The problem with low exp per kill of mobs

I'm a casual player I play around 10 - 25 hours a week .. mostly I sit in GGH and talk in guild chat or general and see if peeps need help .. but I can take a lvl 85 heroic to 120 within 2 weeks , even if you say I played for 25hrs each week thats 50 hours of play time to lvl a toon ..

AA's are different but they come easily once max lvl ..

yes I box , and I can box my ranger and HS in FM to get my 85 up to 110 pretty easily especially with XP potions and or bonus weekend ..
then I take that 110 toon and group/box it with my tank or mage and lvl it up rest of way .. I cant do the paragon missions so I usually get my guild to help out with those .. once those are done then i focus on merc/part/overseer and collects to lvl rest of way ..

As I said, you are conflating two statements.

Current speed is 3200ish kills + missions. (Which comes out to around 30ish hours). The person I replied to said it should be around 200 kills per level, which would result in that 30 hours becoming ~8 hours.

I am not "bouncing around". Again, the person said 200 kills per level. I will lay it out more clearly for you.

Fian's suggested leveling speed;
115-116 = 200 mobs
116-117 = 200 mobs
117-118 = 200 mobs
118-118.5 = 100 mobs
118.5-120 = 4 missions.

Now, stay with me here, 200 + 200 + 200 + 100 is 700. Hope that clears things up.

I only replied to your comment that 3200+missions in 8 hours, I don’t know what’s confusing about that.

Because that was never proposed, so the confusion is where that thought manifested.

I also misunderstood FranktheBank's post and thought it was proposing that 3200 kills and 4 missions takes 8 hours. But when I reread the post through your quote, I realized that's not what was said. The first sentence was saying it took about 3200 kills and 4 missions to level to 120 from 115 (probably 1 kill shy of 116). The second sentence was saying Fian's (the person that was quoted) proposal would mean it would take about 8 hours to level.

It could have been worded better. Something like this would have made what was said clearer to me: "It takes about 4 missions and 3200 kills to level from just shy of 116 to 120, which takes about 30 hours. What you're proposing means it would take only 8 hours." But a second read also made me realize he wasn't saying 3200 kills and 4 missions takes 8 hours.

That formula you refer to has not been static since 1999, or "20 years" as you say. It has clearly been modified many times.

Yes, they drastically reduced the amount of XP needed to level in the lower levels to speed the pace to get to a certain point (x # of levels below max) to be roughly about the same amount of time as it was with the previous "tuning" to get to a similar point (x # of levels below max). They have also smoothed the "Hell levels" to not be on a similar XP/level tragectory as the levels before and after. There were posts about both types of efforts over the years and/or even call outs in the release notes.

The formula or concept behind how you get XP and that you need an amount of XP to level HAS NOT CHANGED since the game launched.

• The concept of each level requiring more XP than the previous level to get to the next level has been part of the game since release. Only the explicit amount of XP needed to go from one level to another has been modified. The trajectory of XP needed to advance a level does increase substantially in the levels closer to max.
• Mobs giving an amount of XP per kill modified by the difference in levels between the mob and the group average, the number of individuals in a group, XP divided between the members of a group, and with a bonus for zone, event, race, class, server, XP-boost, etc. has also not changed (though there were fewer bonuses in the past). The trajectory of the amount of XP given per kill for an even con may be on a lower slope than the trajectory of the amount of XP needed per level.
• Quest completion giving XP was part of the game since launch.

What has changed:

• The amounts per level in the LOWER levels has been smoothed and reduced at various times.
• Additional methods to get XP by a % of the XP needed for a level (Achievements, quest completion in newer expansions, collections, etc.).
• Additional bonuses: vitality (was that in at launch or added later?), Lesson of the Devoted, different kinds of XP potions, XP sharing (Fellowship), Trophies, Tribute, etc. etc. etc.

The difference in the trajectory of the XP needed vs the XP per kill does not mean the formula has changed. The addition of other ways to get XP to fill the bar also does not mean the formula has changed.

It's more like they they are not maintaining the EXP curve anymore... Just using giant one time exp gains for completing missions to offset that fact. So you are wrong, the formula for the way we get exp has changed under the hood and has impacted gameplay significantly.

If you kill things, do you get XP? If you got absolutely zero, as you do when mobs con grey, that would be a change. But, you do still get XP when you kill something that is withing a certain number of levels (at least green con).

But, the difference in the trajectory of the XP needed vs the XP per kill does not mean the formula has changed. The addition of other ways to get XP to fill the bar also does not mean the formula has changed. Only if you got absolutely zero XP per kill would you be correct.

