Experience
AH. I meant to Dalvyn's proposal. Being level 1-9 your stuck in the newbie pit mostly and that goes slooow.
You ask 'What is a tri-force?'
Spaki says 'But vessels for godly energies would be hard to come by. Let alone tri-forces.'
Spaki says to you 'Just a word I heard from a fellow with a green tunic.'
Spaki says 'But vessels for godly energies would be hard to come by. Let alone tri-forces.'
Spaki says to you 'Just a word I heard from a fellow with a green tunic.'
I hate to plug World of Warcraft here, but they have an experience system of which I'm a fan: time spent not levelling (actually, specifically in an inn, or major city), whether while logged off or logged on, increases a character's "rested experience". What this means is that, if you, say, log out of one of your characters in an inn, and don't play him for two days, when you come back, you earn double experience for your next X experience. The amount of experience you get at the 200% rate is of course derived from how much time was spent resting, and it also caps off at (I believe) two levels of "rested experience".
I think this system can make the casual or infrequent player's life much easier.
Also, there is one thing that I've always wanted answered about experience when fighting in groups. Many games give an experience bonus per enemy killed while in a group, and that is wonderful. However, the same games often don't scale the experience given per enemy to the number of players in the group. The end result is that a mob that grants 1000 experience when killed solo now grants maybe 1000 (the original experience) + 400 (bonus) / 4 (for a four player group) = 350 experience per character. Many have argued that this is fine, because a group can kill enemies at a much faster rate, which is well and good, but there are still a limited number of enemies in a given area, which means you will end up waiting for repops. This means you actually may level slower in a group, unless experience is scaled based on the number of players in a group. As it pertains to this game, I'm not sure how things are done behind the scenes, but I think it's clear which jar I'd toss my two cents into, given the option.
I think this system can make the casual or infrequent player's life much easier.
Also, there is one thing that I've always wanted answered about experience when fighting in groups. Many games give an experience bonus per enemy killed while in a group, and that is wonderful. However, the same games often don't scale the experience given per enemy to the number of players in the group. The end result is that a mob that grants 1000 experience when killed solo now grants maybe 1000 (the original experience) + 400 (bonus) / 4 (for a four player group) = 350 experience per character. Many have argued that this is fine, because a group can kill enemies at a much faster rate, which is well and good, but there are still a limited number of enemies in a given area, which means you will end up waiting for repops. This means you actually may level slower in a group, unless experience is scaled based on the number of players in a group. As it pertains to this game, I'm not sure how things are done behind the scenes, but I think it's clear which jar I'd toss my two cents into, given the option.
The gain in exp is supposed to represent in a pretty loose fashion the challenge that was overcome in gaining that exp. I don't see why a monster whose 'challenge level' indicates it is worth 1000 exp suddenly becomes worth 4000 exp when 4 people kill it simultaneously...
To extend this argument, if I had 10 people with me, would that same monster now be worth 11000 exp (in total)? Even though each character would maybe make 1 hit towards the kill, or perhaps not even manage to engage in the battle - how is that an equivalent challenge to fighting it on my own?
I would suggest that an exp bonus for grouping is fine, and your first idea about a multiplier for characters that kill things less frequently has merits (I'll leave it as an excercise for others to point out the potential flaws), but would be opposed to the idea of scaling experience based on the size of the group.
To extend this argument, if I had 10 people with me, would that same monster now be worth 11000 exp (in total)? Even though each character would maybe make 1 hit towards the kill, or perhaps not even manage to engage in the battle - how is that an equivalent challenge to fighting it on my own?
I would suggest that an exp bonus for grouping is fine, and your first idea about a multiplier for characters that kill things less frequently has merits (I'll leave it as an excercise for others to point out the potential flaws), but would be opposed to the idea of scaling experience based on the size of the group.
Tempus- I agree with what you are saying about scaling XP based on group size in that it would not make sense to give out an insane amount more for large groups. But, the way this looks is that grouping is detrimental to gaining XP and would encourage more players to solo areas instead of grouping. I thought that was what we were trying to get away from.
Now, I was recently told by an IMM that grouping does, in fact, earn you XP at a faster rate than soloing. In reference to an individual character, is this truely the case or did they simply mean that the mob give out a little more XP than usual (which would result in the situation Taerom brought up).
In regards to the WoW system, I do like it in theory, but it seems more aimed at the hack n slash type play. If it could be kept under control, I think it is an excellent idea. But what I see actually happening is that as soon as the player sees they can get that 200% XP rate, soloing and razing areas suddenly becomes a lot more appealing than seeking out RP.
Now, I was recently told by an IMM that grouping does, in fact, earn you XP at a faster rate than soloing. In reference to an individual character, is this truely the case or did they simply mean that the mob give out a little more XP than usual (which would result in the situation Taerom brought up).
In regards to the WoW system, I do like it in theory, but it seems more aimed at the hack n slash type play. If it could be kept under control, I think it is an excellent idea. But what I see actually happening is that as soon as the player sees they can get that 200% XP rate, soloing and razing areas suddenly becomes a lot more appealing than seeking out RP.
Tragedy is when I cut my finger. Comedy is when you walk into an open sewer and die. ~Mel Brooks
You get a "bonus" wile grouped... I do not know, nor have i seen a beneficial difference, how much of a "bonus" this is.
Exp in FK is based on how much dmg you to the the mob... on WoW... it is when a mob dies... I do now know how that would be applicable to the 200% exp gain... Nor do I fully understand that when grouped... a priest who heals everyone and does no damage.. do they get exp too?
Exp in FK is based on how much dmg you to the the mob... on WoW... it is when a mob dies... I do now know how that would be applicable to the 200% exp gain... Nor do I fully understand that when grouped... a priest who heals everyone and does no damage.. do they get exp too?
R.I.P.
You will never be forgotten..
In memory of Stephanie
and the best damn RPing I have ever had!
Thank you
You will never be forgotten..
In memory of Stephanie
and the best damn RPing I have ever had!
Thank you
-
Amalia
- Sword Grand Master
- Posts: 331
- Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2006 6:51 pm
- Location: Ardeep Forest
- Contact:
I could just be crazy, but I think the XP calculation is more complex than damage alone-- and I also think that group XP is nothing to sneeze at. I haven't been back on long enough to be sure at all, but my impression is that being in a group has a huge impact.
Dear Enemy: May the Lord hate you and all your kind, may you be turned orange in hue, and may your head fall off at an awkward moment.