Soloing vs. grouping, once and for all

[Noselacri]

I've been wondering about group vs. solo exp. At this point in time during Live, I exclusively played classes that had to group, so I don't have a distinctive memory of the difference. What I certainly don't remember was constantly hearing that soloing was vastly better exp than grouping, nor finding a magician in every conceivable solo spot in the entire game, but this is clearly the case here. I can level significantly faster solo than I can in groups, and that's as an enchanter or shaman, not even the true solo-exp kings.

The impact this has on gameplay on this server is extremely obvious, and if this was the case in nineteen ninety-nine, I'll resign myself to the apparent fact that this is how it always worked and that people were just more willing to group back then.

So, to those of you who soloed extensively eleven years ago, was solo exp twice as good back then as well?

[Evandor]

solo isnt faster than a good group, the downtime is much longer and after 10+ mobs it gets boring like hell...
i dont know why ppl want to solo all their way up?
I am back in this game because modern MMORPGs don't offer any group feelings, it only comes to groups to rush through instances...
I would prefer even "not so good"-groups over solo stuff in EQ, if i want to solo i would play other games but seriously not EQ.

thats just my 2 copper.

[Noselacri]

Well, your personal preferences for grouping are fairly irrelevant. I'm not interested in anecdotal nonsense, and I think it's safe to say that anyone who knows how to solo efficiently can verify that the exp is quite a bit faster than grouping if you can find a place that offers enough mobs to avoid having to wait for respawns. What I'm looking for is believable reports of whether or not this was the case in the era we are trying to emulate, to the extent that is currently evident.

[Cheech]

Group exp on this server is horrible now. If your able to solo with your current class in a decently timed manner, then do so. You won't regret it.

[Tronjer]

The levelspeed on P99 is too fast anyway. Took me 20 days /played (roughly 2 months) to hit 50 solely by group xp and I spent a considerable part of this time /lfg.

[Wizerud]

I think it's the same. The difference is that people were much more inclined to group back then and I remember people used to look down on soloers as some kind of freaks who shouldn't be playing such a socially-enabled game.

The other thing is I think people are much more aware of better soloing techniques for almost all classes now than back then. So people are just better at it now (generalizing).

[JayDee]

The levelspeed on P99 is too fast anyway. Took me 20 days /played (roughly 2 months) to hit 50 solely by group xp and I spent a considerable part of this time /lfg.

Shoulda been here around server inception.

People were doing 20-40 in one day in sola.

[Auvdar]

It's amazing how differently people play there second run through of a game. Kinda like, you know what the fuck to do so you do it the better way <shrug>

[RKromwell]

I think it's the same. The difference is that people were much more inclined to group back then and I remember people used to look down on soloers as some kind of freaks who shouldn't be playing such a socially-enabled game.



The live servers had between 1500 to 3000 people on them at a time. If you wanted to kill anything you had to be in a group. Sure, there were people running solo but to get the good spawns they knew at some point they would have to group, just to have a shot at something they wanted.

[Tronjer]

Shoulda been here around server inception.

People were doing 20-40 in one day in sola.

Yeah, but where is the point?

Rush to level 50, kill plane trash for a brief time and all one can do afterwards is racing with other guilds for the few raid encounters, or farming plat in anticipation of Kunark. Doesn't matter if this procedure takes a few weeks more or less.

In contradiction to 1999, people have the knowledge about zones, spots, items, game mechanics, and build support networks from the get-go already. Where you once had three camps (HK, SolB Royals) there is just one here, death penalty and cr doesn't sting anymore and the infamous PoF break-ins are a joke nowadays.

That's not meant at as a rant, but to really bring back EQlive feeling, the mechanics should be balanced according to increased players experience. Slower leveling, less dps, mobs with higher hp, etc. Given the current rate we will burn through Kunark in two months again and permacamp Trak/VS afterwards.

[Nedala]

NERF SOLO EXP IMO, so we see more grps again, pls.

It just sucks that solo exp is so much better.

Or boost grp-exp, whatever works.

I think grp vs. solo is waaayyyy to much difference atm :(

[skorge]

So, to those of you who soloed extensively eleven years ago, was solo exp twice as good back then as well?

Yes, it was, unfortunately...and that is the sole purpose of "twinking" an alt. Because, everybody knows that soloing is much faster if you know what you are doing.

[Braveguard]

Yes, it was, unfortunately...and that is the sole purpose of "twinking" an alt. Because, everybody knows that soloing is much faster if you know what you are doing.

And there is a big part of the issue... twinking. If you are level 5 with level 40 gear, there is no point in grouping. You're taking nearly no damage and killing non-stop. Why would you bother with a group. Even with a minimal amount of twinking, if you know all the quirks and secrets of the game (as a larger percentage of players do), you can play the system to level faster as a solo than you can in a group.

I prefer having regular partners. I don't like random groups and soloing is boring. I only do it if Im trying to work up a skill or learn a trade or something that would be a drag for someone else to slog through with me. The game really is a lot more fun if you're with a bunch of buddies.

[Lagaidh]

I soloed a great deal in live just to see if I could. Paladins weren't seen as even capable of soloing and I liked to prove people wrong.

But it was SLOW.

I got to where I really enjoyed duoing with a RL buddy ranger. Here I'm duoing with my wife's druid. The xp seems fine enough to me. We don't have a lot of time to play and we're both L18. We started here in lateish August.

If we could find the right situation though... semi regular friends that understood our playtime is bound to RL constraints... that'd be just fine.

I guess the point is for us, at least one regular (each other) is preferable to soloing, but then... we aren't in a hurry to whizz through content we've been dying to relive as classic for at least 6 years.

