Why The Lower'd Amount of EXP for a Group?

[Kittik]

• Experience awarded for 1x Chevron and 2x Chevron mobs is now diminished for groups exceeding the recommended size (1 player for 1x, and 3 for 2x).

Why was this done? Do not 1 Chevron mobs already give a greatly reduced amount of exp to a group of 6 players? It's 1 chevron, so it has less inherent exp to give anyway. Why artificially punish a group of players just because a mob isn't a 3 chevron? I want to believe this is a group centric game that encourages grouping, but this move says the opposite. There should not be a design to lessen the amount of exp a group get just because they are fighting a mob that isn't as challenging. I don't know any groups that are looking to hunt 1 chev's anyway.

 

[Dalton]

My guess is to prevent groups from just rolling through easy content with a large group to power level quickly.

 

[Kittik]

No group would seek 1 Chevrons. If you're in a group of 6 your looking for 3 Chev's. But you're going to encounter 1 Chev's regardless....why punish a group just because they are grouped.

 

[AdricLives]

No group would seek 1 Chevrons. If you're in a group of 6 your looking for 3 Chev's. But you're going to encounter 1 Chev's regardless....why punish a group just because they are grouped.

Maybe now, but just before this change groups starting seeing that 1/2 Chevrons for a full group were decent exp.

6 players attacking a 1^ mob basically one-shot it, its threat to the group is essentially zero.

Do not 1 Chevron mobs already give a greatly reduced amount of exp to a group of 6 players?

Not as much as you would've guessed. Especially with the change to the bonus exp for a full group up to 10% it made 1^ about 1/3 the exp as 3^ for a full group, which made it entirely too enticing as you can breeze through 3 1^ before you could take one 1 3^.

 

[Undone]

Do 1x chevrons still drop coin? Do they still drop loot? Do they still give any XP at all? 1x chevron mobs drop like flies to full groups. 1x chevron mobs are not designed for full groups and should pose little to no challenge, hence little to no reward (at least in the form of xp).

 

[RazorBrains]

I think there needs to be camps of 2^ and 3^, so various sized groups can have places to go. With this change it penalizes people to group up. I think there needs to be larger concentrations of higher chevron mobs in certain places regardless, but this change makes it way worse for groups.

For example the deeper into the dungeon you go, the more likely there will be 3^, where deepest place where almost everything is 3^.

Also it it feels that for 4 people a 3^ is very hard to fight. So this makes it a big problem. So forcing them to do 3^ is not good. Especially since you cant even find 3^, in most places they seem rare.

 

[RazorBrains]

Do 1x chevrons still drop coin? Do they still drop loot? Do they still give any XP at all? 1x chevron mobs drop like flies to full groups. 1x chevron mobs are not designed for full groups and should pose little to no challenge, hence little to no reward (at least in the form of xp).

Yes I agree with you that they are ez, but a group of 6 also has to share xp on them, so 1^ split 6 ways is small anyways, its already a penalty. If you have 4+ people where are you even going to go that doesn't have 1^ mobs? So you are making groups have a penalty for no reason when there is no alternatives.

 

[Undone]

For example the deeper into the dungeon you go, the more likely there will be 3^, where deepest place where almost everything is 3^.

Also it it feels that for 4 people a 3^ is very hard to fight. So this makes it a big problem. So forcing them to do 3^ is not good. Especially since you cant even find 3^, in most places they seem rare.

A bit confusing as you just said in the deepest part of the dungeon almost everything is 3^ but then "you can't even find 3^, in most places they seem rare."

And how are we forcing 4 person groups to fight 3^? If you get to a spot where it's all 3^ then maybe don't go any farther?

 

[Undone]

Yes I agree with you that they are ez, but a group of 6 also has to share xp on them, so 1^ split 6 ways is small anyways, its already a penalty. If you have 4+ people where are you even going to go that doesn't have 1^ mobs? So you are making groups have a penalty for no reason when there is no alternatives.

As Adric mentioned above, full groups could mow down 1^ content and get a considerable amount of experience in a small amount of time due to the low time to kill. One week I'm being told that 1^ are too easy for groups and provide too much xp while the next people are upset that the easiest mob to kill in the game is giving too little xp for a full group? I have whiplash from all of this back and forth.

