I have mentioned this briefly to a few people in the past, but I
think it is worth elaborating on a little here. I have played on
more than my fair share of muds and I have seen this on more
than one occasion. The issue is xp andsolo / group xp gathering.
I wish I could remember the name of this one mud in particular
because their method of xp distribution was unique, well-balanced
and it encouraged exploring.
Mobs are given a initial (reboot, game start up) xp value, as time goes
on: mud day, mud week, whatever you choose, the value of the mob
increases slightly as time goes by without it being killed. Usually there
is a max or terminating value (say +40% of initial value, though it could
be whatever you like). At the same time mobs killed continually repop
after repop (Klein) slowly devalue (say -40% of original value) as
a direct result people tend to want to explore and kill stuff that hasnt
been killed recently. Everyone is rewarded for exploring.
Wow, Assassins Tower hasnt been run in a week
the xp must be great!
I think you get the picture. Even newbies can benefit by
hunting down low level mobs in other areas. If pigs in
Alaska are worth 40% more than the ones in Tara, people get exploring.
To be fair I dont know the mechanics behind LegendMUD, but the
muds I have seen with this system were very stock in comparison to
this place, so I dont see as being an impossibility. I have also seen
variations based on when the zone (area) is first initialized or based
on the length of time that an area is empty (no PCs).
I guess I am in favor of anything that gets people off of the
wait for PD to be run kick. And I am sure guards and
shopkeepers of Klein would have long since called it a day with the
slaughtering they go through.
Just an opinion from one of the many.
Princess Laughing Eyes of the Choctaw
Tuesday, November 04 2003, 02:24AM
That's a very interesting idea in my view!
Tuesday, November 04 2003, 07:38AM
Personally I think that is a wonderful idea, not sure how hard it would be
to implament here at Legend, but a sound idea. Lets hope the immortals
see it as such also.
Tuesday, November 04 2003, 08:11AM
I wish I knew how to code this if possible. Brilliant idea.
Tuesday, November 04 2003, 12:25PM
I also agree! what a great idea to promote exploration!!
but, like everything else I am sure it was already thought of,
and rejected for some reason or another.
it really is a fantastic idea !
Tuesday, November 04 2003, 07:31PM
its called bonus xp in dark age of camelot. its a nice system to think
about adding here.
Wednesday, November 05 2003, 02:18AM
thats a stellar idea, what do more immortals think?
Wednesday, November 05 2003, 03:55AM
One thing that someone mentioned: Are we going to have new problems with
people that we didn't before, the likes of...
You jerk, you went and killed PD and we were waiting another 3 hours
to get the maximum bonus!
Suggestions for a workaround for that might bea good idea.
Wednesday, November 05 2003, 04:25AM
Well, the way I see it is frankly, if I lead a PD run, and someone
else wanted to, but never said a word...not my fault is it?
Wednesday, November 05 2003, 07:09AM
And if he said a word but you had chat off, or chose to simply disregard it?
I'm just concerned about possible abuse that will lead to whinefests
here. It'd be nice if someone could think up a good work-around to
avoid those situations altogether.
Wednesday, November 05 2003, 07:16AM
I would think that if people wanted to run an area, or kill a mob,
that we wouldn't have people 'calling' said run or mob. We don't
condone that now, I don't think that we would if this went in
Wednesday, November 05 2003, 08:34AM
as much as i think the idea has merit and is a really cool idea
the thought that the next wave of complaints and concerns Kae
already brought up are valid and need to be thought completely
through. You can't dismiss a potential problem just because
it SHOULDN'T be a problem. Poeple whine .. people complain .. all of that
detracts from teh atmosphere and enthusiasm of immortals
and mortals alike. There isn't really a workaround other than
complete hands off from teh immortals on Kae's concern and lectures
at teh complainers everytime it comes up. This concerns me
as it will drain immortal time and energy over what could be a very cool
Wednesday, November 05 2003, 09:33AM
People complain now over trivial things. Yeah, there might be a couple people
people who complain about it, but how many more would love and benifit
from it? No matter what you do people complain, that's part of mudding
and being involved with other people real life. So you have to look
at it alittle differently. More like "how many of our players are
going to benifit from this and be happy about it?" "How will we
respond to people who cry over this?"
Alot to both questions..-=shrug=-
Wednesday, November 05 2003, 01:57PM
We wouldn't want you to have to work choc. Heaven forbid.
