Pet Damage, exp. AGAIN!
jaZZmanian Devil
REVERSED his statement about the pet classes and exp. going to pets in a
group. Here's the latest and (dare we hope?) final answer on this.
Hello.
I have an update, rather a correction, on one of the answers to the
questions that the Mage Compendium folks sent in.
I was just informed by Scott Hartsman that I made a mistake about the
pet experience thing. Pets only take experience from a group if they
outdamage the entire group. If they do, then they gain a share as if
they were a group member. If they do not, they take no experience at
all.
This is how it's been working the whole time, and it makes a lot more
sense. I'm sorry for the mistake.
Alan
***********
So, there you have it. Not even the 1% thing we'd been buying all along.
Pet does more damage than the rest of the PC's combined, get's a full
share as a group member. If you all do cumulative damage greater than
the pet does (and if you can't you need to leave) then the pet get's
nothing. Hopefully this information will get propogated widely and some
of the pet classes will become more welcome in groups where people were
paranoid about the pet sucking all the xp out of the camp.
--
jaZZ md
- - - -
Braellaen: "Does anyone know the approx hit points of a rhino?"
Kirstin: "7. But they're *big* HP."
Jeff
"jaZZmanian Devil" <js...@stny.rr.com> wrote in message
news:3C8E2FBA...@stny.rr.com...
I don't think Alan realized the uproar he caused by making that erroneous
statement. It went against all the info about pets/grouping we had before.
I am VERY glad it was not true.
Xyplok Fizzleking of Povar
lvl40 Gnomish Mage of Brell
Jeremiah Kristal
This makes a lot more sense from a coding point of view also. I
suspect it works something like this: Basically, they treat each pet as
an ungrouped PC by default. If the group outdamages the pet, the group
gets the EXP and it is split amoung the party members depending on their
level. If the pet goes wild and outdamages everyone else though, I
suspect it triggers a subroutine which divvies the EXP up as if the pet
were a group member, designates the appropriate amount of EXP to each
character, and then applies the group bonus and class bonuses to the RAW
EXP and then applies it to the characters. I'm not sure if it awards exp
to the pet or just dumps it, but the net result is the same.
The nice thing about this method is that it only has to trigger the
subroutine if the kill is attributed to a pet. In the vast majority of
cases it treats a pet no differently than an ungrouped PC beating on your
mob.
Arolpin
Casey Webster
Solo with a pet:
pet does <= 50% damage, it takes 0 exp
pet does > 50% damage, it gets half exp
Group with pet:
if any persons pet can do > 50% damage, it takes exp as if it were
a member of the group
if no pet gets > 50% than no pet recieves any experience.
This is why some pet classes find it more beneficial to duo rather
than solo. With 2 people + pet(s), it is harder for a single pet to
do more than half the total damage to the mob, and it takes no exp.
and when i say a pet "takes experience as a member of the group", what i
mean is say you have a 4 person group, all level 20, and one person has a
level 16 pet. Everyone sits down while the pet kills something, so it gets
more than 50% damage. When experience is split up, it is split like you
were
a 5 person group of 4 20's and a 16, and the split that goes to the 16 just
dissapears. So say this group killed a lvl 23 mob in some outdoor zone,
if the pet does not get 50% total damage, the group gets the following exp:
4 person group, Nec, SK, War and Wiz. nec has pet up.
10 % group bonus for 4 players
lvl 23 mob gives 39,675 exp
Nec : 12001 exp (1.1 class modifier)
SK: 15275 exp (1.4 class modifier)
War: 10911 exp (1.0 class mod (for exp awards, .9 modifier for level reqs)
Wiz: 12001 exp (1.1 class modifier)
( you may note that the exp does add up to toal mob exp, this is because VI
makes up exp for any class that has a penalty so each class gets the same %
of thier levels exp requirement. ie, everones exp bar moves the same)
now take that same group, but the pet did do 51% damage
lvl 23 mob gives 39,675 exp 43642.5
Nec : 9918 exp
SK: 10279 exp
War: 9017 exp
Wiz: 9918 exp
Pet: 7574 exp
if anyone would like clarification of how i arrived at these values, feel
free to ask, i have a length file i could post that explains most of the
formulas and how to apply them.
"jaZZmanian Devil" <js...@stny.rr.com> wrote in message
news:3C8E2FBA...@stny.rr.com...
