sure (but we'd need an expert researcher like Dolalin or Rygor to confirm) that the mechanics of light blue XP never changed. The only thing that ever changed (right at the end of Velious IIRC) was the coloring: mobs who conned green, but gave XP, suddenly started conning light blue (but continued giving the exact same XP).

Thank you for saying this, because this is not the same statement as "I call XP greens 'light blue'" which is all anyone's done so far.

I'm still surprised that there are two tiers of XP penalty considering the small window of levels in which a green mob will give XP, but it at least clears that part up.

[Jimjam]

L = Level of mob being soloed. (If the mob is light blue or green, the xp earned will be 50%, 25% or 0% of the stated value.)

I suspect, in this instance, 'light blue' is being used to mean a blue mob 5+ levels below the player, green is being used to mean mob which is either green but xp, or possibly very low blue.

[Sabin76]

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

I suspect, in this instance, 'light blue' is being used to mean a blue mob 5+ levels below the player, green is being used to mean mob which is either green but xp, or possibly very low blue.

Well, it wouldn't be 5 levels since the mob in question is level 41, and they said the initial XP (pre 55) was in line with expected (without the 50% hit) given the new ZEM. That and the calculator does not account for it either (you can check this yourself by modifying the level down to something you KNOW gives 0 XP).

That said, I finally did some back-of-the-envelope calculations and the discrepancy is not accounted for by that factor. If the mob went to "light blue" after 54, then it should have taken 330 kills. Seems like "light blue" actually happened at 57.

Also, I retract my statement earlier that no one had mentioned what "light blue" actually meant in game terms. It had been a while since I read the first and second pages of this thread :P.

[Vivitron]

Originally Posted by Sabin76 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Well, it wouldn't be 5 levels since the mob in question is level 41, and they said the initial XP (pre 55) was in line with expected (without the 50% hit) given the new ZEM. That and the calculator does not account for it either (you can check this yourself by modifying the level down to something you KNOW gives 0 XP).

That said, I finally did some back-of-the-envelope calculations and the discrepancy is not accounted for by that factor. If the mob went to "light blue" after 54, then it should have taken 330 kills. Seems like "light blue" actually happened at 57.

Also, I retract my statement earlier that no one had mentioned what "light blue" actually meant in game terms. It had been a while since I read the first and second pages of this thread :P.

The op estimates a three level range on the mob. If they are right, then the numbers for 55 seem to work out if the two lower level spawns only give half xp, despite still conning blue.

[Sabin76]

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

The op estimates a three level range on the mob. If they are right, then the numbers for 55 seem to work out if the two lower level spawns only give half xp, despite still conning blue.

I actually bothered to run some numbers now and you are right. If the level range is 40-42 then I actually get the following:

Level 52: delta of -6 kills if all of them are full XP
Level 53: delta of -3 kills if all of them are full XP
Level 54: delta of -4 kills if all of them are full XP
Level 55: delta of 0 (!!!) kills if 2/3 of the kills were half XP and 1/3 were full XP
Level 56: delta of +2 kills if 2/3 of the kills were half XP and 1/3 were full XP
Level 57: looks like it's on track to be 2/3 of the kills at 1/4 XP and 1/3 at 1/2 XP

It's odd and doesn't fit without some serious streaking in the RNG. Would help to get a definite level range of the mob, though.

[Castle2.0]

Experience table on Green is wrong. And it's not rocket science to check.

It's common classic knowledge that 54 and 59 were especially hellacious.

55 and 56 should not take more exp than 54, but they do. Also the jump from 53 to 54 here is correct (~64%), but when tested with quest items it's ~90%.

Something is fishy.

[Thulian]

55 is a hell level and took 5x the exp of 54 on live, i guess you didnt play live maybe thats why you went pro on project1999

[Castle2.0]

I'll make it more simple for you Thulian: going from 54 to ding 55 and going from 59 to ding 60 were "double hell levels."

Google > your memory of 20 years ago. Try it out.