Wednesday, November 05 2003, 04:30PM
that's a productive addition to the discussion Craven, thanks.
I think everyone knowns and appreciates how much you dislike
and how much you don't respect me.
To address the comment though .. yeah I always look on things
that are an added drain on immortal resources with a bit of
question. SOrry but that is simply how it is when you have
limites resources to work with you try and reserve them. Has
nothing to do with being lazy.
As to weighing how many people would use and like the feature
compared to those who would abuse/complain about it. That was
exactly what my point is there. It has to be a consideration
when you add a feature that would be that huge of a change. I
PErsonally don't believe that the majority of our playerbase would
be a problem with this feature if it was doable.
I do think that there might be enough rotten apples to cause it
to be mroe of a problem for the imm staff than it might be worth.
that is why i brought it up.
Wednesday, November 05 2003, 04:41PM
Not implementing ideas because you fear player complaint has NEVER
stopped you or any other immortal before choc. I find it interesting
that you're using that as an idea to block this now.
Wednesday, November 05 2003, 05:00PM
that shows how little you know about the decision process
that we use. But htta is ok because you will believe what you
like eitehr way. it isn't actually the players complaints
that might be the issue but the amount of hurt feelings
and charges of wrong doing that it would introduce.
Can't say that arguing about MY motives for my opinions
has anything to do with the discussion at hand. My point was
simply that there are other considerations beyond how neat/popular
a feature this would be.
Wednesday, November 05 2003, 05:02PM
Alright, alright. Let's not make this another bash Choc post, because
I think this idea is just too stellar to draw away from.
To some extent, I agree with Choc. People will whine. People
will complain. That certainly has to be looked at...you
can't make a decision without looking at the positive and
negative reprecussions, right?
That being said. Let's take a look:
Positives - more reward for exploring, which leads to more people
exploring, which leads to more people who don't need PD every time
it repops and also leads to creating a player-base that
knows the mud! Holy knowledge, batman!
Negatives - the people that sit around waiting on PD will, more
likely than not, still sit around and wait on PD. Why? Because
these people are not dysfunctional or unable to be educated...but
because they are lazy. Why wander around and learn stuff when I can
just get to 50 in a few days with a little help from my friends who did
the same thing with their friends who did the same thing with their
friends who had no idea the monster they were creating.
In my opinion, here, the positives outway the negatives. Sure,
aforementioned lazy bastages will remain lazy bastages. And of course
they will whine...but does that really require that much effort to
quash? I mean, the whining thing sounds like something that the
players can police themselves.
I dunno. I may just be babbling.
Point - it's a great idea, and the positives seem to outway the
Wednesday, November 05 2003, 05:29PM
Never in all my times here has someone ever yelled at someone for
leading a SL run and 'taking' a cuchallains shield when they needed
it so bad. The general prevailing idea around here has always been
first come first serve. Maybe its just me but I see a direct
correlation between the two. If this change took effect, the playerbase
would just consider it a factor not a thing to blame on the immortals,
they'd say, 'lets do south PD' and then someone else would say, 'well,
Rictor lead a south run like an hour ago so the XP won't be as good' and
then they will say oh, thats to bad, and then they will either go or not
go after digesting that new information. They will not start complaining
on chat about how Rictor stole their XP, the administration work load would
-d not increase in any significant way. Will people complain? Yes, people
-e always complain, they complain about everything, if it was a beautiful
day outside, they'd complain that the sky wasn't red instead of blue.
Some people will complain about everything. Furthermore, well, I guess
think back to all the other changes that went in, from the switch off of
dex mud, all the way to the recent hunt changes, which were both WAY less
popular then this idea is. People complained, but eventually we accepted
and moved on, and those ideas weren't popular, this one on the other hand
seems to have broad-based support.
Finally, and this is all constructive criticism and I'm not trying
to tick anyone off or point fingers, but if governments, which the Imm
staff essentially is, ran their respective countries based on what
people would and would not complain about, I just can't imagine thats a
good way to run anything.
Let's think on it logically, think back to the other major changes
on the mud, the unpopular ones - removal of healing wells, removal of
dex mud, and hunt changes for instance, did not really result in any
long-term increase in Administration duties, at least as far I could tell
The more popular ones which are.... lowering meditate requirements and other
-er such things, resulted in no increase in duties at all I imagine. Since
-e this change falls into the category of 'widely popular' I feel tha
-t there is a lot of precedent favoring very little to no significant
increase in immortal duties. In Conclusion, lets get this ball rollin.
