Level 55 EXP required.

[Hamahakki]

Takes 44.1M exp to get through 54
Takes 33.6M exp to get through 55

[loramin]

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

Takes 44.1M exp to get through 54
Takes 33.6M exp to get through 55

Interesting. They're not as different as I expected (I thought hell levels were supposed to be double).

When you couple that with the fact that killing the same mob at level 55 will give you less experience than it did at 54, and the fact that we can't measure any of this completely accurately (without cheating and using ShowEQ or something) it makes sense that killing the same mobs at 55 would seem as slow (or almost as slow) as 54.

[Taffan]

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

Interesting. They're not as different as I expected (I thought hell levels were supposed to be double).

When you couple that with the fact that killing the same mob at level 55 will give you less experience than it did at 54, and the fact that we can't measure any of this completely accurately (without cheating and using ShowEQ or something) it makes sense that killing the same mobs at 55 would seem as slow (or almost as slow) as 54.

According to the wiki, all levels past 50 are hell levels - it's just 54 and 59 are double hell levels.

[Rararboker]

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

Takes 44.1M exp to get through 54
Takes 33.6M exp to get through 55

Wow look at that! My statement was true! Who would have thought? (aside from anyone who already knew how xp worked in EQ)

[fastboy21]

maybe using "pixels" isn't the best measurement of your exp progress...

[Cecily]

There can be no science without units of measurement.

[fastboy21]

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

There can be no science without units of measurement.

so you're saying science wouldn't be exactly the same in the universe if there were no units of measurement? **boggle**

[loramin]

Originally Posted by fastboy21 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

so you're saying science wouldn't be exactly the same in the universe if there were no units of measurement? **boggle**

Well if you're defining science as "how the universe works" then his comment makes no sense. But if you define it as "humankind's understanding of how the universe works", then yeah, we'd have a pretty piss poor understanding of the universe without units of measurement.

[Atmas]

If 55 is a problem quit before 59.

[JPMorgan]

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

Well if you're defining science as "how the universe works" then his comment makes no sense. But if you define it as "humankind's understanding of how the universe works", then yeah, we'd have a pretty piss poor understanding of the universe without units of measurement.

Subjective objectivity strikes again.