What can we conclude is likely from the PTR classic zone exp changes?

If you have not seen it yet, the latest PTR notes include this:

-Many original everquest zones have had their exp modifier adjusted for balance reasons and/or to encourage variety in leveling.

Prathun responded to comments about us wanting more details with basically saying they prefer us to discover the changes rather than list them, he also said there were as many increases as decreases and the intent is that they even out overall.

It seems pretty likely that that is all the info we'll get on it, and the changes are hard to test on the Test server b/c of a an exp bonus on the server, along with certain hotzone bonuses interfering with testing.

That all said, what can we probably confirm ahead of time? I'm no expert on classic, but I think it is pretty likely Lower Guk is on the decrease side. Hole is also likely on the decrease side. It would be hard for me to speculate much more than that, personally.

Hmm lets see agnarr had 20 picks of unrest, guks, and the hole.... these all got "evened out" i am sure.

I just hope that Kedge ends up with the highest ZEM by a lot.

Probably not enough of a difference for anyone to notice. LFGers will still need to go to where the PUGs are and that is going to be the common "golden path" regardless of how big a difference it is. Basically you need to hit up a server and collect data now, then when the test patch goes live next week, collect it all over again.

I would think this is going to mean even slower XP for Coirnav. At least on Phinny you offset the slow XP with the high dungeon ZEM.

obvious conclusion is they are beta testing changes for their ultra super definitive TLP due out March 16th, 2019 for the 20th anniversary

My only classic experience is on Phinny, but I seem to recall that basically no one exps in Kedge and Permafrost, I would place a bet on those being on the buffed side.

hmmmm, no exp bonus til the 20th you think?

I'll bet the following all are going to be lowered by varied rates.

• unrest
• lower guk
• upper guk
• solb
• the hole
• mistmoore
• city of mist
• chardok
• howling stones
• old sebilis
• velks lab

My guess is PLing spots might be the ones that were targeted for ZEM reduction. So, Guk, Unrest, HHK... would go down.

Well since they said they were adjusting the zem's in "Original" EQ zones, I would suggest you are going to be wrong on the ones below Mistmoore...

always seemed like ZEM was overblown -- easiest thing for them to adjust

a large portion of why those zones are popular wasnt just the ZEM it was the combination of multiple factors

mob density, average hitpoints/ac, mobs that dont run, spawnrate, convenience to get to (ZEM too)

people dont just avoid karnors cause the ZEM sucked, they avoid it cause drolvargs always took way longer to kill than com/seb mobs and the mob density kind of sucks.

unrest was more popular than solA... cause its a simpler zone, no lava or twisty turns to deal with, not many caster mobs to deal with, total mobs in unrest is lower but the density in that compact zone makes it super nice for big and quick pulls... pump up that solA spawn rate

would be nice to see spawntimes in classic-velious zones get a significant boost, take the average from 15min or whatever down to <10min respawns (could keep rare spawn positions @original length)... give us more mobs to kill, make it hard to keep whole swathes of traditional dungeons clear.

if a zone is smaller, sol b versus lower guk for example, make the trash spawns per hour roughly equivalent.
guk say has 200 trash spawn points - 6 rounds an hour - 10min respawn - 1200 mobs an hour capacity
solb has 150 trash spawn points - 8 rounds an hour - 7.5min respawn - 1200 mobs an hour capacity

we dont have enough mobs to kill so we fight over them... more mobs more mobs, make a dungeon crawl a crawl because the mobs keep respawning


(raid zones i do not endorse more trash mobs)

That is a good take tuttles, and one i'm sort of confirming myself. I've been scouting some of the lesser used classic dungeons today, to see if they may be worth trying, and some are pretty obvious why no one hunts there. All the cleric mobs in permafrost and kedge were crazy, not to mention kedge has other obvious issues.

I guess we'll see how it shakes out. I'm most interested in if they just boosted lesser used dungeons, or if they boosted outdoor zones also.

thats pretty hilarious, seems like the only thing the daybreak staff knows how to do is nerf things.

shadowknights nerfed
mages nerfed
exp zones nerfed
shaman and necro dots nerfed
potion belt gone
agnarr exp gone

hell the only thing that hasn't been nerfed yet is berserkers and monks but you can bet you're they will be nerfed eventually.

zones with lots of healing mobs is especially annoying when they heal through walls.

i really dont think this change is going to have much effect unless its a truly massive nerf to some zones, and an equally massive bump to the others. if anything it will be an overall nerf to exp rates, as people are still going to hit and avoid the same places for the same reasons others have said. loot or lack thereof, mob density, mob type, wonky agro through walls, etc.

ouch, necro dot nerf, when?

not really sure why mistmoore would be nerf, since most people don't level there.

the obvious ones are crushbone, unrest, upper guk and lower guk, that is the leveling for i would say the vast majority of tlp players.

I would add in Oasis...those crocs were mad XP (no loot though).

Were shaman and druid dot changes not considered a TLP buff? I thought they were.

They are, depending on how you look at it, they were also given higher tier heal spells at a lower level a year or so ago so they are much more viable as a main group healer.