Numerical Proof of Kunark Experience Discrepencies

[loramin]

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

This is dumb. P99 Green is not P99 Blue. Likewise, P99 Green is not EQ from 1999. Just deal with what there is. The devs can do whatever the fuck they want.

Sure, but it'd be nice if they were at least honest and up front about it. For ten years here the only thing you could count on from R&N was that they would prioritize classic EQ over everything else.

Now they've thrown that out, and they appear to care more about speed runs and making the game last as long as possible (in unclasic ways).

[bomaroast]

Do you have evidence from 20 years ago siding with the exp curve being more like the one on blue? Or just the stats from blue and green?

[nilbog]

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

We can see that the formula (which is correct on P99 Blue) is no longer matching on green. Level 55 requires less overall experience than 54 on Blue, but more experience overall on Green. Also, each level gets progressively harder after 54 by about 8-10% per level.

There are no known changes to the exp rate between green and blue. If there is something different with it, we will need to take some time and examples to work through the code and discover what it is. Quickly conferring with Rogean, he is also not aware of any intentional changes made.

Anyways, thanks for the productive post.


Then there's this.

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

Sure, but it'd be nice if they were at least honest and up front about it. For ten years here the only thing you could count on from R&N was that they would prioritize classic EQ over everything else.

Now they've thrown that out, and they appear to care more about speed runs and making the game last as long as possible (in unclasic ways).

If you want to make rants and flames commentary, I suggest you create a rants and flames thread so I can respond to your diatribe in the proper arena. After reviewing your recent posts, in which you try to speak for Rogean and I both, excessively, you are incorrect over and over again. You do not speak for me.

[feniin]

Nilbog, have you looked into the NPC hit/bash-to-interrupt rate from TAKP where the code was poached from? It's much more reliable to interrupt mobs over there than it is here. Maybe a digit is off on the p99 implementation? Seems almost impossible to interrupt without a full stun or completely emptying a mob's Mana pool which doesn't align with memory/data from the era.

[loramin]

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

If you want to make rants and flames commentary, I suggest you create a rants and flames thread so I can respond to your diatribe in the proper arena. After reviewing your recent posts, in which you try to speak for Rogean and I both, excessively, you are incorrect over and over again. You do not speak for me.

I never try to speak for anyone, and certainly not anyone I respect as much as you and Rogean. My apologies if I came across as trying to speak for you or anyone else.

However ... your actions have spoken for you, and you have chosen (as you very often do) not to explain those actions. As a result, I'm left not understanding how you (or anyone else) could think the most classic thing to do was disable quest XP for a month. Disabling a fundamental part of classic EQ (on the server you spent ten years preparing for) doesn't seem like something a person who puts classic EQ first would do.

And again, not trying to speak for anyone ... but the only reason staff has presented has been that it was "speed running" related (the explanation given was something to the effect that quest XP would let people level too fast, especially given the fact that people could use multiple accounts to store quest items). Clearly the reason wasn't because (after ten years) you suddenly just discovered that quests give XP ... so in the absence of any further explanation, based on your actions, it truly seems to an outside observer like myself that speed running > classic EQ now.

I'd love to be able to discuss that without it being a Rant or Flame, but if need be I'm happy to move there.

[Tuljin]

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

If you want to make rants and flames commentary, I suggest you create a rants and flames thread so I can respond to your diatribe in the proper arena. After reviewing your recent posts, in which you try to speak for Rogean and I both, excessively, you are incorrect over and over again. You do not speak for me.

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

I never try to speak for anyone, and certainly not anyone I respect as much as you and Rogean. My apologies if I came across as trying to speak for you or anyone else.

However ... your actions have spoken for you, and you have chosen (as you very often do) not to explain those actions. As a result, I'm left not understanding how you (or anyone else) could think the most classic thing to do was disable quest XP for a month. Disabling a fundamental part of classic EQ (on the server you spent ten years preparing for) doesn't seem like something a person who puts classic EQ first would do.

And again, not trying to speak for anyone ... but the only reason staff has presented has been that it was "speed running" related (the explanation given was something to the effect that quest XP would let people level too fast, especially given the fact that people could use multiple accounts to store quest items). Clearly the reason wasn't because (after ten years) you suddenly just discovered that quests give XP ... so in the absence of any further explanation, based on your actions, it truly seems to an outside observer like myself that speed running > classic EQ now.