We don't just change values on the fly. Believe it or not, we use spreadsheets with actual data and calculations to determine what values to apply. We know exactly how much XP a player gets from a 1^ mob in a full group. We are well aware that the experience is split 6 ways, and we even account for it in our spreadsheets. Experience is experience, the fact that they give experience at all to a full group should be considered a positive - especially how easy they fall to a group of 6.

 

[RazorBrains]

A bit confusing as you just said in the deepest part of the dungeon almost everything is 3^ but then "you can't even find 3^, in most places they seem rare."

And how are we forcing 4 person groups to fight 3^? If you get to a spot where it's all 3^ then maybe don't go any farther?

No what I was saying, is that I THINK you should put mostly 3^ into the deepest part of a dungeon. This way a higher level group has to work to get to that point. So the farther they go in the harder it will be.

Its not currently like that. Right now in the deepest part of the dungeon there are mostly 1^ or 2^ is mass. Maybe a few more 3^ but not much. I dont even know of a place in the first 2 zones a full group can farm 3^ consistently. Maybe it exists but I don't know where.

What I find, is solo people have nowhere they can go to farm 1^ only, and 3man groups have nowhere they can farm 2^ consistently, and 6man has nowhere they can farm 3^ consistently.

 

[Undone]

No what I was saying, is that I THINK you should put mostly 3^ into the deepest part of a dungeon. This way a higher level group has to work to get to that point. So the farther they go in the harder it will be.

Its not currently like that. Right now in the deepest part of the dungeon there are mostly 1^ or 2^ is mass. Maybe a few more 3^ but not much. I dont even know of a place in the first 2 zones a full group can farm 3^ consistently. Maybe it exists but I don't know where.

What I find, is solo people have nowhere they can go to farm 1^ only, and 3man groups have nowhere they can farm 2^ consistently, and 6man has nowhere they can farm 3^ consistently.

I do not disagree that we could use areas with higher concentrations of 1^, 2^, and 3^ - but I also think that the world is going to be a mix of them in a lot of spots. And I wouldn't judge the starting dungeon too harshly, it's literally a "baby" dungeon not meant to be extremely difficult.

 

[RazorBrains]

We don't just change values on the fly. Believe it or not, we use spreadsheets with actual data and calculations to determine what values to apply. We know exactly how much XP a player gets from a 1^ mob in a full group. We are well aware that the experience is split 6 ways, and we even account for it in our spreadsheets. Experience is experience, the fact that they give experience at all to a full group should be considered a positive - especially how easy they fall to a group of 6.

Well its a good point, but a spreadsheet is only theory. So you penalize a full group for not farming 3^ but give them nowhere to farm them? I dont even understand why you want to penalize groups at all. Who cares if everyone is grouping up anyways. Isnt that a good thing?

 

[Undone]

Well its a good point, but a spreadsheet is only theory. So you penalize a full group for not farming 3^ but give them nowhere to farm them? I dont even understand why you want to penalize groups at all. Who cares if everyone is grouping up anyways. Isnt that a good thing?

We aren't penalizing groups; we are rewarding xp based on the challenge level. You merely perceive it as a "penalty" because at one point in time the reward was higher. I think everyone can agree that 1^ mobs provide very little challenge to a full group - which is why they yield very little xp.

 

[MrDDT]

Currently it's much faster to xp/farm in 2/3man groups than 4+ as you are discouraged from doing larger groups because of the EXP system AND the limited grouping of 3^ mobs. Is this your intent?
As a full 6-person group, having to fight 1^ 3 to 1 3^ ratio is just really bad exp. The 10% bonus you get for a group doesn't help enough to combat the other 2 problems, which to me is highly discouraging large groups.
Not to mention the fact of how difficult it is to keep a full group going and getting it started. As people getting to your group is highly an issue also as if using the example of before if you place 3^ deep into a dungeon only, then by the time a full group gets there, someone has to leave. Then how do they do this? You have to escort them out? Then also escort someone else in? All the while not getting descent EXP as you are not fighting 3^ nor are you at a location that is good for xp/farming.

