Permafrost ZEM below 100?

[zelld52]

Did exclusively Permafrost on my shaman 55-60 shortly after Velious release, before the ZEM shuffle. I remember being level 59 and getting 1% per 4 bears on an Ogre.


I'm level 55 on enchanter, and getting similar exp now. Have done hours here to get a good average and am averaging about 0.4% per bear. (average 4% per 10 bears over 6 hours)

https://wiki.project1999.com/Experience_table

If the above EXP table is accurate, then the ZEM is below 100 for Permafrost now. Low end bear is level 43.

43^2 = 1849.
1849 * 100 = 189400.
189400 / 33M 500k = 0.6%
With a base ZEM of 100, I should be getting 0.6% per bear. Or 6% after 10 bears.


0.4% of 33M is 134352.
134352 / 1849 = 73.

Based on the evidence I've collected (and corroborated with other people who say Permafrost feels very very slow nowadays), the ZEM from Permafrost went from 150 down to 73? (Maybe 75 and was just cut in half).

I know it's old, but I plugged my experimental numbers into Green EXP Calculator and got similar results. I plugged in a level 43 mob, with a 72 ZEM, at level 55 -- and it says approx 240 mobs to ding.
That is in line with my experimental data of 4% per 10 mobs.


So the ZEM was cut in half? That seems a little much? Anyone else have other data?

[Knuckle]

Originally Posted by zelld52 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Did exclusively Permafrost on my shaman 55-60 shortly after Velious release, before the ZEM shuffle. I remember being level 59 and getting 1% per 4 bears on an Ogre.


I'm level 55 on enchanter, and getting similar exp now. Have done hours here to get a good average and am averaging about 0.4% per bear. (average 4% per 10 bears over 6 hours)

https://wiki.project1999.com/Experience_table

If the above EXP table is accurate, then the ZEM is below 100 for Permafrost now. Low end bear is level 43.

43^2 = 1849.
1849 * 100 = 189400.
189400 / 33M 500k = 0.6%
With a base ZEM of 100, I should be getting 0.6% per bear. Or 6% after 10 bears.


0.4% of 33M is 134352.
134352 / 1849 = 73.

Based on the evidence I've collected (and corroborated with other people who say Permafrost feels very very slow nowadays), the ZEM from Permafrost went from 150 down to 73? (Maybe 75 and was just cut in half).

I know it's old, but I plugged my experimental numbers into Green EXP Calculator and got similar results. I plugged in a level 43 mob, with a 72 ZEM, at level 55 -- and it says approx 240 mobs to ding.
That is in line with my experimental data of 4% per 10 mobs.


So the ZEM was cut in half? That seems a little much? Anyone else have other data?

This is big news and should be updated, should have a mega thread for all zones that contradict current zems posted.

[loramin]

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

should have a mega thread for all zones that contradict current zems posted.

I think everyone would love that ... but there are two big problems.

First off, very few people have the stamina and ability to do what zelld52 did: kill the exact same mob (and only that mob; nothing else), in the same zone, over and again ... and record the results. Without many hours of data, any sort of "change in ZEM" might really be just a bit of randomness (eg. you get a lot more low or high level mobs than normal).

The second issue is that there's still a lot of unknowns. That XP calculator he used for instance; I don't know that anyone has verified that thing in a long time (if ever). And again, verifying it would require doing a whole lot of kills, of a mob of the exact same level, then doing the same thing for a mob of a slightly different level in the same zone, and so on.

And then on top of all that, at the end of the day it's (comparatively) easy to say "X zone has changed in ZEM by X%" ... if you have data from both before and after. But what most people really want to know is "how much better is zone X than zone Y?". Solving that is possible, it runs into both of the issues above, to an even greater degree.

I'd really, really like to see some accurate, or at least semi-accurate ZEM numbers in the wiki. I hear people confused into thinking the wiki numbers are accurate fairly often, so I would happily setup shared Google Sheets, wiki pages, or whatever else is needed logistically to make it happen ...

... but even if you only did it for a single level (maybe 51), and didn't try to be too precise (maybe shoot for "within +/- 10 actual ZEM") ... or if you only tried to set a baseline for each zone, so you could tell when it changed... it'd still be a massive, massive undertaking that would require a ton of community effort.