92 replies to this topic

[Ularis]

I voted for high lvl monsters giving less exp.

I own a newbie friendly guild and knowing how they want to reach job change lvl as fast as they can...killing higher lvl monsters should give more exp.

While you're at it maybe return the Repeatable Quests.

I remember making a lot of friends and meeting new ones everyday.

This would make newcomers stay longer since goals are definitely attainable, and not slow and tedious grinding as it is now.

I find myself soloing ever since renewal with the exception of events with or without exp from kills bt it is best with exp.

[Hrothmund]

Dont get confused around "high level grind" and "monsters higher level". I think its more important to focus on the last 300 hours of leveling rather than the first 5-10 hours which is about what it can take to grind from 1/1 novice to 99/1 3rd job trans.

[Drewcifer]

Not to sound impatient but when can we even expect these changes to come about?

[Kitten]

I miss being able to farm items and see a small exp gain. It's like I'm getting screwed twice when trying to item hunt.

So I'm more annoyed with the lower level monsters giving next to no exp. I can see the sense of the higher ones giving less (not that I agree with it but I understand why it's there). Why not just admit both situations suck?

[Trini]

I miss being able to farm items and see a small exp gain. It's like I'm getting screwed twice when trying to item hunt.

So I'm more annoyed with the lower level monsters giving next to no exp. I can see the sense of the higher ones giving less (not that I agree with it but I understand why it's there). Why not just admit both situations suck?

Yea, having to chose in this way sux but i understand Heim needs black and white thing probably to see what to work on first or how to organize events.

Both are a problem for all.

[ErosVice]

I voted "high monsters giving less to lower level chars" is way more painful. (But I hate the exp restrictions over all compared to pre-renewal.)

I know you don't care much for 'gray' opinions but maybe you should at least give more exp from higher monsters when there's a party or something like that. Come on, make partying worth while. It makes it funner and a better game. >:/

[asayuu]

Why just don't test?

These weeks we had the drop range penalty removed. You people could remove the exp penalty and open a NPC poll ingame [Because not everybody looks the forums] for it, and once a hour, say to people to vote on that poll there.

Anyways, that reminds me of my last adventure at new world. Me [Wanderer 108], Deenie [RG 104] and Chlammy [AB 100] were walking there, and killing unicorns and nagas. That level range is someway crappy, because like, I was getting 4k each kill. They were getting like, 1k. But that is not the point. We found the green big lion guy [Tendrilion]. We spent half on hour on trying to deplenish his 1.3m HP, we died a lot of times, and well, that, and... [Note: B> Ungoliant Card, poor priest taking bleeding is bad D:] After that time, we did it. The damn monster was level 126 and then neither of us were on the range, we got a someway horrible exp. [Note: I got 0.2% with VIP, nearly 22k base and job.]

Well, the battle was fun. But the reward was not so good as that. I don't like the idea of leveling just with turnin events like it happens constantly, but... The rewards are not nice because the sharing system and the level range breaks us. [Back to unicorns then. Being level 120, only people over 105 really get exp from the monsters, which one is very good, due to it's "apparently" difficulty]

And well, yes. I vote on high mostly because... Well. Few people really want to explore the world, and get the very nice dungeons. And like. I have another friend who, at level 75, still kill orc zombies, because it's more "rentable" to level by killing 20 monsters with some arrow showers instead of fighting stronger monsters to get the better experience. Okay, mobbing is one style [That as a wanderer, I'm forced to do to save arrows] of growing, but it should not be encouraged as the main way to level. Leave the weaker maps for loot and cards, and of course, for the weak people.

Like. Killing 2/3/4 porings is safer and give more exp than fighting a picky or a willow, when you are between level 1 and 5. So then people forget about the "quality" of the leveling, but in the "quantity".

I did the overlook quests with another friend, and that was a good thing. We played for like, five hours in a row, and went from 34 to 70. [Then we rest a little, after that, more 3 hours at clock tower/goats and went to 80]. That kind of turnins are good. Even not being repeatable [how sad, but well], this way to level, after killing some monsters [and getting exp for each one, unlike the turnin events which we kill one enormous amount of monsters to get the whole exp at once. Oh, oh, oh... Well...