[Messianic]

I personally think xp rates are identical, if not almost exactly the same, as they were on live during the comparable era. Why? I had plenty of RL friends who played a variety of classes - one Ogre SK, one Troll Shaman, one High Elf Magician, and myself, a human monk.

I saw the magician blow us all away in levels. He did play slightly more, but his xp gain and soloing ease made it a joke for him to pass us. The Shaman had a great deal of trouble until 24-34ish, when his speed started to ramp up. I leveled the slowest at first, being addicted to alts (as I am here), and played around a bit. However, once I pulled together enough cash from trading wisely and manufacturing items, I twinked the garbage out of my monk and burned through levels.

One concrete example is the Troll Shaman - he camped Osargen in HK from 24 to 27-29 (don't remember exactly). The exp he reported at the time in terms of bubbles and general exp rate was nearly identical to when my erudite wizard on this server camped him for a while (adjusting for exp penalties)

If there is some giant difference, i must be completely blind and can't see it.


My theory? Knowledge about how the first 2-3 years of everquest functioned, the classes who have solo advantages, the best places to solo, the best NPCs to camp, the best gear to use - the knowledge we have now about all of these things is immeasurably higher than what it was.


Most of the people who play this game have already done the group-route in 1999 or thereafter. We've grouped in lguk, and Sol B until we were blue in the face, so it's not a novelty to do what we did in 1999/2000. Quit complaining about group exp - you have to face the fact that unless you're in a group that knows what it's doing and you're in the right place in the right zone, solo exp is often faster than group exp.

If you genuinely play for a group experience instead of a solo grinding/Raiding experience, there's no reason to complain anyhow, and you need to take the bad with the good. Quit whining that other playstyles have an advantage. It shouldn't matter to you that some mage camping guards in HK levels faster than you - his leveling doesn't pick your pocket or break your leg.

Forcing people to group won't help either, nor would it be "classic." Sorry, you can't re-create a lack of knowledge that led people to group more often in classic without distorting exp mechanics and therefore making it less "classic."

[Mcbard]

Soloing was always much faster xp than group xp so long as you could minimize your downtime and kill times. It rocked being a necro.

[Raavak]

At the risk of deviating from classic increasing or retooling group exp may not be a bad idea.

[Pescador]

I'm fairly sure that the solo exp is cranked up beyond what it was in classic. I have no hard evidence to offer, but I'm sure many other people remember being thrilled if killing a blue mob solo even had a noticeable effect on your exp bar. Now, it seems like I can kill a blue mob in a hell level and still get 1/4 of a blue bar per kill.

Again, I have no evidence besides my memories, but I'm sure other people would agree that back in 1999/2000 you couldn't hop on your paladin and get a yellow after an hour or two of solo'ing.

Add to that the fact that mage pets still seem far stronger than they were originally, and you have people soloing their way to 50 in very little time. I know that 9 or 10 years ago my level 12 mage in wc would get absolutely crushed by kodiaks, but here I was able to kill deep red cons while only healing my pet a few times and tossing a level 1 nuke to get exp. Similarly, when I hit 16 I wouldn't dare attempt red con dw crocs in oasis because it simply wasn't worth the mana expenditure and the risk, while here I can solo them all day with almost zero risk because my pet can almost solo them himself.

Overall, though, I think the solo exp is quite a bit higher than it was on classic, because there was NO question that grouping was faster in 9 out of 10 cases, with certain kiting classes in certain zones being the exception rather than the rule.

I don't think people were ignorant 10 years ago; if the exp bar moved faster when solo'ing, everyone would have been solo'ing. It's not like we are so much wiser 10 years later that we have all suddenly realized that solo'ing was faster all along. There were min/maxers back in 1999, and it's silly to think that they just "assumed' grouping was faster.

People almost exclusively grouped in 1999 because it was faster than soloing. People are almost exclusively soloing here because it's faster than grouping. Something (and my guess is that solo exp is way too high) is different.

"Lack of knowledge" seems like a very thin excuse; don't you think the people playing 18 hours a day in 1999 would have figured out that grouping was crappy exp? It's not like you truly need years of experience to learn how to level fast in EQ. I don't really mind, since I'm able to solo my cleric, mage, pally, and bard and get at least a level every few hours, but I can very clearly remember that it was not this easy in classic.

[Messianic]

I have no hard evidence to offer, but I'm sure many other people remember being thrilled if killing a blue mob solo even had a noticeable effect on your exp bar. Now, it seems like I can kill a blue mob in a hell level and still get 1/4 of a blue bar per kill.

Killing blues on my wizard during a hell level had a barely noticeable effect on my exp bar.

Again, I have no evidence besides my memories, but I'm sure other people would agree that back in 1999/2000 you couldn't hop on your paladin and get a yellow after an hour or two of solo'ing.

Against undead with a Ghoulbane between 20-40, sure you could. I did it on live on my Half-Elf Paladin.

I know that 9 or 10 years ago my level 12 mage in wc would get absolutely crushed by kodiaks, but here I was able to kill deep red cons while only healing my pet a few times and tossing a level 1 nuke to get exp. Similarly, when I hit 16 I wouldn't dare attempt red con dw crocs in oasis because it simply wasn't worth the mana expenditure and the risk, while here I can solo them all day with almost zero risk because my pet can almost solo them himself.

Mage pets are an entirely separate issue from how fast you can gain exp as a specific mechanic. You can make another thread if you want to debate that.

Overall, though, I think the solo exp is quite a bit higher than it was on classic, because there was NO question that grouping was faster in 9 out of 10 cases, with certain kiting classes in certain zones being the exception rather than the rule.