I think there are 4 major issues that are currently discouraging grouping.

1) Getting people to your group. (Can we get a summon where 2 people in a group can summon 3rd?)
2) Getting out of wherever the group was farming (Can we get a local recall on a long timer? I think this is planned)
3) Lack of farming locations that support a lot of group dynamics like clusters of 2^s, and clusters of locations with 3^s.
4) Because a 4 or more person group gets lower returns on 2^ or less, they are forced to farm 3^s

None of these have anything to do with levels either, which also has some minor issues in there as currently the level ranges in a group of just being off by 3 is greatly discouraged from grouping (which might be intended) as mobs are very from farming spots with enough mobs to support even 1 group let alone 2 or 3 full groups. Also with the lack of locations that support even remotely (currently poorly) will be the highest farmed and not support multi groups even if they were locations with only 3^s.
Couple this with named mobs being placed in areas without supporting 3^s around it, small groups will farm named mobs (with long timers) often so full groups can't do those locations either.

These are my opinions and ones I've heard from talking to people in chat and on discord while playing.

Thanks guys so much for listening if you read this far, love where you going with the game and looking forward to more testing!

 

[Undone]

Currently it's much faster to xp/farm in 2/3man groups than 4+ as you are discouraged from doing larger groups because of the EXP system AND the limited grouping of 3^ mobs. Is this your intent?
As a full 6-person group, having to fight 1^ 3 to 1 3^ ratio is just really bad exp. The 10% bonus you get for a group doesn't help enough to combat the other 2 problems, which to me is highly discouraging large groups.

Everyone needs to realign their expectations a bit here. Our XP reward structure is based on risk vs. reward. In other words: how much of a challenge does something pose? 1^ pose next to no challenge for a large group, and 2^ pose very little challenge to a large group. Both 1^ and 2^ mobs are going to have a shorter time-to-kill (TTK) when compared to 3^ mobs, especially for large groups. It stands to reason then, that if a mob has a shorter TTK than another you can kill more of them in the same amount of time. If a mob has a shorter TTK and rewards slightly less experience than a more difficult mob, then the group is going to focus on the less difficult mob. Why? Because they can kill more of them in the same amount of time while earning roughly the same amount of experience (if not more) AND face less risk of death in the process.

We all know groups are going to seek out the most efficient route to leveling; this has been proven in our testing time and time again. For this reason, we adjusted the reward structure for 1^, 2^ mobs for groups that are too "large" for their intended design. These 1^ and 2^ mobs are designed for solo and small groups, not full groups. Now that is not to say that full groups cannot kill 1^ and 2^ mobs - let me remind you that they still provide experience and loot to whomever kills them.

I am very happy with the current reward structure and do not see it changing drastically in the near future. However, if there are not enough 3^ mobs to go around then that's an entirely different design issue that we can easily address.

4) Because a 4 or more person group gets lower returns on 2^ or less, they are forced to farm 3^s

I believe this to be a perception issue - I am willing to bet that if I had not mentioned the xp change in the first place no one would have noticed. Either way, a 4 person group should have no problems taking out 2^ mobs and they will be rewarded accordingly. The word "diminished" seems to be a dirty word around here because the actual value of diminished xp for a 2^ mob in a 4 person group is minimal.

None of these have anything to do with levels either, which also has some minor issues in there as currently the level ranges in a group of just being off by 3 is greatly discouraged from grouping (which might be intended) as mobs are very from farming spots with enough mobs to support even 1 group let alone 2 or 3 full groups. Also with the lack of locations that support even remotely (currently poorly) will be the highest farmed and not support multi groups even if they were locations with only 3^s.

I doubt any location will contain only 3^ mobs. Things are going to be intermingled because that's the natural flow of things. The outskirts of an area will/should contain 1^ mobs for folks to pick off and solo. A little deeper in and you're going to encounter 2^ mobs for the smaller groups, and then at the core of whatever it is we're talking about you will find 3^ mobs. And as I mentioned above, if the density of 3^ mobs is too low that's something we can address.

Couple this with named mobs being placed in areas without supporting 3^s around it, small groups will farm named mobs (with long timers) often so full groups can't do those locations either.