Wednesday, November 05 2003, 05:49PM
it's amazing how much people misread into soem statements.
I simply said that we needed to look at this angle and not
ignore it. Yes unpopular changes happen and this one wouldn't
be one of those. But just because we CAN do soemthing doesn't
always mean we SHOULD do something. There are a lot more factors
to a HUGE game design change liek this than teh cool factor.
Wednesday, November 05 2003, 09:39PM
agreed, so let us players know how these type of changing decision
is made, make it public and visiable.
i guess, instead of arguing this is a good idea, or bad idea,
we will let the process take place, and the general public will
know why this idea will not be passed asap.
e.g. because its too much of coding work, or it will effect the
existing system result in some other problems, etc. etc.
i say one good thing about this bonus xp ideas, people wont be
just gathing around pd and looking for exps, they will go and
seek out every high lvl mobs out there and kill them to find out
whether or not this is good exps, also, we can put a max exps
bonus on the mob, so people wont be guarding a mob for 2 days
straight, heaven sake, i believe people will be more movitated
to look out for new mobs instead of guarding someone.
p.s. dont forget about lotps, make them hard to catch, and i am
sure there will be bunch of lotp hunters out there to get them.
(good discussing, and lets keep it rolling)
Wednesday, November 05 2003, 10:06PM
I don't see the downside so much as an issue about
the number of complaints, but an issue of potential
abuse of the system. While it is a great idea
(that yes, has been brought up before and
decided against for - I think - our inability
at the time to support it code-wise), it could
open up avenuse of abuse. I'm sure plenty of
you can think up how to take advantage of
a system like that, it's not too hard... But it
is something we need to consider before just
rushing in and implementing it.
We are constantly striving for balance while
maintaining the fun factor. It wouldn't do us any
good to imbalance the xp scale (some recall the
changes to the fight system where a 100k mob
died in 2 rounds and xp was insanely easy to
get and it wasn't a whole lot of fun or
challenge, right?) if we decided to implement a
feature like this.
People will complain, yep... I don't think we'd get
many more complaints out of something like this
than we currently do about kill-stealing or
looting of a mob by someone that didn't kill it. While we
do consider the potential for an increase in administrative
issues, we also need to consider the amount of
effort it will take on the behalf of those that would
be responsible for implementing something like this - the
coders and/or builders, and all those that
contribute to how it should be implemented. All along
with all the great benefits something like this can offer.
Wednesday, November 05 2003, 11:52PM
most everyone i know here hated the new xp system when it went in,
so don't use this now as an excuse to not do something.
besides if you are so worried about it make it small initially -
heck make the bonus percent a parameter set at startup, so you could
change it with a reboot, and make it small like 10-15% to begin with
and work from there.
my only concern would be impact on the mud lag -- currently this mud
lags more than it should, call it too small of a server, slow code,
whatever, but tracking the amount of time a mobs been 'alive' and then
doing the math at kill time could add lag. i don't want lag.
personally i liked the old system, typing kick/stand/kick/stand/rest
is hardly a 'fun' thing to me.
Thursday, November 06 2003, 01:54AM
I can only speak from my personal experience. I found
that this system worked well in getting people moving.
As far as the complaints, well I have played here long
enough to know they won't stop. I think there must be an
emphasis on the fact that it is "exploring bonus xp".
There is a certain degree of offset. Big groups are no longer
always the best place to find xp. Maybe two hitters and
a healer exploring can do better for xp than a PD group of ten.
I am not saying this would discourage big groups, merely
offer everyone different ways to play the game. Why should
people feel big groups are the only practical way to get xp?
Also I can't help but feel sometimes imms need to take a
more hands off approach in some cases. I am sometimes
amazed at how much imms do for players here.
As far as the imms defending themselves. I really think it
is hard to except the complaints when everyone knows
the xp is out there somewhere. It just needs finding.
I firmly believe this would in prove the fluidity of the mud.
One day big groups are giving the best xp, the next day
solo exploring. I think the complaints would also dwindle
as the mud grows:more areas, more mobs, more options.
I haven't thought much about abuse. I am normally not
clever enough to utilize things to my advantage. Hiding
mobs with invis or camo or something seems possible
but that seems like alot of effort, running around to select
mobs and hide them. What other possible abuses to people
see? Maybe moving mobs to hidden rooms? I can't think of
any more off the top of my head. How about you?