I soloed constantly. So did most of my friends. I knew it was faster. I essentially soloed my monk to 60.

"Lack of knowledge" seems like a very thin excuse; don't you think the people playing 18 hours a day in 1999 would have figured out that grouping was crappy exp? It's not like you truly need years of experience to learn how to level fast in EQ. I don't really mind, since I'm able to solo my cleric, mage, pally, and bard and get at least a level every few hours, but I can very clearly remember that it was not this easy in classic.

All of what the Min-Maxers did back then trickles down to everyone else over time. Nearly everyone here is a person who is devoted enough to the game to play it over 10 years after it was released, so you have a higher population of min-maxers here than on live, which is another point that supports the concept.

Bards actually leveled faster on live because you could nearly swarm kite entire zones - mobs ran slower than they do here. I have a friend who did it through PoP. But the EXP he got from his swarms seems to match what bards can do here.

The points stand - Knowledge is better now, non min-maxers have access to be min-maxers. More Min-maxers here than on live as a %. Additional - general change of gameplay style of MMOs from group/hard/unforgiving to solo/easy/expect casual epics.

[ShivanAngel]

Im thinking Kunark will do a lot to bring back grouping. There were certain camps that were nearly impossible to solo. liikkkeeee most of sebilis and karnors...

If I saw a mage rocking disco or drolvarg warlord solo id start to wonder, but, soloing certain camps in Lguk isnt especially challenging.

Another issues is the concrete camp rules on this server. There were no "camps" recognized by GM's in classic EQ. If you tried to say you were soloing frenzies room a group would move right in and take it over. You were forced to group in this regard.

[Messianic]

don't you think the people playing 18 hours a day in 1999 would have figured out that grouping was crappy exp? It's not like you truly need years of experience to learn how to level fast in EQ.

if the exp bar moved faster when solo'ing, everyone would have been solo'ing.

Not exactly, because not everyone experienced every single class in classic, and therefore didn't experience how efficient mages or necros were, or tried to solo and failed utterly and decided they wouldn't.

And yes, experience does dictate how fast you level in EQ, and more knowledge about the best spots plays a huge role. More broad experience in the game = Better knowledge about where and how to grind.

Gear is also more easily accessible here than it was on live, with a few notable exceptions (FBSS, Mith2hander).

I made 6-7k before hitting level 30 because I knew what I was doing - I gained multiple levels a day occasionally in my 20s (and no levels for a few weeks given my play schedule).

[ShivanAngel]

Im soloing mostly now or duoing with my brother and the exp is really good. The duoing isnt that bad but god soloing is boring.

Choke
Root
Weaken
Let pet beat it down...

Repeat times infinity....

I would much rather be in a full group constantly chain pulling mobs as long as they were competent.

My brother and I were actually talking about this the other night, part of it is you risk something inviting that third person into your duo. If they are bad they actually slow you down. So you might be hesitant to bring new people in.

[yaeger]

Yeah, I've talked about this in other topics. We've calculated out the exp, we ran the numbers, checked the difference and it's amazing.

Essentially a good soloer, Mage, can kill 6 mobs in 5 minutes at a good camp spot with little downtime.

A group, to get comparable exp, would have to kill about 25-30 mobs in 5 mins which is impossible.

It'd be hard to find a place with 25-30 mobs that respawn every 5 mins. It's hard for a cleric to heal the tank through 25-30 mobs every 5 mins. A wizard cannot nuke 25-30 mobs in 5 mins and still have mana.

The list goes on and on...

Basically the group exp bonus is 10% now, went to 20% in 2001, then went to 80% in 2004.

I hope the devs give the server some kind of non-classic change, we need incentive to group up.

[Messianic]

Yeah, I've talked about this in other topics. We've calculated out the exp, we ran the numbers, checked the difference and it's amazing.

Essentially a good soloer, Mage, can kill 6 mobs in 5 minutes at a good camp spot with little downtime.

A group, to get comparable exp, would have to kill about 25-30 mobs in 5 mins which is impossible.

It'd be hard to find a place with 25-30 mobs that respawn every 5 mins. It's hard for a cleric to heal the tank through 25-30 mobs every 5 mins. A wizard cannot nuke 25-30 mobs in 5 mins and still have mana.

The list goes on and on...

Basically the group exp bonus is 10% now, went to 20% in 2003, then went to 80% in 2004.

I hope the devs give the server some kind of non-classic change, we need incentive to group up.

This is an argument for nerfing mages, not incentivizing grouping...

[ShivanAngel]

The only thing that is really insane is the fire pet Dshield (however the thing has no HP). Its damage=level (or at least, im pretty sure it does). So at 20 the pet has a perma 18ish point damage shield, thats what a level 40ish mage can cast.

Also if you think they are insane now wait until they get that beast that is the epic pet... Thing is crazy.

[Messianic]

The only thing that is really insane is the fire pet Dshield (however the thing has no HP). Its damage=level (or at least, im pretty sure it does). So at 20 the pet has a perma 18ish point damage shield, thats what a level 40ish mage can cast.

Also if you think they are insane now wait until they get that beast that is the epic pet... Thing is crazy.

It takes quite a while for one epic pet to be "manufactured" on the server...that's one of the hardest if not the hardest epic. Don't expect to see them all over the place...

But yes, the fire pet damage shield is insane.

[ShivanAngel]

Oh I agree that the mage epic, is probably one of the most tedious and time consuming. (Close contender with the warrior epic).

But yeah, I remember grouping with a mage with it back in OS during kunark.... Was one of the holy shit wow moment.

[yaeger]

This is an argument for nerfing mages, not incentivizing grouping...