Dan Harmon
Damn, you beat me, I have it on my clipboard right now to paste here. :-P
All I can say is...THANK GOD!!!
Link to the post in question:
http://boards.station.sony.com/ubb/everquest/Forum1/HTML/000514.html (URL
may wrap...what's the URL to the site that'll make short links?)
jlmc
26 % Damage pet 2 does 25%??
"Casey Webster" <casey-...@trifocus.net> wrote in message
news:Sirj8.78070$6j2.4...@typhoon.austin.rr.com...
Handy Solo
<>
>
> Hello.
> I have an update, rather a correction, on one of the answers to the
> questions that the Mage Compendium folks sent in.
>
> I was just informed by Scott Hartsman that I made a mistake about the
> pet experience thing. Pets only take experience from a group if they
> outdamage the entire group. If they do, then they gain a share as if
> they were a group member. If they do not, they take no experience at
> all.
>
> This is how it's been working the whole time, and it makes a lot more
> sense. I'm sorry for the mistake.
> Alan
<>
and the beastlord cheered!!
--
Darkensolo Lightenhealer- 44th Dwarven Cleric
Lizsolo Spiritmaster - 28th Barbie BeastLord
Rachsolo Rachensteady - 35th Half Elf Bard
All proud members of "Fizzle Fiends" on Rodcet Nife
m0oni
news:itrj8.356004$Aw2.29...@bin7.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...
[snip]
> Link to the post in question:
> http://boards.station.sony.com/ubb/everquest/Forum1/HTML/000514.html
(URL
> may wrap...what's the URL to the site that'll make short links?)
http://www.makeashorterlink.com
link for that URL
http://makeashorterlink.com/?P3BE2358
jaZZmanian Devil
>
> pet damage has been known for quite a while. The simple rule is
>
> Solo with a pet:
> pet does <= 50% damage, it takes 0 exp
> pet does > 50% damage, it gets half exp
Well, let's face the facts. If Casey Webster posts one thing to a Usenet
newsgroup, and Alan "Absor" posts something completely opposite on a VI
developer's board, a lot of folks are going to go with Absor's answer.
Fortuantely, he double checked and corrected himself.
As to "known for quite a while", it wasn't universal, since it was
"known for quite a while" that the pet still got 1% of the xp even if it
didn't do more than 50%, but that's apparently not true either.
James Grahame
> Casey Webster wrote:
> >
> > pet damage has been known for quite a while. The simple rule is
> >
> > Solo with a pet:
> > pet does <= 50% damage, it takes 0 exp
> > pet does > 50% damage, it gets half exp
>
> Well, let's face the facts. If Casey Webster posts one thing to a Usenet
> newsgroup, and Alan "Absor" posts something completely opposite on a VI
> developer's board, a lot of folks are going to go with Absor's answer.
>
> Fortuantely, he double checked and corrected himself.
>
> As to "known for quite a while", it wasn't universal, since it was
> "known for quite a while" that the pet still got 1% of the xp even if it
> didn't do more than 50%, but that's apparently not true either.
I'd always thought that the XP penalties were first discovered by
ShowEQ'ers, so I wonder if the 1% is in fact true and VI doesn't know about
it. If the code with a pet in the group split the XP as if the pet had taken
a share, then gave it back to the group if the pet didn't get kill credit, I
could see rounding errors possibly chopping off 1% of the XP. Or any other
design where the XP gets split twice because a pet is present. Wonder what
the XP split is really like - any ShowEQ users want to do a few experiments?
:-)
James
John M Clancy
"James Grahame" <jamesg...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:D5tj8.597$S57....@news1.telusplanet.net...
When I was reading the hacker stuff way back when I read that the pet took
1% period all the time every time. Even if the pet did 100% of the damage.
The guy did several tests trying to get it to do any other split.
He did prove that it was correct that the pet took 50% of the solo exp if it
out damaged the pet owner.
But that was a long time ago it could be totally different now. Does showEQ
still work anymore?
--
Go here and click every day:
http://www.thehungersite.com
Casey Webster
and regardless of how many pets in group, it is impossible for 2 pets to
both get 51% dmg, so you will never have more than 1 pet drawing exp
as a group member.
Its that simple.
"jlmc" <none> wrote in message news:u8shuti...@corp.supernews.com...