As far as coding and work goes. I admit I have no idea about
the work that goes into it and I am sure coders would rather
be working on the projects that they care and have a passion for.
Princess Laughing Eyes of the Choctaw
Thursday, November 06 2003, 02:49AM
The form of abuse that jumped immediately to my mind was
that of a few people running to splat a mob or an area while
a run was officially forming to do it - just to be buttpains
to the run leader, a run member, whoever. Jerks are jerks, and
unfortunately, this otherwise so great idea does offer jerks
a good way to be, well, jerks, in this aspect.
I'm not saying that that should stop the idea from being
implemented. All I said was, it's a risk and if someone can come
up with a work-around, that'd be great.
Thursday, November 06 2003, 04:18AM
well how about keep group areas group areas, and non group
areas non group areas.
by that i mean PD/SL/KZ/AT etc only give bonus xp when a
group of 5 (just a figure i pulled out of my bum) kills
the mob. This would mean its not really worth it for jerks to
go and get a small group of 2 or 3 and kill half of PD before
a forming group gets there.
likewise, for places like klien and other 'solo' areas have
the reverse, any groups bigger than say 5 dont get the bonus
or maybe have a slightly vairiated version where it uses
combined levels of the group, so that way you could still
have a level 50 xping about 8 level 1s :P
From: not sure how easy to imp, but seems like a nice
quick fix to the abuse problem (well mostly fix)
Thursday, November 06 2003, 05:09AM
Some might of course argue that a level 50 power-levelling
8 levels 1 was the very definition of abuse :)
I'm not so concerned about who can get xp as I am about people
trying to deliberately piss each other off. It might be that the
only response to this is, 'deal with it'. There are enough ways
to be jerks already, for sure. But it's a valid concern, and again,
if someone out there is a real brainiac with a good idea, append
Thursday, November 06 2003, 07:40AM
Well, the thing I see here, anyway, is that the avenue of abuse exists,
but is maybe being a tad overemphasized. If a jerk wanted to splat a
mob or area while a group sets up to run it, they can do that now with
essentially the same effect--I don't see an idea like this fundamentally
changing how people gather their groups (how much response will you get
to "PD will have great XP in four hours, so let's get a group ready and
wait for that" anyway?) Logically, if a group is forming to run a mob
or an area and somebody goes in and kills the mob of area first, the
resultant consequence will be the same in this proposed system as it is
right now--no mobs. So I guess I'm arguing that the avenue for abuse
that Kae is worried about has been paved and surfaced since we
and areas that required large groups, and not too many people seem keen
on it now. As for people hiding mobs so they can hoard them later, well,
I have to assume the buildup of XP is meant to be a very gradual thing,
which leads to the following for that path of abuse:
Hoarding Character: I will hide these mobs so nobody takes their precious
exploring XP from me and kill them later.
[waits six hours]
Hoarding Character: Yes, I've killed these mobs and gotten 2% more XP than
I would have otherwise!
Other Character: Yeah, while you were doing that, I actually did something
for six hours and got several times more XP than that.
Which is to say nothing of when somebody decides that they haven't seen a
given mob in far too long, get a detect hidden, and beat the poor little
bundle of XP...er, I mean, mob...into a bloody pulp before the hoarding
character comes back from his nap.
Anyway, I think the idea is a good one, and I guess I just don't see how
people could severely abuse this system in ways they can't abuse things
already. I do find it interesting that in 26 appends, only one person
has mentioned the potential lag issue (nod Kosminski). Considering that
Legend has thousands of mobs, setting up code to track every last one
of their lifespans sounds like it could have unfortunate effects on the
speed of the system--and I feel sorry for newbies finding out that, due
to overhunting of the population, mice would be worth 25% less XP, and
Sherwood rabbits would probably actually take XP away from you when they
die. Oh well, I've ranted enough. Now I challenge you to even attempt
to find my point!
Thursday, November 06 2003, 08:02AM
So perhaps this code should not affect mobs under level 10 at all,
lest we make it more difficult for them newbies? :)
Thursday, November 06 2003, 08:20AM
kae, i have yet to hear a good reason why you are against this. you
have given some not completely thought out objections, but why are you
against this? how in the world would this make it harder for newbies?
at beast there is ever only a few low levels on at once here, and 99%
of them are not true newbies anway. more xp is a "good thing" .
Thursday, November 06 2003, 08:36AM
I'm not against this idea at all, quite on the contrary. I'm trying
to think of the problems before they crop up and bite us on the back,
so to speak. Dealing with issues before they happen is generally a
good thing. Less hurt feelings and annoyed coders that way.