A couple of notes on named mobs:
a) they are not necessarily "placed".
b) our spawn system is very dynamic. it is highly unlikely that a named mob appears in the same place twice in a short period of time.
c) solo and small groups deserve named mobs too
c) are you referring to the newbie zone? it's a tutorial zone so I would caution judgment here as the zone's purpose is to introduce players to the game.

 

[RazorBrains]

1) Getting people to your group. (Can we get a summon where 2 people in a group can summon 3rd?)

I agree, this is the single biggest thing the game could do to encourage grouping. Its also a social dynamic. I don't understand why this would not be put into the game, and I also don't see why something like this should be restricted at all. There is really absolutely no downside. There are plenty of games that have this, without any cooldowns or restriction.

The reality is that the average person has between 30-90 minutes to play continuously. Most people need to do things for real life like cook dinner, go to store, walk dogs, watch program with family then come back to game. The fact it takes 30-90 minutes just to get to a group makes grouping very restrictive. I cannot tell you the amount of times just this weekend this became a massive issue. 100% needs to be fixed.

2) Getting out of wherever the group was farming (Can we get a local recall on a long timer? I think this is planned)

Agree completely

3) Lack of farming locations that support a lot of group dynamics like clusters of 2^s, and clusters of locations with 3^s.

Clustering would be great

4) Because a 4 or more person group gets lower returns on 2^ or less, they are forced to farm 3^s

Yes 4 is to low for 3's, needs to be 5+ if they are sticking with the current system.


I also I believe that if this game is wanting to add difficulty, they should have patrols with a wide patrol area of 2-3 mobs linked together, with 1 of the mobs a placeholder for a random wandering boss, this patrol could wander the dungeon or area, with the boss occasionally replacing one of the mobs every 1 out of 10 respawns. Even better have a rare boss spawn every 100 respawns also. This mechanic would shake things up, but the patrol area needs to be very long so it doesn't become just an automatic wipe mechanic that frustrates everyone.

 

[MrDDT]

@Undone I see what you are saying here.
This just encourages people to group in small groups and not full groups. This seems to be your intent. As nothing said here is going to promote or you are stating even wanting to promote full groups.

Think about it.
Full groups can clear 1^s no problem as you've said but they also give no bonus to killing them and in fact "diminished" returns as you've stated. So why would you have them in areas where you have 3^ when those are meant for 4+ man groups? It just seems like punishing people that want to do full groups. People already complaining that there are 3^s mixed in all their 1^ 2^ areas when they want to solo or small man group it. It's like this is not doing service for anyone. So people are going to want to be in groups of 3man strong arming areas to get the best exp, likely doing white to blue mobs, so they can a odd 3^ here or there. Yet no place will currently support a full group and surely not allowing them to be rewarded for being in a full group. There is 1 reward to being in a full group and that's the possibility of finding a named and burning down mobs in an area to farm for items. Which means they will be killing lower level areas that are not really meant for them just to burn it all down for loot. I don't think this is wanted or intended either.

Everyone needs to realign their expectations a bit here. Our XP reward structure is based on risk vs. reward. In other words: how much of a challenge does something pose? 1^ pose next to no challenge for a large group, and 2^ pose very little challenge to a large group. Both 1^ and 2^ mobs are going to have a shorter time-to-kill (TTK) when compared to 3^ mobs, especially for large groups. It stands to reason then, that if a mob has a shorter TTK than another you can kill more of them in the same amount of time. If a mob has a shorter TTK and rewards slightly less experience than a more difficult mob, then the group is going to focus on the less difficult mob. Why? Because they can kill more of them in the same amount of time while earning roughly the same amount of experience (if not more) AND face less risk of death in the process.

But the TTK is not really low as you have to pull mobs else they will come in massive groups with is very harmful to parties. You pull even just 2 2^s and 2 1^s and you can party wipe as you are limited on resources, CC options all this, which also means that non tanks are getting attacked causing them to take more damage than normal. This would be major problems for a party fighting at whites/yellows.
At the very least it wouldn't be effective at all.