I'd love to be able to discuss that without it being a Rant or Flame, but if need be I'm happy to move there.

Idk, I've somehow never run into Loramin in game but man, I really don't know what your hardon is for staff bashing and Mannastone sycophantism with this quest XP nerf is all about. I get being an EQ nerd and wanting to update the wiki blah blah, but man offering a 2k cash incentive for people new to blue to update the wiki? I just don't get it man. EQ nerds love their paper napkin math - your pace on forum posts is over 3 posts ~per day~ since July 1, 2013, and that doesn't count RnF.

Dude, seriously, get a grip.

[wwoneo]

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

Idk, I've somehow never run into Loramin in game but man, I really don't know what your hardon is for staff bashing and Mannastone sycophantism with this quest XP nerf is all about. I get being an EQ nerd and wanting to update the wiki blah blah, but man offering a 2k cash incentive for people new to blue to update the wiki? I just don't get it man. EQ nerds love their paper napkin math - your pace on forum posts is over 3 posts ~per day~ since July 1, 2013, and that doesn't count RnF.

Dude, seriously, get a grip.

This coming from a guy who spends half his posts calling people "KC Nubz" and discussing politics and other off topic discussion posts on the forums a 20 year old elf sim.

You don't have a leg to stand on. Get off your high horse.

[Dolalin]

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

As a result, I'm left not understanding how you (or anyone else) could think the most classic thing to do was disable quest XP for a month. Disabling a fundamental part of classic EQ (on the server you spent ten years preparing for) doesn't seem like something a person who puts classic EQ first would do.

The P99 patch process seems pretty involved and Rogean seems to be necessary to do a lot of it, and his availability seems very limited.

From playing with eqemu on my private server I know you can disable quest xp with a quick DB change / hotfix, and this doesn't necessitate pushing new code.

Every other way I can think of to do more targetted nerfing of quest XP (like say, disabling quest xp over level ~20 via a change to the perl quest libs) involves a patch or server reset.

I'm about 99% sure that's the limiting factor. They can't do patches / code changes easily without Rogean's involvement.

I've had a lot of interactions with staff and I can say I don't recognize Nilbog from what you make him out to be in your post. There are some server balance considerations but 99% of the time if you give them classic evidence they make the change when they find the time.

[loramin]

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

The P99 patch process seems pretty involved and Rogean seems to be necessary to do a lot of it, and his availability seems very limited.

From playing with eqemu on my private server I know you can disable quest xp with a quick DB change / hotfix, and this doesn't necessitate pushing new code.

Every other way I can think of to do more targetted nerfing of quest XP (like say, disabling quest xp over level ~20 via a change to the perl quest libs) involves a patch or server reset.

I'm about 99% sure that's the limiting factor. They can't do patches / code changes easily without Rogean's involvement.

I've had a lot of interactions with staff and I can say I don't recognize Nilbog from what you make him out to be in your post. There are some server balance considerations but 99% of the time if you give them classic evidence they make the change when they find the time.

I didn't intend to "make anyone out to be" anything. I simply started with two objectively true facts: 1) R&N do claim classic EQ is priority #1 (especially on Green), and 2) disabling a core mechanic of the game for a month isn't classic.

Seeing those facts from the outside, all that's clear is that something was higher priority to the staff than keeping classic EQ quest mechanics. Based on the only communication provided, I inferred that server firsts ("speed runs") were the priority.

If my guess was wrong, the staff could just ignore me (I'm just one dumb poster). Or they could ban me for making their life difficult. OR they could give not just me, but our whole community (which "joined the cult of classic" because of them), just a couple sentences of communication:

Originally Posted by Staff

Yes we know that disabling quest XP for a month is unclassic, and our goal is still to keep things classic. We decided having Kunark be a few days late (so we could code up a better solution like quest XP caps) would be more unclassic than disabling quest XP for a month.

They don't "owe us that " at all. Period. End stop. But as members of the cult of classic that they indoctrinated us into ... it certainly would be nice.

[Rogean]

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

However ... your actions have spoken for you, and you have chosen (as you very often do) not to explain those actions.

Imagine a world where we need to rush to the forums to clear up every misconception that people post. Jeez, sounds like an exhausting, unproductive life.