I don't agree that there are next to no low or new players, though.
They just tend to be less vocal. :)
In either case, newbies would be quite likely to benefit from this idea
as well as everyone else. Cruor suggested that with implementation of
this idea, such commonly killed mobs as the Tara mice might decrease
in xp value which would in turn hurt the newbies prowling that area.
That means that that is an issue that needs addressed, whether it means
that level less than 10 mobs should be excluded, or something else.
Or was I just not clear enough that I meant less than 10 _mobs_,
Thursday, November 06 2003, 10:18AM
more xp is a good thing worries me...
More xp means a faster progression to 50 and boredom.
DOesn't mean i don't like this idea because contrary to
how people have taklen my comments I think it's a good idea
that we need to be very careful about implementation on.
But i do worry about the theory that "more for less is better"
Thursday, November 06 2003, 11:10AM
I'm actually for this idea as well.. now how to do it, that would
be the challenge. I do agree we need to look at how it can be abused,
as with any new feature but so far I haven't seen anything that would
As for the "more for less is better", I'd be against that, but to me
this sounds more like "move your butt if you want to benefit" and
that's a fine message IMO.
Thursday, November 06 2003, 12:29PM
Okay, I'm on raw telnet, so bear with me...
As it stands now, when I xp, I can run a
quite literal racetrack around the mud to "my" xp mobs.
I have an aliases to tell them all to see which are up.
I don't nkow the entire mud perfectly, but I know enough.
I know enough to see that my xp run would lose value
because others are too lazy to explore.
Don't get me wrong, I do see this as positive to improve general play.
However the negative I see is that it would
detract from the play for those of us that already learned the mud.
I learned it all to be better than average.
There was no xp reward for it.
Why should people have to be rewarded to play on a higher level?
Thursday, November 06 2003, 01:34PM
If you know where all the high level mobs are, or even most, then
you'll do fine.. since the less commonly hit ones would be gaining
experience. Its the folks that kill the same thing day after day
that will be receiving less since most times everyone is hitting
those mobs too.
Thursday, November 06 2003, 01:37PM
While boredom can/does sit in at level 50, especially for those of you
like choc that refuse to pk, don't pretend it doesn't exist elsewhere.
Taking 17 hours to level from 33-34 wouldn't be exactly exciting either.
Thursday, November 06 2003, 04:37PM
If I'm running a racetrack around an era
with a healer, and timed repops. You'll still start
losing xp because you're killing mobs.
Basically, I don't want to start losing xp because
my era run pattern also has normal xp mobs.
Thursday, November 06 2003, 09:08PM
This is a great idea. However, the potential I think we
are all missing is the increasing visits to relatively
unexplored areas. If this idea were implemented, it would have
everyone exploring areas and taking chances killing mobs they've never
once thought about killing before. Not only that, but they will discover
where new inns are, wells, boards.... and with that could come housing
where new inns are, wells, boards.... and with that could come housing
RP plots and ideas etc etc. This isn't just about xp... but I agree
we need to check our 6 for ever possible exploitation as possible.
The Honorable Straussy M.
Friday, November 07 2003, 01:31AM
I dont see what was wrong with my idea of having a group
cap for some mobs/areas.
the main thing kae seems worried about in the abuse side
is jerks taking mobs before other people who set up a full
run to do them did (which as someone pointed out might not be
worth it as you may decide to increase max xp by 10% over 10 hrs
1% extra per hr, thats what 500 xp per hr on an avg level 50 mob)
but if they after the bonus xp, and you put a min number of peps
in there (or level, not sure which would work better), then
the 3 peps doing PD before the big group does would think twice
In responce to the heavily killed mobs taking away your xp, i thought
the idea was to LOWER the xp, by a amount, so you wouldnt ever get
- xp, just might only 20-30k for a "50k" mob
anyway what would I know? seems like i was ignored the first time...
Friday, November 07 2003, 07:48AM
Holy crud, some of this posts on this subject have boggled my mind.
Yes, please, check into every possible form of abuse and make sure
you as immortals are prepared for it and can deal with it. If you
think that remark was meant as sarcasm, it wasen't. The last thing
I want immortals here to have is another excuse to not implament
something else that is a great idea in the future because this
extremely great idea has taken to much of the immortals time away
and they can not deal with the next great idea because of it.