We all know groups are going to seek out the most efficient route to leveling; this has been proven in our testing time and time again. For this reason, we adjusted the reward structure for 1^, 2^ mobs for groups that are too "large" for their intended design. These 1^ and 2^ mobs are designed for solo and small groups, not full groups. Now that is not to say that full groups cannot kill 1^ and 2^ mobs - let me remind you that they still provide experience and loot to whomever kills them.

That is not the say that full groups cannot kill 1^ and 2^ mobs? You are saying here that you intend and require them to kill them. As there is no supported places for full groups to kill only 3^s

I doubt any location will contain only 3^ mobs. Things are going to be intermingled because that's the natural flow of things. The outskirts of an area will/should contain 1^ mobs for folks to pick off and solo. A little deeper in and you're going to encounter 2^ mobs for the smaller groups, and then at the core of whatever it is we're talking about you will find 3^ mobs. And as I mentioned above, if the density of 3^ mobs is too low that's something we can address.

To me it's not natural to see areas that are like this as it just makes finding a location for a full group as I said bad for their time and effort. You would have to escort people coming into and out of your group into these locations (wasting time) and even if you had a group already set up, getting into an "farming area" would be a great deal of time wasted of just killing as you've even said "little challenge" but it still takes time to regen back up or move out and make sure you don't pull/train too many onto you.
I think having areas where full groups are supported are much needed and make sense to me and are not the "natural" order from my understanding.

A couple of notes on named mobs:
a) they are not necessarily "placed".
b) our spawn system is very dynamic. it is highly unlikely that a named mob appears in the same place twice in a short period of time.
c) solo and small groups deserve named mobs too
c) are you referring to the newbie zone? it's a tutorial zone so I would caution judgment here as the zone's purpose is to introduce players to the game.

a) not sure what you mean? You mean that named mobs are not located in areas and have spawn points as that seems to differ greatly from exact locations I've seen them in multiped times. Example is the bear cave.
b) short period of time is relative right? However, I'm not talking about a group standing there waiting for only the named mob to spawn and kill it over and over. I'm talking about they are farming near by it and check it often and ready to kill it when/if it does spawn.
c) I fully agree, however, I doubt if all named mobs will be made for all peoples (solo/small/full) as some will be meant for each type, in fact they have to have an exact meaning on how you want them killed as a solo player is not going to kill a 3^ located near another 3^. (or if they do something else is wrong with the game). So you need to choose which named is going to be meant for which type of group size to kill.
d) I've only played 1 weekend and I've only got to level 11. I've done SNH (which I believe is the "newbie zone") and NNH which I believe is no longer considered the newbie zone (as mobs are much more aggro there).

Thanks for the replies and helping me understand your thoughts on this.

 

[RazorBrains]

We aren't penalizing groups; we are rewarding xp based on the challenge level. You merely perceive it as a "penalty" because at one point in time the reward was higher. I think everyone can agree that 1^ mobs provide very little challenge to a full group - which is why they yield very little xp.

Well I still don't understand why you would want to hinder grouping, but understand where you are coming from on risk vs reward. I will digress from this issue, if its understood that there is a lack of locations for full groups to consistently find mobs without lots of downtime. Currently full groups are forced to clear out entire camps of 1^ and 2^ just to find an occasional 3^. If there were places with mainly 3^, and even better have some deep in heart places with LINKED 3^ to add some challenge, then this problem would not be as big of a problem as it currently is.

 

[MrDDT]

I also I believe that if this game is wanting to add difficulty, they should have patrols with a wide patrol area of 2-3 mobs linked together, with 1 of the mobs a placeholder for a random wandering boss, this patrol could wander the dungeon or area, with the boss occasionally replacing one of the mobs every 1 out of 10 respawns. Even better have a rare boss spawn every 100 respawns also. This mechanic would shake things up, but the patrol area needs to be very long so it doesn't become just an automatic wipe mechanic that frustrates everyone.

Yeah this sounds awesome!

 

[MrDDT]

Oh another thing I forgot to add @Undone
Is that in cases like this finding areas to support a full group is very hard and you end up having to pull very far (20s to 40s pull duration) just to find mobs for your group to kill which also causes the pull to lose out of any exp if they party is killing, or finishing up killing.