Some of the "turn ins" could be permanent, but giving less exp than killing the normal monsters. Like, let me see. A trip to Orc Dungeon to kill 100 zombies. So then we kill 100 zombies and get some points. The points could ignore level range and be the same as 20~40 zombies. Something like that. More decent quests at Eden Group then. Maybe remaking the signs to the levels, and make like [11~20/ 21~30/ 31~40... 81~90/ do it by yourself now until 99], raise the exp from some quests, make new ones for third classes [Not Eden, quests like the new world ones, the seals... Something with one history, you see.]... And stuff like that. We people do the New World entrance quest at level 70, but the maps are level 90+. You could restrict to 90+ and give a better exp reward on it... [Pssst~ and make those mobsters on the last map give some exp and loot. They are really very hard for some level 90 people, even partying.]

I really want to enjoy the game, join with people and hunt for stuff together~~~~~ and not buy over 9000 Reset Stones and Battle Manuals and repeat Megingjard seal over and over to reach the level 150.

Sorry for the big posting, now I will make a conclusion: How about making one "event", and wipe out the exp range too... Just for one week... No bonus inside the level range, no penalties outside the level range... And let's check the approvation of people. I hope it's not hard, it's just something to see if it will make the game better... For multiplayer. If it's possible, give it a try. If it's not, at least we tried~

[Taper]

I voted for "Monsters that are too HIGH of a level compared to a character giving less EXP," and I can provide a good example:

Since my Mechanic is at level 123, I should be able to get more xp by hunting stronger monsters in AL or Dimensional Gorge (they're level ~130-135) due to xp bonus for hunting stronger monsters, yet I find it to be much more efficient xp-wise to level in GH Chiv 1 (level ~115) instead despite the fact that I'm already couple of levels too high for monsters there. Why?

Because I can oneshot Raydrics and AK with HSCR, netting me 2x as much experience in same amount of time as I normally could get from DG/AL even though it takes me 3-4 hits to kill monsters on those maps. Even Rachel 1 wasn't as rewarding XP-wise for me. Thor simply wasn't worth it for me (largely because HSCR no longer bypasses shield reflect), because the exp I got wasn't enough to justify expenses I incurred there (pre-renewal, oh god it was worth every zeny I spent levelling my MS from 90 to 99).

I likely can see myself sticking with Raydrics and AK until level 135, even with its 85% XP reduction.

HOWEVER, I do think it doesn't really make any sense that monsters being too low of your level permanently give less xp. Make it something like flat 50% less once past a certain level difference, so the penalty would be still somewhat tolerable (you just end up doing 2x more effort), much like how the drop penalty is a flat 50% once past a certain level difference.

Also...

xed (broken glorious fist, reflect(not RD), 1 shotting plant skills (HSCR for one), actual reductions to damage for woe(DB)if possible, thats not my only thought, random reported event and skill bugs (cannon balls anyone?)

I always thought it was very unusual that I could one-shot plants with HSCR, but to be honest I don't think it's really that much of a bug or a problem. You're basically spending 1.5k zeny to kill a plant that has only 10-20hp, and with its low drop rates level the drops aren't really worth the HSCRing expenses.

Edited by Taper, 19 May 2011 - 02:51 PM.

[Ryzel]

A couple people have brought this up already and I agree...If you can easily kill monsters 10 levels higher than you alone why would you party? you get less exp per kill and it takes the same amount of time to kill. I think one way to get around this and promote partying (if there must be a level penalty) is to increase the lvl that monsters give 140% when a party member is on the same screen or map (depending on how strict you have to be) that way people would want to party to get that monsters lvl cap up.

Another option(though probbaly not reasonable) is to more accuratly scale the difficultly of differently level ranged monsters.

As a priest I find I cant kill anything stronger than dark priests alone...yet its hard to find a party in my level range because everyone else can solo non undead monsters. I overheard someone talking in town...and I quote "everyone solos since Renewal came out" I think thats the most acurate statement I have heard. Also I may be alone here and might get flamed...but I think the penalty for low level monsters is to little. maybe if your 20 lvls higher or something they should give like 10% exp.

Edit *also the drop penalty...there should be no drop penalty for monsters higher and less of one for monsters too low...One of my favorite parts of the game was hunting for items when i got bored.

Edited by Ryzel, 19 May 2011 - 07:36 PM.

[RegalPrime]

Overall, Im for loosening up the % penalty.