No, that was an example using mages as a solo class. Every other class that solo's effectively earns more exp than a group hands down.

Take that number down a bit, say a Druid kills 3 mobs in 5 mins routinely. A group would have to pull, kill, and med up enough to continue killing ~18 mobs every 5 mins.

Still impossible to match the soloer.

[Messianic]

No, that was an example using mages as a solo class. Every other class that solo's effectively earns more exp than a group hands down.

Take that number down a bit, say a Druid kills 3 mobs in 5 mins routinely. A group would have to pull, kill, and med up enough to continue killing ~18 mobs every 5 mins.

Still impossible to match the soloer.

I see what you did there.

This is also an argument against the idea that grouping was faster on live...math seems to indicate otherwise.

[yaeger]

Here's the math.

Not true, I've checked it with debugging repeatedly. In fact what happens is:

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:


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

So except for the Human Cleric and the Halfing Rogue, all members of the group earn more XP for killing 6 mobs while grouped than they did killing one mob solo.

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.

That's why Sony/Verant kept raising the group experience bonuses. Groups cannot keep up with the dedicated solo classes.

That's why we see so many druids, mages, necros. You can level alone without the hassle of groups, not having to share any of the loot, and you gain a ton more experience.

Mathematically (an example), a mage killing a mob every 50 seconds, will earn 2-3 times the exp a busy group would get.

[Raavak]

part of it is you risk something inviting that third person into your duo. If they are bad they actually slow you down. So you might be hesitant to bring new people in.
Just like on Live in SoV on I never joined a pickup group and opted for (endgame geared) guildies. Grouping can be a crapshoot. Caveat is that ive had no bad experiences on p99 as of yet.

Soloing-you can hunt whenever you are ready and if in a good spot can optimize your time by having lots of mobs. Bio while medding, etc. Grouping-you are somewat at the mercy of your group. Healer or tank go afk and everyone either sits or you make conservative pulls.

[KilyenaMage]

^^^^ I don't really understand that table entirely. You mean to say that the Halfling Rogue is earning the LEAST xp of anyone in the group !??!?


Also, the server should just do away with class/race penalties now. Or at the very LEAST make it so those penalties are no longer shared with the group.


Also last night our group was fortunate to have a mini-PL of sorts. We had a 28 dark elf SK, a 28 human monk, a 28 dwarven rogue, a 24 DE enchanter, a 23 erudite cleric and a 24 dwarven rogue.

We were chain pulling red-con gnomes in sola. Hell, more than chain-pulling. There were always 3-5 mobs mezzed in the camp waiting to be killed. Our group had LITERALLY 3 5 minute med breaks the entire time?

It took me a little over 3 HOURS to get 4 yellows of xp and ding 25....as a dwarven Rogue.

My mage can solo from 24-25 in about an hour, and she's completely ungeared. Basically then I would say soloing is at LEAST 3x more efficient if not more.

[Messianic]

^^^^ I don't really understand that table entirely. You mean to say that the Halfling Rogue is earning the LEAST xp of anyone in the group !??!?


Also, the server should just do away with class/race penalties now. Or at the very LEAST make it so those penalties are no longer shared with the group.

It's because people who need less exp to level take less. Exp penalties and bonuses are essentially flattened while grouping, meaning that the rest of the group gets less exp per kill if choosing between, say, a halfling warrior or a troll SK.

Everyone gains the same % exp with relation to their EXP bar, in other words.

[Messianic]

It's because people who need less exp to level take less. Exp penalties and bonuses are essentially flattened while grouping, meaning that the rest of the group gets less exp per kill if choosing between, say, a halfling warrior or a troll SK.

Everyone gains the same % exp with relation to their EXP bar, in other words.

ERm...I think race penalties don't affect group, but class ones do, IIRC.

[KilyenaMage]

It should be noted that 3 hours to get 4 yellows at lvl 24 is probably pretty accurate.

[Frice]

I solo'd a Wizard on live, as well as a Enchanter. So, technically you have Druids, Necros, Mages, Wizards, Enchanters in the solo'able group. There is no doubt you have some advantage be it experiance or money in soloing. However, you also take a risk. Not having a rezer at higher levels results in accidents having consequences that may take a while to overcome - from the wasted time having to run back to your corpse (if it's easily available) to the time it takes to recover lost xp due to the death. So, straight line calculations about group vs solo xp are not always correct.

Making bonuses for groups have unwanted effects as well, I'm sure we saw this on live. Once someone defines what the "perfect" group is for a particular camp, you see that classes (perhaps non solo classes) become bastard children and are unable to find groups because they don't fit the perfect group blueprint, all the while those classes that could have just solo'd for xp now find that grouping is even as-good-as or even better xp, with less risk.

[ShivanAngel]

Yup, the group trinity will hit really hard when kunark goes live. Karnors, and OS are not dungeons you mess around in.

Groups will pretty much need

Cleric
Chanter
Tank
3 best dps you can find.

[Mimn]

I decided to play a necro here not because it's a great soloing class but rather, it was one of the few classes I didn't play in live. I'm very happy with my decision because when I go to the dungeons of appropriate level looking for groups (Lowerguk, solb, etc.) I don't find groups, just lvl 50's farming for their alts. I started my character about a month ago and I get the distinct feeling I "missed" this server by a good 6 month. Currently I'm level 37 and I get INSANE xp at certain solo camps but I'd gladly exchange that for some fun groups. I'm not in a rush to fifty, what's the point? but it sure would be nice to find more than a half dozen people in 'group' zones.

As to the xp, with nothing to support my argument other than gut feeling and recollections of live, I would say that the solo xp is a bit faster than it was during release in '98.