Though may I say this, Lets not harp on the bad to much, the good
of this IMHO far far outweights the bad. And Krynn may I suggest
Era hoping for those mobs on your run to kill more may help with
that situation you were discussing, if you killed everything and
are waiting for a repop in one era, there are two other era's with
great xp mobs and maybe better xp then you expect with this change.
To say that it will take away from your "known" xp run is the
entire point really, people are saying explore, find new things and
heck, here is a bonus for doing it. Saying that it will lessen the
same old same old and thats a serious problem may be somewhat true
in the way your thinking, but if you explored a bit more and
added to your allready broad knowledge of the mud, You can add on
to that xp run in better ways im sure, and thats the point of this
As it stands right now, I have seen two posts I found really
relevant, or well two questions that have been asked but not
1) How much additional lag will this add to our exsisting mud. Now
I know the imms can't answer this but its something to keep in mind.
2) Can we as the players be kept informed as to the progress of any
talks, thoughts or anything else involved in this idea. I believe
at a recent Q and A static asked for a board to do this purpose
and the immortals said no. So I don't forsee it happening in this
case either. its to bad because I see a lot of players here who
think this is a really good idea but what I don't see is anyone
saying "yes, we think it has merrit and we, the immortal staff are
going to conduct research/discussions into it to see if its
possible to do here on Legend". I think if someone who is in the
position of authority here said something along those lines at
least, this may help with peoples concerns that this may be another
great idea that will either get ignored or not implamented for
To end my thoughts, I really hope that this idea goes somewhere other
then the discussion board. I think the idea has a lot of merit and
could work well with our current system. I would think that having
a level 10 cutoff for newbies is a bit extreme, maybe level 4 or 5
would be more appropriate there, after all once you hit level 2 and
get skills, gaining more xp gets a lot more easier unless your some
freak 3c mage who still thinks getting all your words first is the
way to go :P , and as to the abuse, abuse is here now and can be done
as someone else said in the same ways pretty much currently, adding
this feature I don't forsee would make anyone want to beat a group
to an area more then it does now without it. as to hiding mobs, hehe,
if someone wants to hide a mob for 4 days in their house just to
gain the extra 10 to 30% xp, all the power to em.
Ohh, here is one more thought I just had, sorry... What about crashes,
would this reset the percentages to +/- 0 or would the current
+/- remain over reboots/crashes?
sorry for the long post
Friday, November 07 2003, 08:58AM
ok ... umm i can't do an exact quote .. but ..
yes the immortal staff thinks this idea has merit and we
are going to look into teh best way to implement it into
the gaming system we are creating/maintaining"
As to keeping the player base up to speed with the progress...
I'm not going to start a flame war but as significant progress
is made and player input is neeeded you will be informed. Sorry
if that isn't the level of involvement you would like. Perhaps
working towards making yourself part of the design team would
satisfy your need for teh ability to contribute on that level.
Friday, November 07 2003, 11:49AM
I really don't think frequently killed mobs should drop in xp value.
I do agree that it would be an excellent feature to increase xp of
mobs that haven't been killed for a period of time. But I don't
think I should be penalized if I want to go kill the guestmaster
every now and again if he's up.
Friday, November 07 2003, 12:56PM
You would have to lower the xp for the frequently killed mobs in order
to have the less frequently killed mobs have an increased xp value.
the both go hand in hand, otherwise we'd have players hitting 100mil
left and right.
Friday, November 07 2003, 04:25PM
I thought this was a way to encourage exploring, which in a sense it is.
But you are penalizing those who don't explore extensively, which is
wrong. Its like now that you are "encouraged" to group and suffer the
consequences if you don't. Slow XP gain in other words. If lowering
XP on frequent mobs is the only way to increase XP on infrequently
killed ones, then count my support out.
Friday, November 07 2003, 04:30PM
As far as I can see, some people might complain now if they were
planning to do SL and somebody else jumped in before them. I doubt
that the fact they were waiting for a modest amount of extra xp
would make a significant difference...in any case, perhaps this
would be an idea that could somehow exclude areas intended for
high level groups, since those areas are run regularly and already
designed to give good rewards?
The main benefit of this would be for those who are more oriented
toward exploring, so that they can get a benefit from using more areas of
the mud equivalent to the benefit for those who like to do high-powered
xp runs. Xp would have to be reduced for frequently killed mobs to
balance things out, and this would also encourage newbies away from
exclusively killing those small number of low level mobs that offer the
best gain for the least effort. In the course of this, they would
discover new areas, skills & equipment. If this is a serious problem
for high level players who like to kill just a few big mobs, it could
even be restricted to mobs below a certain level?