I really hate going to some places to only have my priest (which is a few levels lower than my RuneKnight), get crap exp from a few of the monsters because they are "too high."
50% to my RK, and 50% to my Priest (ooh wait hes one level too low, so he gets 40% of that 50% ////zzz).

I dont believe in the "if i can kill it I should get full exp for the monster no matter its level," ideology. It will bring back all that stupid leeching from Pre-Renewal. Im a 6X LK, doing 100-200k damage a CS.

Loosening up the penalty and rebalancing some of the maps would be a nice start to fixing things.
ie making Majoruros (~3k exp) summon a more advanced Minorous (higher level and more exp). Kinda lame to mob and kill to only get 100 more exp for those minos.


*lol at azzy's comment about no more Thors regionalized spawns. Stuff like that just makes for stupid feuds and lazy leveling.

[Heimdallr]

The intention in the long run is to overall loosen up restrictions.

But understand that the exp value differences between a level 70 creature isn't too different than a level 140 creature.

If the "under" limit was removed we would have 150s blasting out of Orc dungeon, as that is one of hte highest densities of monsters in the game, and the ability to pull out 2x the kills of a lvl 110 zone is very likely. The thing that kept that in check was 2 fold 1 being the escalting exp needs, and 2 the penalty.

Taking off the "upper" cap would only expose lower levels to bigger challenge and a bit more exp per effort (which I love that idea) but the under restriction would need to be regulated with changing exp values on monsters I think (or at least more extremely than only doing the 1 wing change)

I do like the votes and the feedback, it is useful, now to get a schedule and a more concrete plan put together.

[Charon]

Again, a graph of a suggestion:


All I did was:
-getting rid of the huge fall at +16
-increasing the upper bottom to 60% so really higher monsters are not THAT bad
-changing the lower jumps to be gradual decreases of 5% isntead of 30%
-loosened the -30--60 area a bit so that lower places aren't practically 0 exp, but not so much that it would cause scenarios like your orc dungeon example. It would simply enable you to get at least something from places you were at 40lvls ago.

[Hacks]

i hate them both. really.

upper cap has made my GX gameplay feel like i'm trying to do my best impersonation of a bot, higher level mobs give no exp worth mentioning.

the lower cap cuts exp to 10%. seriously? do we need it this low? nobody is going to 150 in orc dungeon, even at 50% thats at best 5-6k for a FAT mob, they'd be better off mobbing in other areas. i feel the 90% penalty is just too harsh.

[asayuu]

Oh, oh, oh... Another idea... In this case, about partying again.

Sometimes it's sad when I can level with people, but one [or more] member[s] of the party is outside the level range for the monster [Note: Always "lower"] and then we need to retreat for a weaker map just to make exp for that missing person. Or maybe continue leveling there and make this missing person receiving way less EXP.

Hmm... So... There is not something when we start a trade, which it shows the level of the people trading? o:
People could make it with the level of the party. Like, two options:

1- Party level would be the same as the party leader's level.
2- Party level is the mean [somatory / number of members] of the levels of the people inside it.

And the exp to sharing would not be based for each character individually, but based in the party level instead! [Someway, it would be more realistic, because the exp would really be "even" shared]

For who had not understood, let me put one example on the spoiler:

Spoiler

Mia, Sorcerer level 120, makes a party with Kareomi, Rune Knight level 113, and Athena, Archbishop level 125, to adventure and kill monsters. The party can be set on even share, because all of they are in the range. The party is level ([120+113+125]/3 = 119.333), and then they could kill monsters as strong as level 134 to enter in the default range and the best level to kill would be 129. The only level 129 monster I found was the Imp... According with... that. That also says one imp gives 14470 base and 10849 job exp.

It would be even shared, and applying the exp bonus [Actually, just 10% in my calculations], each member of the party would get 5305 base and 3977 job exp each one of they, instead of Mia getting 3410/2557, Kareomi getting 1010/757 and Athena getting 2779/2083 experience by killing the imp.

[Sera]

I don't really understand the poll, but please add more viable leveling areas in the 110 to 150 level range.

Please add places where I can solo for reasonable experience without using Kaahi.

