Riahuf22 said:Yeah, I get that which is why people don't see it as a modifier because it's literally been in very single mmorpg that as ever been made.
You can choose to ignore something for what it is if it makes you feel better. Chocolate doesn't cease to exist as chocolate just because it's used in every chocolate chip cookie recipe. My main point is that modifiers aren't inherently bad. There is a difference between concept and implementation -- the "hot zone" modifier isn't much different than a "hot NPC" modifier from a concept level, but they are implemented much differently. Looking at the example Mauvais gave where some zones were worth 60% XP while others were worth 150% ... it's very similar to a green mob giving 60% while orange mobs give 150%. The main difference is that the ZEM bonus was static and affected all content inside the zone while the relative con-level modifier is dynamic and adjusts to the level of players.
Tigersin said:MauvaisOeil said:The conveniency of easing your journey in favor of a supposed "busy life" is pointless in a game based around the journey. No amount of bonus XP can be reasonable as long as it makes a significative difference in your invested time to reward ratio. The point is : the game is based around enjoying the time you spend in it, not to make it the shortest possible. If your friends play 10% 100% or 400% more than you do, then they have the option to mentor you and help you catching up while downgrading their level. If they don't want to, hell honestly theses aren't friends.
I dislike the seeming flippancy of this reply. Demanding them to dedicate time to me or risk losing my friendship? I dislike extreme posts like this. I do get the point you made... I just wanted to take a minute to reply that more thoughtfulness would have been appreciated.
It will not be down to players managing their expectations in the end. The rules of the game will have a lot to do with any individual enjoyment. Even in a group-centric game.
I see your pint but I can't agree with it, for one if pantheon allows you to get exp while mentoring it won't hurt your friends at all to help and and catch you up to them in the process, so what could of been 3 weeks with exp bonus without your friend could be 2 weeks with with because of your friend and not having to find a grp, travel to the dentination, and everything else because your friend filled in all those wants and it happened once you hopped on the game if you planned ahead.
oneADseven said:Riahuf22 said:Yeah, I get that which is why people don't see it as a modifier because it's literally been in very single mmorpg that as ever been made.
You can choose to ignore something for what it is if it makes you feel better. Chocolate doesn't cease to exist as chocolate just because it's used in every chocolate chip cookie recipe. My main point is that modifiers aren't inherently bad. There is a difference between concept and implementation -- the "hot zone" modifier isn't much different than a "hot NPC" modifier from a concept level, but they are implemented much differently. Looking at the example Mauvais gave where some zones were worth 60% XP while others were worth 150% ... it's very similar to a green mob giving 60% while orange mobs give 150%. The main difference is that the ZEM bonus was static and affected all content inside the zone while the relative con-level modifier is dynamic and adjusts to the level of players.
But the OP wasn't talking about the consideration system, that was my point everyone in the world knows if you kill something higher level than you, you get more exp because of the risk involved in killing it, so why even bring it up, he was talking about killing mobs in one zone giving you some as another gives you a ton, which is bad and shouldn't exsist, the bonus should be with the grp, maybe have open world give less than dungeons, and PoI gives more sure like maybe a 30% or something nothing fancy but like I said it doesn't need to be there.
Riahuf22 said:I see your pint but I can't agree with it, for one if pantheon allows you to get exp while mentoring it won't hurt your friends at all to help and and catch you up to them in the process, so what could of been 3 weeks with exp bonus without your friend could be 2 weeks with with because of your friend and not having to find a grp, travel to the dentination, and everything else because your friend filled in all those wants and it happened once you hopped on the game if you planned ahead.
That's a very long sentence. That's cool if you disagree; thanks for at least reading. I'm presuming you are curious so I'll answer in a concise way.
In many instances a higher level friend may be trying to complete a quest or may already be max level. In these instances, they won't be seeking experience and that motivation for them will simply not exist.
Anyway, I won't disagree with what you said. Makes sense.
I'm not going through all of that with you again Riahuf. Read my previous posts if you want to understand why.
Nephele said:- What if XP gain is normalized based on player level vs. mob level? How many other players you're with doesn't matter - you, personally, will always get the same experience per kill. So now, you want to group as big as you can to kill as fast as possible. This insures players will be social but it doesn't fix the other problems I mentioned above.
I actually kind of like this approach. If you are a level 10 and somehow manage to solo a level 10 mob you would get 100 exp, but you wouldn't be doing yourself any favors when you could have a full group and kill that same mob to earn the same 100 exp.
Tigersin said:MauvaisOeil said:The conveniency of easing your journey in favor of a supposed "busy life" is pointless in a game based around the journey. No amount of bonus XP can be reasonable as long as it makes a significative difference in your invested time to reward ratio. The point is : the game is based around enjoying the time you spend in it, not to make it the shortest possible. If your friends play 10% 100% or 400% more than you do, then they have the option to mentor you and help you catching up while downgrading their level. If they don't want to, hell honestly theses aren't friends.
I dislike the seeming flippancy of this reply. Demanding them to dedicate time to me or risk losing my friendship? I dislike extreme posts like this. I do get the point you made... I just wanted to take a minute to reply that more thoughtfulness would have been appreciated.
It will not be down to players managing their expectations in the end. The rules of the game will have something to do with individual enjoyment. Even in a group-centric game.
Let's put aside the fact I would judge friendship over the efforts me and my friend are willing to do. We obviously don't share the same criticism and I wouldn't call mine better, because thay would just be my opinion and it's not a law or anything commonly considered as truth.
I appreciate you took the time to tell me you got my point, even if I managed to get on a slippy slope trought a pack of mildly exagerated fact, I don't however intended to suggest to dump your friends for whichever reasons, that was my naturel tendancy to cynicism and crude answers.