[Lickum]

The only thing that is really insane is the fire pet Dshield (however the thing has no HP). Its damage=level (or at least, im pretty sure it does). So at 20 the pet has a perma 18ish point damage shield, thats what a level 40ish mage can cast.

Also if you think they are insane now wait until they get that beast that is the epic pet... Thing is crazy.

I played a mage from velious on and never used the fire pet except in groups because they were wizards and would cast spells. When did they have this high of DS? I only remember them casting wizard DS's like O'Keilly or something that didnt do much damage, I always had to cast my DS on them to overwrite the shitty one they cast on themselves.

edit: also the fire pet did considerable less melee damage than the other 3 pets.

[ShivanAngel]

only the 50+ first pets are wizards.

before 50 they have the same melee damage table (they may hit for max less often due to low strength). But their Dshield is equal to the level of the pet, so the level 4 pet has a 5 point DS. Their autocast nuke is also the strongest of the 4 pets.

[yaeger]

I solo'd a Wizard on live, as well as a Enchanter. So, technically you have Druids, Necros, Mages, Wizards, Enchanters in the solo'able group. There is no doubt you have some advantage be it experiance or money in soloing. However, you also take a risk. Not having a rezer at higher levels results in accidents having consequences that may take a while to overcome - from the wasted time having to run back to your corpse (if it's easily available) to the time it takes to recover lost xp due to the death. So, straight line calculations about group vs solo xp are not always correct.

Making bonuses for groups have unwanted effects as well, I'm sure we saw this on live. Once someone defines what the "perfect" group is for a particular camp, you see that classes (perhaps non solo classes) become bastard children and are unable to find groups because they don't fit the perfect group blueprint, all the while those classes that could have just solo'd for xp now find that grouping is even as-good-as or even better xp, with less risk.

I don't understand. If you raise the group exp bonus to promote groups, it still leaves solo classes getting the same very good exp that they already had. It's a win/win.

Besides.. you already see the 'perfect group' mentality on this server. Do you invite that ranger with mediocre dps and huge exp penalty, or that rogue?

[ShivanAngel]

I don't understand. If you raise the group exp bonus to promote groups, it still leaves solo classes getting the same very good exp that they already had. It's a win/win.

Besides.. you already see the 'perfect group' mentality on this server. Do you invite that ranger with mediocre dps and huge exp penalty, or that rogue?

This is part of the reason class exp penalties were dropped. People would pass over certain players so they could get better exp.

Most of the time on my ranger I had to make the group to get one.

[Messianic]

I don't understand. If you raise the group exp bonus to promote groups, it still leaves solo classes getting the same very good exp that they already had. It's a win/win.

Besides.. you already see the 'perfect group' mentality on this server. Do you invite that ranger with mediocre dps and huge exp penalty, or that rogue?

This wouldn't be a terrible idea - it depends if "Classic" trumps "Good for the Server."

It's reasonable...Maybe this is a cause more people should rally behind? They could just raise group EXP bonuses to a place where they can at least come close to solo mage/necro/druid/wizard(only quadding) exp given the same mobs, etc. Would certainly encourage more grouping, although there are almost certainly some unintended consequences (although I can't think of any off-hand).

[tanknspank]

I'm playing a necro, new to the server no fancy gear (no stats just cloth armor). My blue con pet solos yellows with no assistance from me. No fear kiting, no kiting, nothing. If I help it out then I can chain kill reds.

I've played both a necro and a mage back in 1999 and at no point did an untwinked, un-focused, un-buffed pet kill things so easily.

[Messianic]

I'm playing a necro, new to the server no fancy gear (no stats just cloth armor). My blue con pet solos yellows with no assistance from me. No fear kiting, no kiting, nothing. If I help it out then I can chain kill reds.

I've played both a necro and a mage back in 1999 and at no point did an untwinked, un-focused, un-buffed pet kill things so easily.

Which reds? What level are you?

I have a 12 necro, and my pet, even the highest con pet, was definitely not soloing yellows.

[eqravenprince]

Wow, I didn't know that is how experience is done in groups. So I forget the exact experience penalty/bonus per class, so forgive me if my exp mod is a little off. But in theory you could have a group of the following:

Using the 1000xp mob, 1100xp after group bonus.

Paladin (1.4 exp mod) - 1490 exp
Cleric (1.1 exp mod) - 1278 exp
Warrior (.9 exp mod) - 958 exp
Rogue (.9 exp mod) - 958 exp
Rogue (.9 exp mod) - 958 exp
Rogue (.9 exp mod) - 958 exp

But if I replace a Rogue with a Ranger the exp given for the same mob would be as follows:

Paladin (1.4 exp mod) - 1380 exp
Cleric (1.1 exp mod) - 1182 exp
Warrior (.9 exp mod) - 886 exp
Rogue (.9 exp mod) - 886 exp
Rogue (.9 exp mod) - 886 exp
Ranger (1.4 exp mod) - 1380 exp

So in effect, but replacing that one Rogue with a Ranger, you have reduced experience by about 7.5% per mob for everyone else that stayed in the group. I'm fairly certain that Ranger assuming equal skill and gear isn't going to speed up the killing by 7.5%.

[Eccentricaa]

So in effect, but replacing that one Rogue with a Ranger, you have reduced experience by about 7.5% per mob for everyone else that stayed in the group. I'm fairly certain that Ranger assuming equal skill and gear isn't going to speed up the killing by 7.5%.

But a rogue cant harmony, cant heal your nearly dead cleric, cant track your named mob, and cant give you sow.

[Kassel]

I solo on p99 (Druid) simply becouse i was a warrior on live and I am not willing to wait forever LFG like i once was. I also wanted to play something new, hence the druid.