I think the level difference experience gain thing has a purpose being in the game, however I also think that renewal is unfairly baised towards mobbing excessive amounts of monsters and requiring the use/abuse of kaahi to solo effectively, a player should be able to reasonably have their character (of standard intended build) attain max level without the use of outside buffs or characters, though these outside buffs / characters should certainly provide benefit.

Edited by Sera, 20 May 2011 - 05:56 PM.

[mooMOOmoo]

i hate them both. really.

upper cap has made my GX gameplay feel like i'm trying to do my best impersonation of a bot, higher level mobs give no exp worth mentioning.

the lower cap cuts exp to 10%. seriously? do we need it this low? nobody is going to 150 in orc dungeon, even at 50% thats at best 5-6k for a FAT mob, they'd be better off mobbing in other areas. i feel the 90% penalty is just too harsh.

Diablo 2 cuts exp to 5% when you're 10 levels or higher than monster your party killed. At high 90's the only two thing that gives more than 5% exp is Diablo and Baal (act bosses). At level 98, it takes about 4 baal runs to gain 0.1% exp. Each baal game must last at least 3 minutes or risk a temporary IP ban, so maximum exp rate is limited to about 0.5%/hour.

If you're level 24 or below, you get only 5% exp when the monster is 10 levels or higher than you.
But if you're level 25 or above, the exp penalty on killing high level is essentially nonexistent. (exp modifier = your level / monster level). In this way everyone just rushes to act 5 hell and leech Baalbot runs all their way to level 90s incredibly quickly. And that's already with a 2-screen exp share radius, because that place is such a small room low levels just stand there and leech their way up. (Thankfully in RO there is level limit for exp sharing so this kind of widespread superfast leeching will not happen.)

Edited by mooMOOmoo, 20 May 2011 - 08:57 PM.

[Charon]

Actually yea, would make sense with the share range being 15, that the exp penalty for everyone in it would depend on the leaders exp penalty.

[Einea]

At the moment I'm having a problem as Battle Paladin,
I'd like to move to higher level monster because i do damage equal to 2 times of the HP of the current monsters,
and theyre 10 levels higher than me,
I'm having hard time to keep my SP up since im using it for "low hp" monsters, and could aswell use it for higher HP's no oneshot em. (But theres no point since they give so little EXP)

[Ahlen]

Just make it so when you hit level 100 the exp penalty is completely removed for any monster above level 100. Also increase the exp value of the more difficult stuff so that partying becomes more lucrative.

[Kitten]

If the "under" limit was removed we would have 150s blasting out of Orc dungeon, as that is one of hte highest densities of monsters in the game, and the ability to pull out 2x the kills of a lvl 110 zone is very likely. The thing that kept that in check was 2 fold 1 being the escalting exp needs, and 2 the penalty.

No. No you really wouldn't. Density aside, the EXP gain would still be considerably less than what would be earned elsewhere. Did this sort of thing happen pre-Renewal when the EXP penalty wasn't in place? No, it didn't. I get that you're reaching here, and trying to defend a system that is obviously broken, but please think a little bit about the examples you're attempting to give.

What you'd end up with, however, would be characters spreading out a bit instead of all grouping onto the same four or five maps that have been deemed to be decent leveling spots. You'd also lessen the gap between the elite and the average, allowing the average every day player a bit of lenience even if they were not as well geared or in a situation where they couldn't afford to be spamming Potions or Ales. They'd still be gaining less than the well geared and financially well off player, but they'd be gaining in a situation that would be comfortable for them.

You'd also take the edge off the whole mess that is the drop penalty.

I don't understand why you can't see this.

[wotmint]

I think players shouldnt be exp penalized when partying...

[Charon]

no, they should, otherwise theres no point in the exp penalty when soloing either.

what it should do is give everyone in a share party the exp penalty of the leader.

[wotmint]

I think players shouldnt be exp penalized when partying...

I guess i put it wrongly. What i meant was when in party we should get full exp, not shared. Having +5 peeps in a party gets bonus to boot.

[Clogon]

I chose the upper limit because it has a lot more restrictions than the lower limit. The problem of no variety at 140+ can be fixed with better exp on the monster balancing for those zones.

[Rammm]

Both.

Because having a new player (and I mean a new player, no items, money, etc) would have to depend on leveling up on one spot till a certain level for a long time. Unlike old players who can pass on items to their old characters, they can go straight to higher level monsters due to their items.