For this, I would simply like to apologize.
Iksar said:Nephele said:- What if XP gain is normalized based on player level vs. mob level? How many other players you're with doesn't matter - you, personally, will always get the same experience per kill. So now, you want to group as big as you can to kill as fast as possible. This insures players will be social but it doesn't fix the other problems I mentioned above.
I actually kind of like this approach. If you are a level 10 and somehow manage to solo a level 10 mob you would get 100 exp, but you wouldn't be doing yourself any favors when you could have a full group and kill that same mob to earn the same 100 exp.
Love the thought process, but only tweak I would have to say is if it gives 100 exp to a solo member than I'd hope it be like 60ish or so in a full grp, simply case you'll alrdy be killing it 3x faster and safer than you would be soloing it, so getting the same amount of reward seems high, but love what you thought of it. Just needs to be knocked down a touch, and for as long as the game remains challenging grping shouldn't be a problem.
Riahuf22 said:Iksar said:I actually kind of like this approach. If you are a level 10 and somehow manage to solo a level 10 mob you would get 100 exp, but you wouldn't be doing yourself any favors when you could have a full group and kill that same mob to earn the same 100 exp.
Love the thought process, but only tweak I would have to say is if it gives 100 exp to a solo member than I'd hope it be like 60ish or so in a full grp, simply case you'll alrdy be killing it 3x faster and safer than you would be soloing it, so getting the same amount of reward seems high, but love what you thought of it. Just needs to be knocked down a touch, and for as long as the game remains challenging grping shouldn't be a problem.
Not if the amount of experience was figured for being in a full group to begin with. And 100 exp wouldn't be much either, given a full group should be pursuing yellow/orange mobs for optimum reward and those would yield far more than 100 xp.
Iksar said:Riahuf22 said:Iksar said:I actually kind of like this approach. If you are a level 10 and somehow manage to solo a level 10 mob you would get 100 exp, but you wouldn't be doing yourself any favors when you could have a full group and kill that same mob to earn the same 100 exp.
Love the thought process, but only tweak I would have to say is if it gives 100 exp to a solo member than I'd hope it be like 60ish or so in a full grp, simply case you'll alrdy be killing it 3x faster and safer than you would be soloing it, so getting the same amount of reward seems high, but love what you thought of it. Just needs to be knocked down a touch, and for as long as the game remains challenging grping shouldn't be a problem.
Not if the amount of experience was figured for being in a full group to begin with. And 100 exp wouldn't be much either, given a full group should be pursuing yellow/orange mobs for optimum reward and those would yield far more than 100 xp.
True, this is very true wasn't thinking of it in that way.
Riahuf22 said:oneADseven said:Riahuf22 said:Yeah, I get that which is why people don't see it as a modifier because it's literally been in very single mmorpg that as ever been made.
You can choose to ignore something for what it is if it makes you feel better. Chocolate doesn't cease to exist as chocolate just because it's used in every chocolate chip cookie recipe. My main point is that modifiers aren't inherently bad. There is a difference between concept and implementation -- the "hot zone" modifier isn't much different than a "hot NPC" modifier from a concept level, but they are implemented much differently. Looking at the example Mauvais gave where some zones were worth 60% XP while others were worth 150% ... it's very similar to a green mob giving 60% while orange mobs give 150%. The main difference is that the ZEM bonus was static and affected all content inside the zone while the relative con-level modifier is dynamic and adjusts to the level of players.
But the OP wasn't talking about the consideration system, that was my point everyone in the world knows if you kill something higher level than you, you get more exp because of the risk involved in killing it, so why even bring it up, he was talking about killing mobs in one zone giving you some as another gives you a ton, which is bad and shouldn't exsist, the bonus should be with the grp, maybe have open world give less than dungeons, and PoI gives more sure like maybe a 30% or something nothing fancy but like I said it doesn't need to be there.
What if that mob or zone has poor loot? What if it takes half an hour just to reach while there's a nice solid dungeon for exp and loot 5 minutes outside a major city?
Keno Monster said:Riahuf22 said:oneADseven said:Riahuf22 said:Yeah, I get that which is why people don't see it as a modifier because it's literally been in very single mmorpg that as ever been made.
You can choose to ignore something for what it is if it makes you feel better. Chocolate doesn't cease to exist as chocolate just because it's used in every chocolate chip cookie recipe. My main point is that modifiers aren't inherently bad. There is a difference between concept and implementation -- the "hot zone" modifier isn't much different than a "hot NPC" modifier from a concept level, but they are implemented much differently. Looking at the example Mauvais gave where some zones were worth 60% XP while others were worth 150% ... it's very similar to a green mob giving 60% while orange mobs give 150%. The main difference is that the ZEM bonus was static and affected all content inside the zone while the relative con-level modifier is dynamic and adjusts to the level of players.
But the OP wasn't talking about the consideration system, that was my point everyone in the world knows if you kill something higher level than you, you get more exp because of the risk involved in killing it, so why even bring it up, he was talking about killing mobs in one zone giving you some as another gives you a ton, which is bad and shouldn't exsist, the bonus should be with the grp, maybe have open world give less than dungeons, and PoI gives more sure like maybe a 30% or something nothing fancy but like I said it doesn't need to be there.
What if that mob or zone has poor loot? What if it takes half an hour just to reach while there's a nice solid dungeon for exp and loot 5 minutes outside a major city?
Simple the zone would die, it's on the devs to encourage players to go to far off lands and adventure dangerous dungeons and castles with loot and mysterious quests rewards to complete. So if they failed in doing that one a particular dungeon/castle than they will go d the results of people going to that place fair below the average of other zones, and a simple exp boost wouldn't even fix that because at the end of the game horizontal progression is far better than vertical at the end of the day.