Casey Webster
> Casey Webster wrote:
> >
> > pet damage has been known for quite a while. The simple rule is
> >
> > Solo with a pet:
> > pet does <= 50% damage, it takes 0 exp
> > pet does > 50% damage, it gets half exp
>
> Well, let's face the facts. If Casey Webster posts one thing to a Usenet
> newsgroup, and Alan "Absor" posts something completely opposite on a VI
> developer's board, a lot of folks are going to go with Absor's answer.
>
> Fortuantely, he double checked and corrected himself.
>
> As to "known for quite a while", it wasn't universal, since it was
> "known for quite a while" that the pet still got 1% of the xp even if it
> didn't do more than 50%, but that's apparently not true either.
> --
ok, "known quite a while" isnt universal, but among the boards i used to
post at, i was often answering experience questions. As for my facts, i
never did put much stock into what VI says, my numbers all come from
sitting down with multiple group setups and killing things, while performing
detailed analysis of exp rewards using showeq, and derving experience
information from that.
Casey Webster
happy
to share
group split is performed in the following fashion. First, determine the
number
of people in your group, and apply the following exp bonus.
solo, no bonus
2 people, 2% bonus
3 people, 6% bonus
4 people, 10% bonus
5 people, 14% bonus
6 people, 20% bonus
ok, now take the exp a mob gives, which is equal to (mob lvl)^2 * ZEM
in this case, ZEM is 75 for most outdoor zones, 80 for some dungeons, 85
for some others, and it maxes out at 100 for underused zones and some
especially difficult ones.
take this experience, and apply the proper bonus. This is the exp that will
be
split amongst the group. Now we determine how it will be split.
For this, look at each group members level, and add 5 to everyones level
(your included), and now add it all up. Call this aggregate_level. Now
take
just your level, add 5 and divide it by aggregate_level. This is your group
split. Figure this for each group member, and multiply it by mob exp, and
this
is what each member gets. Note that class plays absolutely no part in the
split.
Now, remember back to when VI said they took out class penatlies. They
didnt really, they just negated the effect (so they are in effect not
there). The
way they accomplished this, is after your split of the exp is assigned to
you,
it is multiplied by your classes particular class exp modifier (what makes
you need more exp to level). For the purpose of exp rewards, here are
the class modifiers
Wis casters (DRU, SHM, CLR), warrior, rogue - 1.0
Int casters(NEC, WIZ, MAG, ENC) - 1.1
Monk - 1.2
Hybrid (BST, SK, PAL, RNG, BRD) - 1.4
Now, the value you get after multiplying your split by this class mod, is
the experience that goes into your exp pool. Again, for emphasis, at
first glance, it appears that an SK gets more exp than a druid, but what
you need to look at is Experience reward / Experience to level. If the
SK and druid are the same level, the % of the level they gain per kill
will be equal, even though thier raw numbers are not. This is the effect
of negating class penalties.
Now, since that is a lot of info to take in at once, lets have a
demonstration
Group of 5,
44 SK
46 druid
43 warrior
48 rogue
45 pally
they kill a lvl 50 mob in a dungeon (the ZEM 80 variety)
the mob gives 50*50*80 experience, or 200,000 exp.
They have a 5 person group, so 200,000 + 14% is 228,000 exp.
Now for the split, calculate group aggregate level (everyones levels + 5)
(44+5)+(46+5)+(43+5)+(48+5)+(45+5) =
49 + 51 + 48 + 53 + 50 = 251.
Now we calculate the individual splits
SK: (44+5)/251 = 49/251
druid: (46+5)/251 = 51/251
warrior: (43+5)/251 = 48/251
rogue: (48+5)251 = 53/251
pally: (45+5)251 = 50/251
now, multiply this split value by the exp reward to get the xp per person
SK: 44509 exp
druid: 46326 exp
warrior: 43601 exp
rogue: 48143 exp
pally: 45418 exp
notice that the split is purely a function of level, not class.
now we adjust the reward per class to compensate for the innate differences
in levelling requirements.
SK: 44509 * 1.4 = 62312 exp
druid: 46326 * 1.0 = 46326 exp
warrior: 43601 * 1.0 = 43601 exp
rogue: 48143 * 1.0 = 48143 exp
pally 45418 * 1.4 = 63585 exp
these are the rewards applied to your experience pool for the kill.