I will say so far (20's) I level much faster solo then grouped. Also If I die its always my fault and not some noobs. I also can pop on for sporatic periods of time and still feel like I have made some progress.

[DekThai]

Solo is fun in certain classes. You always going to get more XP than group because of Risks vs Rewards.

Group get less XP because obviously, less risk vs Solo.

BUT!

Example. Class 1 solo spends 30 minutes killing 30 mobs and get 3 bubs of exp.
While group 1, spend 30 minutes killing 60 mobs and get 5 bubs of exp.

There are pros and cons that applied on each scenario so yeah, if group sucks you gonna get less XP and vice versa.

[KilyenaMage]

I certainly wouldn't say that solo is higher risk ; reward.

ESPECIALLY for Druids and Necros that are kiting.

Kiting is essentially zero risk MASSIVE reward.

[Daldaen]

I certainly wouldn't say that solo is higher risk ; reward.

ESPECIALLY for Druids and Necros that are kiting.

Kiting is essentially zero risk MASSIVE reward.

Kiting basically uses up an entire bar of mana to kill 2-3 mobs generally, for a druid at least (killing dark blues). Then I have a 10+min med break before I kill again.

Depending on where you kite you have 'zero risk'. I encourage you to kite in Kedge Keep and rethink that claim though (Yes I do this occasionally if root is not working)

[DekThai]

Kiting basically uses up an entire bar of mana to kill 2-3 mobs generally, for a druid at least (killing dark blues). Then I have a 10+min med break before I kill again.

Depending on where you kite you have 'zero risk'. I encourage you to kite in Kedge Keep and rethink that claim though (Yes I do this occasionally if root is not working)

Thank you for thinking outside the bun, just like he said, its depends on scenarios such as terrains and mobs.

[Daldaen]

Thank you for thinking outside the bun, just like he said, its depends on scenarios such as terrains and mobs.
You're welcome :)!

[yaeger]

Soloing as a Warrior/Rogue/Ranger: High risk vs. reward.

Soloing as a Mage/Necro/Druid: Low risk vs. reward

It all depends, I'd view soloing as a better risk/reward scenario than grouping. Mostly due to a couple things: one person can't screw everyone over, you don't have 5 DPS classes just hanging out while the healer regens mana, and you don't have idle times LFG or looking for that vital group member (tank, healer, slower).

Anyone that says soloing SHOULD be better exp than grouping is wrong. It should be consistent exp. It should be relatively safe exp. It should be constant exp.

It should not be all-around-better exp.

[Lazortag]

I've been in some amazing groups that were definitely comparable to the exp rate of a mage soloing (crazy royals groups chain pulling, for instance) except that they were (a) funner and (b) safer. But most of the time the people I've grouped with have been idiots. I'm kind of surprised that this server full of "veterans" has so many people who seem like they've never played before, and think it's acceptable to constantly go afk, not assist, attack mezzed mobs, etc. I haven't had a good grouping experience in months, but then again I haven't played that much lately.

I realize that this has probably been said before (aka, the problem is that so many groups suck blah blah blah) but many of the players on this server really need to get their shit together if grouping is going to be desirable for people like me.

[yaeger]

Here's a hypothetical situation:

This isn't taking into account level differences, or group makeup with shared exp penalties.

Let say you get into a good group. Your camp has 20 mobs in it with a 15 min respawn (I'd say that's pretty good for a group to kill 20 mobs before repops, taking into account med breaks, difficult pulls, etc). Your group will clear the camp just before repops come, making you start all over again.

A soloer, to get equal exp as any member of the above group, would have to kill 4 mobs in 15 mins to get equivalent experience (see my previous exp calculation post).

That's what I don't understand. It's day and night comparison.

[Estu]

I'd like to suggest that a full group is perhaps not the most efficient way to go about things. Today in Crushbone on my level 10 warrior, I camped slaver caves with a 9 monk and 9 druid, and despite a lot of the centurions being green or light blue, I gained a full level in about two hours. Of course this is Crushbone at level 10 so it's faster than a later-level group, and I am somewhat twinked (char's gear is worth about 1-1.5k), but the experience was very noticeably faster than any full group I ever had at slaver caves. We had basically no downtime and kept everything down, just straight-up chain pulling.

This doesn't mean that grouping is necessarily faster than soloing, but I would suggest that maybe a duo or trio actually is faster in certain situations, maybe with the caveat that you have to compare against a druid or a shaman soloer rather than a mage or necro.

[insertname]

I am a necromancer, soloing the forums mwwaahahaha.....

seriously though, any update as to whats what about all this?

[vageta31]

Soloing is hands down faster experience, provided you understand and implement the most efficient method. If you burn all your mana and have to med for 10 minutes then you lose that efficiency unless you were able to kill about 8 mobs in that time. Kiting in general is only somewhat efficient and really only shines if you can either a) quad kite, or b) kite yellows and reds. Kiting a bunch of blues is sort of pointless as the whole entire idea of killing a higher number of blues is the lower mana cost in order to do so not to mention the extra time it takes.

My iksar necro spent most of his 20's chain killing high blues, whites and yellows and leveled extremely fast while never really running out of mana. I'm talking a level in 90 minutes or so. There's a threshold you have to find and understand to determine the best mana per kill efficiency. Do you burn more mana to kill mobs faster and then sit and med, or do you use less mana and take a bit more time?

I was killing the two treants and then still had enough mana to run around and kill 3-4 blues in the area, come back and still be able to get treants when they popped. That's 5-6 kills per spawn cycle with very little downtime. The only time I really had to stop completely to med was when I had way too many resists in that cycle and decided to just med to full before starting again. Of course the entire reason I played an Ikky was for the regen as it is god's gift to a necro.

