Class Experience Penalties

[Danth]

It's one of those things where you have to take the bad with the good. As I've said, I dislike the penalties, and if it were up to me, I wouldn't implement them--but it isn't up to me. The powers that be said they're staying in. So be it. Given that reality, the next best thing is to see them implemented in the manner most closely similar to 1999 as possible.

Yes, some groups may refrain from taking a hybrid due to the penalty. This will hurt Rangers the worst, I suspect. However, they can always group with their friends. As it currently stands, most of my friends outleveled me and I can group with my wife on equal terms only because she's willing to suicide her character. As such, I rate the current implementation as even worse than the classic form. Some folks may disagree of course.

Danth

[Widan]

If it's implemented correctly it won't hurt them as bad as the straight 40% penalty now is hurting them.

[guineapig]

I mentioned something about this group exp penalty issue about a month ago but I was told I was wrong at the time:

I was under the impression that this is how it's supposed to be in groups. It was just another way to encourage group play.

So the penalty that the big races get as well as the hybrid classes, which makes up almost half of the possible combinations of race/class can be offset by simply not soloing.

I could be wrong though...

http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...=2590#post2590

Basically I figured reducing or getting rid of the exp penalty when in groups was just one of many ways that Verant decided to encourage grouping.... well maybe. In any case didn't didn't advertise their reasoning very well if that was true.

[Summit]

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

Basically:

1) If the xp comes out of nowhere, it will be like not having a hybrid penalty.

2) If more xp is just given to hybrids I think groups are going to be leery of taking them.

If the experience penalty stays in because it was in classic it should be implemented like it was on classic. I don't see why it's absolutely ridiculous to suggest we remove the experience penalty but its a-okay to change it so it suits one type of group or another.

[Halladar]

Well 2) is apparently the way it was until 2001.

Hybrids get more xp. So if you group with a warrior, as opposed to an sk/pal you get more xp.

Something is really screwy about this whole thing though. Rogues and warriors get a 9 and 10% bonus respectively. What does that mean? say they should get 800 xp. Does that mean they get 880 xp? Or simply that the total xp they need to obtain a certain level is reduced by 10%?

I remember Pyrocat put up the troll sk formula 1.4 for being an sk, 1.2 for a troll. total xp penalty = 1.4*1.2=1.68.

We assume we know exactly what that means. Well what does it mean? Let's say a class with no bonus or penalty (cleric say) needs 1000 xp to get level 2. Does that mean a troll sk needs 1680 xp to get level 2? Or that xp received is divided by 1.68?

I'm getting a headache.

Edit: Just wanted to say that depending on how xp works, you have an additional bonus (warrior xp bonus %/# group members) for every warrior or rogue in your group basically, as opposed to any other class. Depending on how this all actually works though. It's not very big though.

[Danth]

"Or simply that the total xp they need to obtain a certain level is reduced by 10%?"

That would be correct. Experience penalties didn't really exist in the form of a multiplier. Instead, classes simply required more or less experience to level. You're also correct in that a group full of Warriors and Rogues would level quite a bit faster than a group full of Rangers and Shadow Knights.

I do not know how EQ-EMU factors things.

Danth

[bigups43]

If theres no exp loss in a group, then I think thats a happy medium.

[stormlord]

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

This hits the nail on the head... Roll up a bard/sk/paladin... try to keep the same group of friends together for more than a week. I was grouped with a rogue/druid 3 nights in a row... I started as a paladin at level 11, they were level 10... by the 3rd night i was level 14 (almost 15) and they were levels 17 and 18. Now I get to find another group to do this with... rinse repeat untill your getting tells from people who are level 22 sending you tells of congrats for getting 16. Oh what fun (sarcasm).

You want 1999, that is fine... but right now unless your twinked to hell, getting power leveled, or just like beating your head against a wall, there is no reason to be a hybrid. One of the great things about eq is finding "friends" and being able to play together. Your exp penalty takes away from that community experience. Just do a /who sometime. The reason bards/rangers are the least played classes in the game is not due to bugs/suck factor... its cause of the bugs/suck factor plus penalties that people just say "no way in hell". Take a poll, I bet there have been 100 plus bards leveled to 10-15 that then quit due to the penalty.

You don't know that. Rangers have been called gimps since day 1. I played a ranger on day 1 and I enjoyed it. It's all about outloook. If you go into this thinking it'll suck and that it sucks not to keep up with your close friends, then you'll set yourself up for a self-fulfilling prophecy. All you'll see are the negatives, and frustration will fill your life. Better to live within your means. Things go smoother.

If anything, there should be an option in the client:
1) "Share experience with group: [X]"

If you turn it on, you share the penalty with your group and everyone suffers. If you turn it off, the penalty stays with you and you level slower than the others in your group. For those with close friends, suffering the penalty together is preferable because their goal is to stick together. For others, who often get random groups and adventure all over the place with different people, they might not want the whole group to suffer the penalty. I can imagine groups not wanting to invite you because of the penalty, as well. So out of respect for the group, or yourself (you just want a group and you don't want to give them a reason to not invite you), you turn it off.

Having it as an option would be the best possible outcome. I wouldn't want it forced on me (or the group).

[Widan]

Or since everyone always whines about every suggestion that differs from classic, why not just make it how it was in classic?

[Swank]

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

Or since everyone always whines about every suggestion that differs from classic, why not just make it how it was in classic?

^^^
What I was going to say