There will be some degree of error here from rounding and not using the
exact numbers VI uses (they are floating point numbers for class/race
mod, whereas i am using simple integers). But in the wide scope of how
much exp you need at these levels, a couple points doesnt really mean
much. I'll save calculating experience needed to level for another day.
"James Grahame" <jamesg...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:D5tj8.597$S57....@news1.telusplanet.net...
>
Casey Webster
"John M Clancy" <sp...@spark.com> wrote in message
news:u8srf8o...@news.supernews.com...
It does, but the exp studying capabilites are hampered, as VI does not send
exp
data back to the client anymore. Just a ratio over 330 which is pretty much
the
exact resolution the exp bar provides you, and has no real meaningful data.
Dan Harmon
"m0oni" <sp...@unl33t.org> wrote in message
news:a6lhc...@enews1.newsguy.com...
Thanks! I've added it to Favorites in a couple different folders...next
time I'll have it. <g>
James Grahame
> considering i wrote the curernt exp split calculations in showeq, i'd be
> happy to share
Thank you! :-) I'll snip whatever parts of your analysis I don't have
questions about.
> ok, now take the exp a mob gives, which is equal to (mob lvl)^2 * ZEM
> in this case, ZEM is 75 for most outdoor zones, 80 for some dungeons, 85
> for some others, and it maxes out at 100 for underused zones and some
> especially difficult ones.
I assume when the big "upping underused zone" XP bonus patch was done
that some ZEMs changed. Did any get over 100, that you recall?
> For this, look at each group members level, and add 5 to everyones level
> (your included), and now add it all up.
Is this also the case at low level? I've been a level one character
grouped with a level 2 character and the split of XP I got was quite small
compared with what I should expect from this, and much closer to the 1/3rd
I'd expect if it were straight levels. (Low level was easiest, I could
visually assess the impact of grouping.)
> Now, remember back to when VI said they took out class penatlies. They
> didnt really, they just negated the effect (so they are in effect not
> there). The
> way they accomplished this, is after your split of the exp is assigned to
> you,
> it is multiplied by your classes particular class exp modifier (what makes
> you need more exp to level). For the purpose of exp rewards, here are
> the class modifiers
Are the race modifiers applied directly to "XP to level", then?
James
David Van Cleef
> pet damage has been known for quite a while. The simple rule is
>
> Solo with a pet:
> pet does <= 50% damage, it takes 0 exp
> pet does > 50% damage, it gets half exp
>
> Group with pet:
> if any persons pet can do > 50% damage, it takes exp as if it were
> a member of the group
> if no pet gets > 50% than no pet recieves any experience.
>
Why do people still split this up into solo/group? The solo is just a
degenerate "group of one" using the group rules.
Casey Webster
>
> "Casey Webster" <casey-...@trifocus.net> wrote in message
> news:ZCuj8.78478$6j2.4...@typhoon.austin.rr.com...
> > considering i wrote the curernt exp split calculations in showeq, i'd be
> > happy to share
>
> Thank you! :-) I'll snip whatever parts of your analysis I don't have
> questions about.
np, happy to share what info i have
>
> > ok, now take the exp a mob gives, which is equal to (mob lvl)^2 * ZEM
> > in this case, ZEM is 75 for most outdoor zones, 80 for some dungeons, 85
> > for some others, and it maxes out at 100 for underused zones and some
> > especially difficult ones.
>
> I assume when the big "upping underused zone" XP bonus patch was done
> that some ZEMs changed. Did any get over 100, that you recall?
some zems reached 100 as a result of the patch (the hole is an example), but
no zones exceeded it. The only zone at 100 before that patch was Kedge
i believe.
>
> > For this, look at each group members level, and add 5 to everyones level
> > (your included), and now add it all up.
>
> Is this also the case at low level? I've been a level one character
> grouped with a level 2 character and the split of XP I got was quite small
> compared with what I should expect from this, and much closer to the 1/3rd
> I'd expect if it were straight levels. (Low level was easiest, I could
> visually assess the impact of grouping.)
>
The numbers are a bit screwey at low level. At lvl 6 and under, a "newbie"
zem of 100 is applied to kills regardless of zone. The split with a lvl 2
and 1
should be 7/13 and 6/13. The other factors that may contribute to this are
the exp cap.