How did I do it? Used as little mana as possible, sit down as much as possible and found a nice spot where I didn't waste time running too much in between spawns. Easy blues would only get one darkness, one fear and my pet. Tougher mobs would get one darkness, one boil blood, one fear and my pet. Turn off taunt, darkness mob, fear it, put on a blood boil, run about 100 yards out and then sit and med. With allure on I had gained a good portion of my mana back by the time the mob came after me in which I'd simply run away again and then sit and wait.

This threshhold takes time to figure out for each class, level and situation but if you're smart about it then it becomes natural. I did the same thing leveling my shaman to 50 completely solo. Instead of root dotting and kiting (which I find embarrasing to shamans everywhere), I played an Ogre and went full on battle shaman. I was tanking, yes tanking, spectres from 45 to 50 and doing it very efficiently. I also camped AoF solo from about 45 and up doing the same method of tanking and got awesome exp as well. AoF himself hit pretty hard so I only stepped in when pet was in trouble or I was getting low on mana, but I still had that option.

Had I root dot'd or kited them it'd have been far slower. I loaded up on HP and AC gear, rubi BP and FBSS, grabbed a nice high damage 2h weapon then went to town. I did this for most of my career and I leveled very fast this way. Open up with a slow, drop one dot on the mob then would melee it down with pet helping. Keeping hit points about 60-70% was enough and plenty to canni if needbe. The regen kept me healing fast during what small downtime I had and I was pulling pretty consistently. Most shamans don't use this method and I see them plugging away for much longer grinding but it's just not that efficient. Root dotting is a horrible method for Shammies due to the high cost of mana.

Then there is the whole idea of how much more money you make while soloing versus splitting in groups...

[fishingme]

I've got to agree, pling my brothers (cleric/warrior) when grouped they will get a level every 40 or so minutes. When solo each of them easily will get a level in 10-15minutes with laid back pling, not serious "hey lets frak some shit up and level asap"

[stormlord]

I've been wondering about group vs. solo exp. At this point in time during Live, I exclusively played classes that had to group, so I don't have a distinctive memory of the difference. What I certainly don't remember was constantly hearing that soloing was vastly better exp than grouping, nor finding a magician in every conceivable solo spot in the entire game, but this is clearly the case here. I can level significantly faster solo than I can in groups, and that's as an enchanter or shaman, not even the true solo-exp kings.

The impact this has on gameplay on this server is extremely obvious, and if this was the case in nineteen ninety-nine, I'll resign myself to the apparent fact that this is how it always worked and that people were just more willing to group back then.

So, to those of you who soloed extensively eleven years ago, was solo exp twice as good back then as well?
I've thought about this some. I really think it depends on the person.

Some people are really good in groups. They're not afk too much and love the thrill. If a group is well functioning and it's in a good zone for groups then experience will come in at a faster pace than most soloers will get.

The probelm is that a lot of groups are pickup and not very good at what they're doing. A lot of them aren't even playing for the experience. They just like it. Some will go afk. Some will have their mind somewhere else. They will spend hour(s) just forming the group. So the hypotheticall 200% with 6 people never takes form. Some of them won't like it. of course. I suppose they'll learn to hate this game.

You can't easily compare a single person to a group because a single person is usually an expert in a particular place when they go there. They press all of hte buttons and at the right time. They have it down to a science. But that's hard to find in groups. I've been in EQ for a long, long time. I've seen a lot of groups. Finding a group that really knows how to play is difficult, and can get boring if you always play with the same guys. Furthermore, since a lot of people do AFK (and often), necros and other classes with FD or CC ability will have an obvious advantage. RL beckons us. Games can't have all of our attention, 24/7.

I played a ranger in 99. I made another one in 2001 and that's all I played, mostly. I think that it was picking a ranger that made me remember EQ so fondly. If I had picked a group-dependent class, I don't think I would have felt the same way. I was able to solo, track, root, snare, kill from a distance, sneak, so on and so forth; I really had a lot of tools in my bag. Without many tools to use, it gets boring fast - you don't feel in control.

I also, strangely, think that soloing is boring. Well, it gets boring because you start to do the same thing over and over again. And there's no one to talk to or to correct. DDO is a fun game if you play it solo. But inevitably, you want to group to stay interested. For me, grouping ruined DDO completely. Everyone rushing, pushing ahead, not being able to absorb everything, etc. But maybe this is just the way I am. In EQ, I grouped a lot with my ranger. I hated camping. I soloed sometimes and it was faster experience, but it was boring. It got boring because I would master a zone and then AA or something. But I always did the same thing. I didn't go to new areas when I was getting experience. For me, the game was in the grouping and in the guild because they pushed me to do new things and to use all of my ranger abilities - ya, I used ranger gate a lot.

[vageta31]

You're right about the quality of groups. If you compared a really well put together group that knows how to play efficiently, then group exp can be pretty good. However most pick up groups are not like this, and even if they are how long will it last before someone leaves, dies or what not?

Soloing you can pick a spot and have at it at your own pace without relying on anyone but yourself. I'm not against grouping at all, however when I want to grind I always roll like Han Solo. If I want to have some other fun, hang out with people or maybe camp something I can't do alone then I'll group. If you know your class well enough then even if you mostly play solo, you can still play your class quite well in a group environment.

Personally I like to solo because I hate relaying and waiting on others. If it's a guild group then that usually solves most of the problems, but there's always someone who's lagging, loses connection, goes afk, etc.. and that slows down the pace of the group. While soloing you are in absolute complete control of your grinding and with Kunark open there are always places to go if your favorite spot is taken.