Friday, November 07 2003, 04:55PM
I think you missed my point Cheap...
I have explored. I know alot of areas. I run those areas.
Now if I'm being effecient and doing a run that ends when the
beginning of it repops (utilizing the bulk of an era) then I will
quite literally get penalized because other people need encouragement
to explore. Exploring and knowing the game is its own reward.
I've been to the nooks and crannies of this mud exploring and
big mob hunting.
I do like this idea. I think it's innovative and clever.
I, however, disagree with the principal of it.
Alot of players here learned this mud without the need for XP adjustment.
Why do people now need to be encouraged/forced to explore?
I see no reason for it. Stag Monkeys will always be Stag Monkeys.
And the good players will always make money selling eq to them.
Old, crotchety, and disliking lazy people.
Saturday, November 08 2003, 01:56AM
I really like this idea!
However, thas not to say that the er people will abuse it to be
mean to other people thing will never happen should it be imped - but!
I played for quite a while at nother mud that had something very
similar, only it's not so much based on how much a mobby was kilt
since last repop, but how recently kilt said mobby.
Course I have no idea what the lag implications are for trying
that sort of system instead.
The idea was, if you haven't killed a mob recently, then it has
more value for you (just like laughingeyes said, only the
xp value is tied to a particular pc whacking a mob)
And if you kill it over a set number of times within a certain
time frame then it starts decreasing in value _for you_ - but not
for the next person who decides to kill it and hasn't killed said
mob in days, or mebbe ever before.
Seems to me this would have basically the same effect as the other
idea, only with less abusive whattits? Only, course, it's probably
incredibly laggy. (I really dunno anything about coding.)
However, I've seen it imped and I like that version too. =)
Saturday, November 08 2003, 03:37AM
About the newbie problems, a cap on lowlevel mobs would
seem to be a fair idea, as not to alienate newbies. You
could also just make it so hometown low level mobs
don't have fluxuating xp, since most newbie newbies
rarely leave their hometowns first off. At least I didn't.
I don't buy into the complaints of someone stepping
in and snagging xp out from under big groups. SL, PD
etc have other rewards besides xp. I really think the
game is better the more fluid it is (sounds like a broken
record). People compete for Klein xp and profits from
selling the eq all the time. It has always been first come
first serve. If it takes a group an hour to get a PD group
running, and it only takes two PCs 5 minutes to choose
to go, well you snooze you loose.
I think Chocorua mentioned the over all increase in ease
of xp gathering. I don't know if it would be over all easier
if the bonus was directly linked to lack of xp in over
killed mobs. I could even see ....I know people will hate
me for saying this...an over all reduction of all mob xp
at the reboot or base value mark for xp. So all mobs
at base value were 10% less than current (just throwing
numbers around, not meant to be taken seriously). This
meaning a maxed bonus mob (30-40% bonus) would
actually only be 20%-30% more than before this system
Also I feel you must consider activity. After a busy week-
end there would simply be less bonus xp out there. So
different times would clearly be more fruitful for xping.
Just ideas. I am glad there has been so much interest.
Princess Laughing Eyes of the Choctaw
Sunday, November 09 2003, 07:23AM
MUDs have tried various systems like this in the past. Before Legend even
opened, there were MUDs that had zone based xp. Once a zone ran out of xp,
you'd get nothing for killing mobs there until enough time had elapsed for
it to recover. Basing it on under utilized mobs is a better approach.
If the xp increase isn't too large or the reductions too small, then it
shouldn't cause any problems for players. Some players will go looking
more to garner more xp, when they do this, then the mobs they kill
normally will be freed up for those who are less willing to explore. Even
if these mobs are worth less xp, they are still available a larger amount
of time for the stick-at home-types and those characters would perhaps
gain xp faster.
Mostly, this would encourage competing characters of the same level range
to spread out more. It doesn't seem like there would be an excess in
complaints. If the xp is only adjusted every MUD week, then those changes
are going to be extremely slow, especially if they don't get tracked
It might be good to allow builders to set the upper and lower limit for
each mob or each area, but it could be better to have the MUD code handle
this automatically. As areas become more/less popular and need xp shifted,
builders may not be able to respond fast enough.
