Group exp testing
Paul Phillips
information I've seen indicates that the individual with the
most exp in the group determines how much exp everyone else
in the group gets. Which means SK, Paladins and rangers
basically suck huge amounts of exp from groups of their
level. I can't imagine grouping with a SK one or two levels
above me because of this. Assuming this is true, do Bards
also take large amounts of exp?
Paul
* Sent from AltaVista http://www.altavista.com Where you can also find related Web Pages, Images, Audios, Videos, News, and Shopping. Smart is Beautiful
Steven H
<il128N...@usa.net.invalid> wrote:
>What work has been done in this area? What little
>information I've seen indicates that the individual with the
>most exp in the group determines how much exp everyone else
>in the group gets. Which means SK, Paladins and rangers
>basically suck huge amounts of exp from groups of their
>level. I can't imagine grouping with a SK one or two levels
>above me because of this. Assuming this is true, do Bards
>also take large amounts of exp?
>Paul
bards take the same amount of Exp as other hybrid classes.
As for EXP division i believe it works like this....
Each class/race combo has a value (with penalty classes/races having
a higher value). the values in the group are added up to form a total.
The EXP from the mob is then divided by this value and alocated
equally to everyone in the group (if there all the same level). so the
more classes with race/class penalties in the group, the less EXP is
awarded overall.
thats how i think it works in an equal level group. not sure how
differential levels would figure into the maths though.
John M Clancy
"Paul Phillips" <il128N...@usa.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:11d9cf80...@usw-ex0110-075.remarq.com...
> What work has been done in this area? What little
> information I've seen indicates that the individual with the
> most exp in the group determines how much exp everyone else
> in the group gets.
True.
> Which means SK, Paladins and rangers
> basically suck huge amounts of exp from groups of their
> level.
True.
> I can't imagine grouping with a SK one or two levels
> above me because of this. Assuming this is true, do Bards
> also take large amounts of exp?
Yes, but not as much as say a Troll SK.
Fozy/Fozwick
http://lum.xrgaming.net/eqexp.html
"Paul Phillips" <il128N...@usa.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:11d9cf80...@usw-ex0110-075.remarq.com...
> What work has been done in this area? What little
> information I've seen indicates that the individual with the
> most exp in the group determines how much exp everyone else
> in the group gets. Which means SK, Paladins and rangers
> basically suck huge amounts of exp from groups of their
> level. I can't imagine grouping with a SK one or two levels
> above me because of this. Assuming this is true, do Bards
> also take large amounts of exp?
Morgan
>
> On Mon, 10 Apr 2000 09:49:31 -0700, Paul Phillips
> <il128N...@usa.net.invalid> wrote:
>
> >information I've seen indicates that the individual with the
> >most exp in the group determines how much exp everyone else
> >in the group gets. Which means SK, Paladins and rangers
> >basically suck huge amounts of exp from groups of their
> >level. I can't imagine grouping with a SK one or two levels
> >above me because of this. Assuming this is true, do Bards
> >also take large amounts of exp?
> >Paul
>
>
> As for EXP division i believe it works like this....
>
> Each class/race combo has a value (with penalty classes/races having
> a higher value). the values in the group are added up to form a total.
>
> The EXP from the mob is then divided by this value and alocated
> equally to everyone in the group (if there all the same level). so the
> more classes with race/class penalties in the group, the less EXP is
> awarded overall.
>
> thats how i think it works in an equal level group. not sure how
> differential levels would figure into the maths though.
Actually, each person gets a share of the experience according
to their total earned experience. If someone has an experience
penalty (like a Troll SK) then they will have earned more
experience to get to the same level and so they will get a larger
share.
http://www.geocities.com/orderoftheblackdagger/EQexp2/
Using the data from that page, here is an example.
Suppose these two are grouping:
Human Warrior, level 8 400,000 xp (308k - 460k)
Troll Shadowknight, level 10 1,600,000 xp (1224k - 1680k)
------------
Total: 2,000,000 xp
The human will get 400,000/2,000,000 = 1/5 of the experience earned by
the two. The troll will get the remaining 1,600,000/2,000,000 = 4/5
of the experience for each kill.
So yes, grouping with a paladin, ranger, shadowknight or bard a couple
levels above you is probably a very bad idea, particularly at low
levels. Grouping with anyone who is four or five levels above you is
also not ideal. A hell level basically counts as two levels.
--
Morgan
(crossposting all posts to rec.games.computer.everquest)
Steven H
EXP penalty when their in a group, but its everyone else that suffers
to subsidise him/her?
On Mon, 10 Apr 2000 16:14:55 -0700, Morgan <mor...@misleading.com>
wrote:
Paul Phillips
You group with a hybrid and they suck the xp out of a group.
Thats why if you grouped with a hybrid all the time you and
the hybrid would level at about the same rate.
Paul
In article <38f3ea81...@news.btinternet.com>,
* Sent from AltaVista http://www.altavista.com Where you can also find related Web Pages, Images, Audios, Videos, News, and Shopping. Smart is Beautiful
Fozy/Fozwick
your example.
5. Group exp is not based on level (within reason).
The exp gained by each group member, as long as each member is reasonably
close in level to each other, is computed by proportionally dividing the exp
per kill by the total exp of each group member. There is no accounting for
the level of each person when determining the split, unless certain people
in the group are far too low level (a level 50 and a level 20 for example).
This leads to a few direct conclusions:
People in hell levels do not take a disproportionate split of a group's exp.
Classes will larger innate exp penalties do not take a disproportionate
split of a group's exp.
People with larger innate exp penalties level slower than their groupmates,
even when fighting the same creatures. They gain exp at the same rate and
will have the same total exp after fighting the same creatures together, but
each one will be at a different level or at least a different percentage
into a level with the same amount of exp points.