Besides I get plenty of social interaction with those I run across during my solo time. I meet a lot of random people that way and if I'm on my Shaman then I almost always stop and buff lowbies which makes me their friend for life :P

I've thought about this some. I really think it depends on the person.

Some people are really good in groups. They're not afk too much and love the thrill. If a group is well functioning and it's in a good zone for groups then experience will come in at a faster pace than most soloers will get.

The probelm is that a lot of groups are pickup and not very good at what they're doing. A lot of them aren't even playing for the experience. They just like it. Some will go afk. Some will have their mind somewhere else. They will spend hour(s) just forming the group. So the hypotheticall 200% with 6 people never takes form. Some of them won't like it. of course. I suppose they'll learn to hate this game.

You can't easily compare a single person to a group because a single person is usually an expert in a particular place when they go there. They press all of hte buttons and at the right time. They have it down to a science. But that's hard to find in groups. I've been in EQ for a long, long time. I've seen a lot of groups. Finding a group that really knows how to play is difficult, and can get boring if you always play with the same guys. Furthermore, since a lot of people do AFK (and often), necros and other classes with FD or CC ability will have an obvious advantage. RL beckons us. Games can't have all of our attention, 24/7.

I played a ranger in 99. I made another one in 2001 and that's all I played, mostly. I think that it was picking a ranger that made me remember EQ so fondly. If I had picked a group-dependent class, I don't think I would have felt the same way. I was able to solo, track, root, snare, kill from a distance, sneak, so on and so forth; I really had a lot of tools in my bag. Without many tools to use, it gets boring fast - you don't feel in control.

I also, strangely, think that soloing is boring. Well, it gets boring because you start to do the same thing over and over again. And there's no one to talk to or to correct. DDO is a fun game if you play it solo. But inevitably, you want to group to stay interested. For me, grouping ruined DDO completely. Everyone rushing, pushing ahead, not being able to absorb everything, etc. But maybe this is just the way I am. In EQ, I grouped a lot with my ranger. I hated camping. I soloed sometimes and it was faster experience, but it was boring. It got boring because I would master a zone and then AA or something. But I always did the same thing. I didn't go to new areas when I was getting experience. For me, the game was in the grouping and in the guild because they pushed me to do new things and to use all of my ranger abilities - ya, I used ranger gate a lot.

[bakkily]

soloing is good exp, but only so few classes do it so well, my ranger is 33 and i do find that in ot only dark blues, i can solo quite easily, about 3-4 rhinos before i need a mana break, the thing though with that class is depending one on gear you have, your archery, and how much dmg your arrows can do, i stick to these 4 dmg arrows, due to being cheap to make, but then getting your skill 185+ in fletching to make 5+ dmg arrows makes soloing so much easier for the ranger

but only true soloers are the pure arcane casters, mage/ wiz, or druid though not arcane, once you get a pet with the shaman you can solo to 60, just 50+ takes longer, necros id say are the kings of soloing, but it all depends on how you know your class, no pure melee'er can solo, but if you know the good spots, the advantages of the area, you can solo

but i prefer grouping, most often

[vageta31]

Shamans can solo quite well to 60, though obviously not as easy as a necro. It's true that gear plays a major part of it. Twink soloers have a huge advantage that someone playing their first characters do not have. This is why my necro can do what he does, if he didn't have gobs of mana and hps he couldn't kill so many without rest.

Iksar monks can solo, especially if they have a fungi tunic. SK's have always been able to solo with their lifetaps and utility spells(invis, FD, etc..) but give them a fungi or an iksar BP and they can do very well.

soloing is good exp, but only so few classes do it so well, my ranger is 33 and i do find that in ot only dark blues, i can solo quite easily, about 3-4 rhinos before i need a mana break, the thing though with that class is depending one on gear you have, your archery, and how much dmg your arrows can do, i stick to these 4 dmg arrows, due to being cheap to make, but then getting your skill 185+ in fletching to make 5+ dmg arrows makes soloing so much easier for the ranger

but only true soloers are the pure arcane casters, mage/ wiz, or druid though not arcane, once you get a pet with the shaman you can solo to 60, just 50+ takes longer, necros id say are the kings of soloing, but it all depends on how you know your class, no pure melee'er can solo, but if you know the good spots, the advantages of the area, you can solo

but i prefer grouping, most often

[Ennoia]

I've been wondering about group vs. solo exp. At this point in time during Live, I exclusively played classes that had to group, so I don't have a distinctive memory of the difference. What I certainly don't remember was constantly hearing that soloing was vastly better exp than grouping, nor finding a magician in every conceivable solo spot in the entire game, but this is clearly the case here. I can level significantly faster solo than I can in groups, and that's as an enchanter or shaman, not even the true solo-exp kings.

The impact this has on gameplay on this server is extremely obvious, and if this was the case in nineteen ninety-nine, I'll resign myself to the apparent fact that this is how it always worked and that people were just more willing to group back then.

So, to those of you who soloed extensively eleven years ago, was solo exp twice as good back then as well?

I solo'd extremely fast on my Magician, faster than grouping with my Necromancer was, but that was before pet nerfs and she was twinked to all hell with a ton of gear, all of the SolRo focus items that a close friend from live hooked me up with because I was too lazy to farm them myself (thanks CK!) and I had the Brazier of Elemental Summoning (which was affected by the focus from Torch of Alna). However, I'm an experienced raider and wanted to just get there asap, having already leveled one character through grouping on P99 to the 40s. If you want the full EQ experience, go with a group.

[Doors]

Soloing is and always will be more effective more often than grouping.

[Galanteer]

grouping however is better for loot (not always though)