You cannot recieve more than 11% of your level in a single
reward. At lvl 1 you only need 900~1600 exp to level (dep on class/race)
so you are effectivly limited to 90-160 exp per kill, and if your split is
more
the exp gets capped. I imagine this might be more noticable grouping at
low lvls than normal.
Other possible "leaking" of exp is killing green/light blue
cons that give "you gain exp" (yes, i realize this woulndt be your problem
since
you are lvl 1 :). Green cons that give exp are divided into 2 groups, high
and low
depending which of the 2 green/light blue levels is closer to you. high
gives
50% exp, and low gives 25%. So basically, if its light blue by 1 level, you
only
get half exp, if by 3 levels 25%.
Were any pets involved? at low levels they have a knack for gettign 51%
damage.
And lastly, was this after or before the patch where they changed experience
and ZEM stuff. If it was before, then exp and groups played by an entirely
difference set of rules. If you'd like, i can go over what those were.
If it still doesnt make sense, and you care to figure it out, post some more
details
and i can see if i can put together the scenario from a numbers perspective.
> > Now, remember back to when VI said they took out class penatlies. They
> > didnt really, they just negated the effect (so they are in effect not
> > there). The
> > way they accomplished this, is after your split of the exp is assigned
to
> > you,
> > it is multiplied by your classes particular class exp modifier (what
makes
> > you need more exp to level). For the purpose of exp rewards, here are
> > the class modifiers
>
> Are the race modifiers applied directly to "XP to level", then?
Experience needed to level is a function of Level, race, class, and "hell
modifier"
(this is what causes the abrubt jumps in the exp curve, the mathmatical
cause
for "hell" levels)
the formula is lvl^3 * race mod * class mod * hell mod
race mod is 100 for most races, 95 for halflings, 110 for barbs and ogres,
120 for trolls and iksar, and i really dont remember the breakdown for the
rest of the races.
hell mod starts at 10, and at lvl 30 starts increasing by 1 every 5 lvls,
until 50
where it does nothing, then at 51-53 it increases 1 each level, then it
increases
by 2 from 54-58, where it increases 3 to 59.
thats from memory, may be off, i'll doublcheck later and post corrections if
needed.
Experience needed to level yeilds total lifetime exp to achieve that level.
If you want
just exp to get a certain level, you must calculate exp for level X and X-1
and take
the difference, and that is the exp needed to get through level X.
notice that while class mod raises exp requirements, the exp you get is also
scaled to
this value, so this part of the penalty is compensated for. The race
penalty
however is not countered, so an ogre will still need more exp than a human,
regardless of class.
>
> James
>
>
>
Casey Webster
"David Van Cleef" <d...@gol.com> wrote in message
news:slrna8t9i...@godzilla.exodus.ne.jp...
because it doesnt work cleanly. If we make solo a degenerate group
(which i agree makes sense), then we have this scenario. Lvl 49 Nec
with a lvl 40 pet. Pet does 51% damage in some case. If it acts as a
group,
by the group splt rules, the pet should receive 45% of the exp
(40+5)/(40+5+49+5). and the nec should get 55% of the exp. And who
knows, this may be the case, i've not done tests where the pet level was
sufficiently lower than the owner that you could really tell the diff
between
5% exp. And unfortunalty, with the current situation that is exp reporting,
well probably never know.
Chris
to mob... it has to out damage group to get exp...
so if you have 2 pets in group... one pet gets 34% of damage dealt... other
pet 33%... group 33%... the exp would be divided including pet because the
pet outdamaged the group and 'got the kill'
no where does verant say 'ONLY if pet gets more than 50% of damage'...
Verant says if your pet outdamages group...
Least that's how I see it... don't mind me tho :) I play an enchanter and
for some reason i don't use my pet much
Richard
>
> "Casey Webster" <casey-...@trifocus.net> wrote in message
> news:ZCuj8.78478$6j2.4...@typhoon.austin.rr.com...
> > considering i wrote the curernt exp split calculations in showeq, i'd be
> > happy to share
>
> Thank you! :-) I'll snip whatever parts of your analysis I don't have
> questions about.
>
> > ok, now take the exp a mob gives, which is equal to (mob lvl)^2 * ZEM
> > in this case, ZEM is 75 for most outdoor zones, 80 for some dungeons, 85
> > for some others, and it maxes out at 100 for underused zones and some
> > especially difficult ones.