Certain classes need to play more, outside of their normal groups, to keep
up with their regular groupmates. A Troll Shadow Knight will need to play *a
lot* longer than the Halfling Warrior he normally groups with to remain at
the same level over any signifigant amount of time.
Someone who is grouped with another who is slightly lowerl level but
fighting things that are green to the higher level person and blue to the
lower level one is still taking exp from the group. Therefore, the high
level person isn't just "helping", he's stealing a lot of exp which isn't
going anywhere because the mob is too low level for him to gain anything.
Foz
"Morgan" <mor...@misleading.com> wrote in message
news:38F2606F...@misleading.com...
Robert Scott Clark
>The conclusions below( taken from the address i posted), seem to contradict
>your example.
>
And it also contradicts itself. (example: XP is split proportionally
with regard to total experience AND hybrids do not take a larger share
experience even though they have more total XP = contradiction)
Personally I go with the theory that is internally consistant.
Morgan
>
> The conclusions below( taken from the address i posted), seem to contradict
> your example.
Yes, and has been stated before, the article you are quoting is wrong on
several points. It is probably better to ignore that article and seek
your information elsewhere.
> 5. Group exp is not based on level (within reason).
>
> The exp gained by each group member, as long as each member is reasonably
> close in level to each other, is computed by proportionally dividing the exp
> per kill by the total exp of each group member.
This much is correct. Experience is divided according to the total
experience of each player in the group.
> There is no accounting for
> the level of each person when determining the split, unless certain people
> in the group are far too low level (a level 50 and a level 20 for example).
This is half true. After the experience has been split according to the
formula above, some players may not get their share. If a player is too
far below the highest member of the group, that player does not gain
experience. If the creature was green to a player, that player may get
no experience or 1/2 or 1/4 of their share if the creature was barely
green. Any experience that was lost to either of these factors is just
gone. High level characters take a huge share out of the experience even
if the prey was green. Low level characters still eat their small share
even if they are too low to get experience in the group.
> This leads to a few direct conclusions:
And here is where it starts to go really wrong ...
> People in hell levels do not take a disproportionate split of a group's exp.
True, but if a hell level separates two people, it counts for about two
normal levels.
> Classes will larger innate exp penalties do not take a disproportionate
> split of a group's exp.
This is just plain wrong. It is blatantly and obviously wrong from the
assumptions made earlier in the article.
> People with larger innate exp penalties level slower than their groupmates,
> even when fighting the same creatures. They gain exp at the same rate and
> will have the same total exp after fighting the same creatures together, but
> each one will be at a different level or at least a different percentage
> into a level with the same amount of exp points.
This would only be true if the players started at the same point, always
grouped together, and accepted that those with experience penalties would
be several levels behind their groupmates. In practice, people group with
others of the same level. This is necessary in EQ because the game
mechanics value level above all other properties.
> Certain classes need to play more, outside of their normal groups, to keep
> up with their regular groupmates. A Troll Shadow Knight will need to play *a
> lot* longer than the Halfling Warrior he normally groups with to remain at
> the same level over any signifigant amount of time.
Here the author says what I just said and gives up any hope of his previous
comments making sense.
> Someone who is grouped with another who is slightly lowerl level but
> fighting things that are green to the higher level person and blue to the
> lower level one is still taking exp from the group. Therefore, the high
> level person isn't just "helping", he's stealing a lot of exp which isn't
> going anywhere because the mob is too low level for him to gain anything.
This is true.
Azmogeddon
spread around the group.
In article <38f3ea81...@news.btinternet.com>, Steven H
<bl...@hotmail.com> writes
>From what i read from your post then that means the SK's negate their
>EXP penalty when their in a group, but its everyone else that suffers
>to subsidise him/her?
>
>
>On Mon, 10 Apr 2000 16:14:55 -0700, Morgan <mor...@misleading.com>
>wrote:
>
Azmogeddon
Morgan
> >>to their total earned experience. If someone has an experience
> >>penalty (like a Troll SK) then they will have earned more
> >>experience to get to the same level and so they will get a larger
> >>share.
> >>
> >>http://www.geocities.com/orderoftheblackdagger/EQexp2/
> >>
> >>Using the data from that page, here is an example.
> >>Suppose these two are grouping:
> >>
> >>Human Warrior, level 8 400,000 xp (308k - 460k)
> >>Troll Shadowknight, level 10 1,600,000 xp (1224k - 1680k)
> >> ------------
> >> Total: 2,000,000 xp
> >>
> >>The human will get 400,000/2,000,000 = 1/5 of the experience earned by
> >>the two. The troll will get the remaining 1,600,000/2,000,000 = 4/5
> >>of the experience for each kill.
> >>
> >>So yes, grouping with a paladin, ranger, shadowknight or bard a couple
> >>levels above you is probably a very bad idea, particularly at low
> >>levels. Grouping with anyone who is four or five levels above you is
> >>also not ideal. A hell level basically counts as two levels.
> In article <38f3ea81...@news.btinternet.com>, Steven H
> <bl...@hotmail.com> writes
> >From what i read from your post then that means the SK's negate their
> >EXP penalty when their in a group, but its everyone else that suffers
> >to subsidise him/her?
Azmogeddon wrote:
>
> SK's don't completely negate their exp penalty, but the penalty is
> spread around the group.
The shadowknight still has the penalty. If the shadowknight were
soloing, he would have to kill more things to get to the same level
as a warrior. In a group, the whole group has to kill more things
for the same benefit if they include a shadowknight instead of a
warrior. The effect is averaged over all the party members, so you
probably won't notice a difference unless you switch from grouping
with all warriors to grouping with all hybrids.
--
Morgan