That is like asking if you get a chance of winning the lotto when you buy a lotto ticket. Sure you do, but most calculators would calculate your chances of winning as 0.

EQ has always been pull stuff, kill stuff, loot stuff, and get level exp or AA. Anyone who says otherwise, is either not being honest or never played EQ.

The amount of level progression you get from killing stuff for an hour or two in a small group is less than abysmal. The risk for rewards isn't worth it.

Overseers is nothing more than a daily check in app. It's supposed to give you a small reward for logging in and subscribing. But the rewards you get is more than enough to advance your character - In my eyes a combination of abysmal level progression and the rewards you can achieve from Overseers, incentivizes people not to group. There's too much risk and little reward for killing stuff for level progression.

Personally I think they need to nerf the missions and quest exp rewards. It makes leveling extremely out of whack. You can go from 115.99 to 120 in 3 days if you focus on the quests, missions, and some powerleveling at the end. Or it could take you months if you mainly solo or duo. Reduce rewards, and it goes back to killing x mobs to gain a level, which is what classic EQ was about.

I am also not a fan of taking the most extreme example - the perfectly crafted PL group and using that to determine how fast levels should be gained. Let the extreme players get their levels quickly. The weaker players may never complete the quests or missions, so the only way they may get levels is duoing with a friend, and they want to see significant progress towards a level in an hour of play. Balance the game around that. You still have thousands of AA to farm after levels.

lol, so you want people to play the game your way and nothing else. It's not going to make people group with you.

Respectfully my recollection is different.
XP has changed significantly.

Grouping bonuses - not there from the start
Mob con ranges - not the same as from start
Mob con bonuses - did not exist at the start ('higher con's only gave more XP because of their level and mob level XP isn't linear)
Primary leveling mechanism was mob killing (whether or not 'intended', it was).
Quest XP outside of very few low-level quests (e.g. Crushbone) was insignificant.
Race & class modifiers - not the same as from start
Hell levels - no longer present

At this point there is very, very little 'grind for XP' action. Once classes could solo/duo for XP that was a healthy fraction of a group's XP rate. Typically not 'good' but solidly in the 'worth doing while waiting' category. Now optimized (and let's be honest... often unchecked scripting) has resulted in mob killing being so unbalanced that the designers chose to throttle mob xp to the point that for most it isn't even relevant anymore. This is a result of a myriad of design choices (zone, mob, class, and 'if people aren't hitting buttons every 3s they will get bored' game-play decisions).

There once was a phrase so often used and even set in parentheses by developers that it appeared to be carved into stone:
"Risk vs. Reward". Sometimes also nuanced as "Effort vs. Reward".

If one avoids clouding one's judgment (by the natural implications of what would be a fair implementation) then the conclusion that the current XP mechanisms are grossly unbalanced are glaringly obvious.

THIS. I didn't pay to come back to play overseer or fight to find groups to do progression, I came back to kill stuff though I have no issues doing it all.

hell lvls are still present ..

109 is a hell lvl .. and not positive but I think 119 is also ..

it takes significantly more xp to go thru 109 than it does 108 or 110 .. very noticeable if doing the paragon missions from ToV and you go from 101 or 102 and the first mission takes you to 107 and the 2nd mission usually doesnt get you thru 109 unless there is a bonus ..

You’re right I put together both of those statements. I misunderstood and the post below you explained it too.

You seem to contradict yourself here.

I'm fine with the hardcore types using their full arsenal of tricks to try to insta-ding to max level. These players cheat only themselves.

What's not fine is how the devs continuously try to fight against this behavior, while solo/molo/duo/casual types continue to be the collateral damage of that fight.

I had a sudden thought possibly mentioned already? I wanted to mention that the longer it takes to level increases the likelihood of a player coming to the same conclusion that subbing for aa's or buying expansion can wait. And I am not talking a minor hold off. I'm talking months or even getting burned out.

The bottom line is the player needs to see a light at the end of the tunnel. Yeah, overseer is sort of that light but soulless. Something like a daily quest all the way to max level that provides 5-10% exp.

I get it, from a creator standpoint you have a dream of players questing and leveling that way. It's just not feasible for everyone and having additional alternatives for decent light at the end of the tunnel exp would be a wise choice.

I watched several new players come back. As soon. As they go heroic I am sighing inside. More than half the time they quit soon after...burned out.

Which means no more profit.

Just do what I do - when new leveling expansion comes out I go silver for 2 - 3 months and just log in and do overseer 1 time per day. gets me to new lvl with nearly no effort, and it saves me $90 each month for 3 months. Only thing that really sucks about this is I am usually behind on type 5 augs for about 3 months.