>
> I assume when the big "upping underused zone" XP bonus patch was done
> that some ZEMs changed. Did any get over 100, that you recall?
>
<snip>
I think The Hole is higher, it is said to be 50% higher than the norm, which
would put it up around 112 or so.
--
Graeme Faelban, Barbarian Mystic of 51 seasons, Erollisi Marr <The
Appointed>
Tainniel, Halfling Warrior of 24 seasons, Erollisi Marr <The Appointed>
Ganwein, Wood Elf Ranger of 14 seasons, Erollisi Marr <The Appointed>
Vardan, Dwarf Paladin of 15 seasons, Erollisi Marr <The Appointed>
Giluven, Wood Elf Druid of 15 seasons, Erollisi Marr <Decadence>
Dark Tyger
>Ok. Absor is once again backpedaling on the developers' boards and has
>REVERSED his statement about the pet classes and exp. going to pets in a
>group. Here's the latest and (dare we hope?) final answer on this.
Given that the information he gave was in error and he received a
correction, I'd say he's well entitled to "backpedal". Or would you
rather he just leave incorrect information without providing
corrections when he receives them?
--
Dark Tyger, the slightly eccentric, railgun-toting kitty kat
Email me at comcast.net
=^..^=
"This is espresso, kid. It's, like, coffee-zilla"
-Dean, The Iron Giant
Rumbledor
Correct, but only if you are assuming that someone outside the group
contributed the other 33%, meaning the only group members that did any
damage were the 2 pets. However, in your example if ANY PC group
members did even 1%, according to Absor, neither pet will get ANY xp:
Pet 1 (34%):
Rest of group (PC group member (1%) + Pet 2 (33%)) = 34% - Even dmg so
no pet xp (must OUTDAMAGE rest of group)
Pet 2:
Rest of group (PC group member(s) (1%) + Pet 1 (34%)) = 35% - Rest of
group outdamaged pet so no pet xp
Rumble
jaZZmanian Devil
> Given that the information he gave was in error and he received a
> correction, I'd say he's well entitled to "backpedal". Or would you
> rather he just leave incorrect information without providing
> corrections when he receives them?
I pick neither of your options. I choose c) "Absor doesnt' answer the
fucking question until he talks to somebody who *knows* the answer
first."
That response was propogated over more discussion fora across Usenet/Web
than we can imagine. And now it has to be reversed.
Discussion and clarification with the public: Good.
Passing out bullshit answers without checking your facts: Bad
This is easy math.... do try to keep up. :-)
Jim Monk
Actually from what I have seen this is still not clear.
In a group with multiple pets do the pets count together or speratly ?
Do they count each other or not ?
e.g. Necro Necro duo with 2 pets.
Pet 1 does 51%
Pet 2 does 49%
Pet 1 presumably gets PC xp
Does Pet 2 since it out damaged the "group" ?
Or does Pet 1 count as part of the group when establishing if pet 2 gets
xp ?
Alternativly
Pet 1 26 %
Pet 2 26 %
Necro 1 24 %
Necro 2 24 %
Neither pet outdamages the group (48%) but together the pets do (52%)
Do the pets get xp ?
Or
Pet 1 49%
Pet 2 13%
Necro 1 13%
Necro 2 25%
If pet 2 is counted as part of the group for working out pet 1's xp then
it does not get any. If not then it does.
I think that there is still some confusion here, but it could just be in
my head.
If pets count as part of the group for other pets purposes then
multi-pet groups whould work out much better. If they don't then they
work out much worse.
Jim
Rumbledor
> I think that there is still some confusion here, but it could just be in
> my head.
>
> If pets count as part of the group for other pets purposes then
> multi-pet groups whould work out much better. If they don't then they
> work out much worse.
>
> Jim
Agreed. Absor was clearly not detailed enough in his explanation(s) to
clearly explain all possibilities. I wonder what chance there is of
his addressing it yet again with more complete information - little to
none probably.
Rumble
Jim Monk
Agreed, I guess that we could all e-mail him.
Jim
Singha
"Rumbledor" <Rumb...@Hotmail.com> wrote
>
> Agreed. Absor was clearly not detailed enough in his explanation(s) to
> clearly explain all possibilities. I wonder what chance there is of
> his addressing it yet again with more complete information - little to
> none probably.
I think the best answer to remove all confusion and all doubt would be:
"We have removed all experience penalties."