Sunday, November 09 2003, 10:50PM
not sure what sorta design you are going with, but here's a thought:
when a mob spawns it stores its spawn time (mud time) and then every
"mud day", i.e. midnight, it gets 5% of its base xp added to its
total xp value, for a duration of 5 mud days -- making the hard cap
125% of base xp. so for a normal level 50 mob, instead of 20k xp,
you could get a cap of 25k xp. you won't be hitting 100 mil anytime
soon with this bonus, but you will see it and like it. to do a minus
system for often killed mobs would be a much more complicated system,
and one that would penalize true newbies until they learn the mud, and
could cause more lag due to the system having to track the number of
deaths a mob had behind the current one spawned. my 2 cents.
Sunday, November 09 2003, 11:43PM
there shouldn't be any penalization to frequently killed mobs
besides less frequently killed mobs having more xp. the whole purpose
of having these less frequented mobs have more xp is to attract
players into exploring areas that don't normally get explored.
5k xp is not going to get level 50s with 1000 odd hours running
around legend in search of xp. And nor would be want that to be the
case here. So we would need to find a good balance. I think mobs
should start out with a base xp, of course, then accumulate xp
every RL day. Then cap off at 1 RL week. This will promote
exploration throughout the week, then repeat itself next week. Also
it won't discourage newbies because the mobs they kill will be as
good as their base xp which should be what it is currently.
Monday, November 10 2003, 03:07AM
every RL day or week? thems increases better be big then.
personally i think its too long cause if you had this working
properly, then most mobs shouldnt last that long. that and
the stability, if they dont store the gain/loss over crash
with 1 RL week, even 1 RL day, the mud could die and bye bye xp.
I've seen times where mud dies every 10 min, other times not
until sceduled down time. My point is that the mud is SUPPOSED
to die once per week, and if mobs last that long (which currently
id say some do (espically smaller ones), then you'd lose all that xp
with each weeks update.
Probably the best duration would be somewhere around 1 or 2 hrs
as it gives enough time that the mob wont be killed of instantly
but short enough that someone is likely to get the bonus, and
you wouldnt have to have the hastle of storing the xp over crashes
but thats just what I think...
Tuesday, November 11 2003, 08:55AM
IMO there would have to be a drop in exp for frequently killed m
mobs as well as an increase for those seldomly killed. One without
the other is less likely to achieve the desired goal, that being to
get people moving about more.
Thursday, November 13 2003, 03:16PM
Let me put it this way:
If I sit and camp around a big mob waiting for the XP bonus, and I get
like 400K experience for that mob, is it gonna be worth it? I wouldn't
call that abuse, I'd call it stupidity. I could go and kill 4 100K
experience mobs without camping for a day, and then move on to 4 more
100K mobs. Thats 800K! Wow! Seems like I'd go with the non-camping,
killing of more mobs route, personally. As far as coder resources go,
all I see lately are small little changes, nothing big, nothing major.
Looks to me like you guys could use the work of implementing a system
such as this, or at least looking into it further. Of course, I'm
no coder myself, so I don't really know whats going on. Actually, most
of us don't know whats going on behind the scenes. Start a coder board
that tells us what projects are being worked on :p
Thursday, November 13 2003, 03:19PM
Tempting as a coder board might sound, you gotta remember that
documentation takes time. Better to spend that time actually
Thursday, July 01 2004, 05:07AM
Well, I don't know if this would work or not, but here's at least one idea.
Maybe just implement it on a trial basis...use much smaller xp adjustments than would be used in the actual system.
For instance, if it would be plus or minus 40%, maybe just make it plus or minus 10% till we see how it works out.
If it doesn't work out, and people start grumbling enough that with a larger adjustment it would be out of hand, well, then we tried it, and it didn't work.
But if it seems to work out well, then we could go ahead with it.
Also, and while I'm sure this would take a bit of time and experimentation to do, I think that it should vary based on area.
For instance, Alaska isn't explored that often...but every now and then people will simultaneously get the urge to go off and see what's there.
But, since, at present(and only to the best of my knowledge) it's a rarely visited area, this wouldn't hurt xp much.
PD, on the other hand(at least as it was used before changes), which is(well, was, but blah) hit all the time, would be more affected by the adjustment.
Just a couple of thoughts I had
Friday, July 02 2004, 01:47AM
Alaska is actually quite visited, you'd be surprised. Dreamtime, now...
But yes, I'm also still very interested in this whole thing. Be
exciting to see what the coders come up with.