Grouping and XPFollow

I will only repeat what facts I know, I think about everything else is conjecture, as the developers have not revealed more

(Z is a variable)
This assume you are all same level
solo - Mob is worth Z exp and you get it all
group of 2 - Mob is worth Z * 1.2 = you get 1/2 that (60% solo)
group of 3 - Mob is worth Z * 1.4 = you get 1/3 that (46% solo)
group of 4 - Mob is worth Z * 1.6 = you get 1/4 that (40% solo)
group of 5 - Mob is worth Z * 1.8 = you get 1/5 that (36% solo)
group of 6 - Mob is worth Z * 1.8 = you get 1/5 that (36% solo)

Note NO loss of exp for adding 6th person.

Non-LDON then you can group with someone 1.5 times your current level or 10 levels higher than you (which ever is greater) and still get exp.

Example - a 1 can group with a 10, a 10 can group with a 20, a 12 can group with a 24, a 30 can group with a 45, a 42 can group with a 64 I know a 44 can group with a 65, I am unsure about a 43.

I know none of this answers you question about levels, but as far as I know there has been no official answer to that question so I consider every thing I hear on the subject Romor/guess/urban ledgend.

In my opinion, anyone that wont group with someone more than 1 level apart, after level 10, is a moron.

But that is just me.

Ok, I don't know all the exact details of how it works out. But from my experience (pun intended) The difference in experience works out fairly well no matter what level spread in your group as long as you are withing the limit for getting any xp at all.

Any way what I make of it is this. (Numbers are not accurate but they get the point across)

Say you are lvl 50 and you are grouped with a lvl 60
It takes you 5000 XP points to gain a level
It takes him 6000 XP points to gain a level
You are given 110 XP for killing mob x
He gets 60 XP from the encounter and
you get 50 XP from it.
In other words you would still both get 1% of your level from the kill.

While you get less xp for the kill it takes less XP for you to level so it evens out.

Again The numbers are just off the top of my head but the system is right to an extent.

Silly me always thought that if I face a creature on my own I would get most out of it since the risk is higher.

But I understand this thread that instead of fighting mobX 6 times I should fight mobX 36 times in a group of 6 and not only having my risk of being killed reduced by about 85% because I get targeted roughly 1 out of 6 times - no I also get MORE xp!

If that's true than it's nothing more than an intentional penalty for soloing which makes me feel free to exploit the game as a soloer in any possible way i can manage.

Edited, Thu Jan 15 07:40:52 2004 by Leiany

There's something else to consider here. Normally, when you group for experience, you're going after mobs much higher in level than you would go after otherwise. There's some disagreement, I'm sure, but generally speaking higher level mobs give more experience per kill. So, while you might be getting a smaller slice of the total experience 'pie' for every mob, it's a bigger pie. In my experience as a Druid (Perhaps not the BEST solo class, but certainly one of the top three.) I find that I get a little bit less experience per kill when grouped, but I generally get much more experience overall that way. Even when quad-kiting, I could slam four mobs, but then I'd have to sit down and med back up before I could go after more. In a group, if everyone plays well, pulls are nearly constant. Thus experience comes in smaller pieces, but at a faster rate.

Note that I'm not talking about raids or farming loot or anything like that. I'm talking about something like a mid-40s group in The Overthere pulling red tigers and rhinos as opposed to a mid-40s Druid quadding blues in the same zone.

That link is to the old rules. About mid year 2003 they switched to the new group exp listed above.

Wish I had a link to that patch message

<*edit*>
Live Patch mesasage -
http://eq.crgaming.com/viewarticle.asp?Article=5134

Test Patch mesage
http://eq.crgaming.com/viewarticle.asp?Article=5124

=D slow day at work


Edited, Fri Jan 16 14:03:14 2004 by sbs

Hi, i know that the formula posted at the beginning of this thread is what everyone Accepts as the breakdown for how experience is split, but in my experience that is not the case. at lvl 59 3 solo kills will get my char(ranger)about 1 blue bubb of exp, but grouped with another lvl 59(warrior) ten kills only got us 1/2 a blue bubb each. so what really happened here is that sony gave us the exp bonus they claim to give us, but the exp penalties from having less risk for the reward, that have always existed are still in place.
it is still far better to get a solo kill then it is to kill two of the exact same mob with two people in a group. but with the exeptional bonuses for full groups, that is probably the most efficient way to xp.

It's a long shot-guess but maybe verant adjusted it that way to make grouping attractive -if not to say necessary- to reduce competion over mobs as the community grew.

I have a couple of thoughts on the grouping (important only to me, lol). Most recently I have hit level 18 with my Druid, and much to my surprise I am not desired in some groups that are two to three levels lower than me. I don't think it has anything to do with my playing, which is fine because I have plenty of people on my friends list at their request, and I am always trying to be better. After awhile though I decided it wasn't worth it to try to explain how the level spread works because these people that are whining about me being too high to group with them, don't really want to hear what you are saying and have thier minds made up.
I guess I need to find a new hunting ground because I'm getting alot of green cons on these groups anyway.
My second thought on this, it seems I see alot of powerlevelers camped in the good spots and you know I realized recently that even if they were just regular players powerleveling an alt, my first thought seems to be lately "are these guys working for Yantis?" and I usually move on.

Recalling from memory exp/mob:

constant * 100 * zone constant * lvl * lvl
Zone bonuses generally:
Old world outdoor 0.8
Old world dungeon 1.0
Kunark outdoor 1.0
Kunark dungeon 1.2
Old world planes ?
Velious ?
Luclin ?
LoY ?
PoP ?

Due to some dungeons being mostly empty and lots of people getting clumped together in the same old loot farms some zones had special zone exp bonuses added.

Special zone bonuses:
Hole,
Paw,
RunneyEye,
probably more

Grouping bonuses:
1 100%
2 120%
3 140%
4 160%
5 180%
6 180%

How exp split is done is uncertain at this point we know exp is divided in some accordance with lvl, but the 6th member rule makes this kinda funky.

A qualified guess could be along the lines of:
share = your lvl / (total levels in group - avg level) * mob exp.

Exp needed for level was in old times (before exp penalties were removed):
lvl constant * race constant * class constant * lvl * lvl * lvl

before hell levels were removed lvl constant was:
1-4 0.50
5-24 1.00
25-29 1.05
30-34 1.10
...
Since hell levels were removed these have been smoothed out so exp needed to ding dont jump like it used to.

race constants (might be for melee classes only):
halfling 80
gnome 80
troll 120
ogre 120
iksar 110
barb 105

class constants:
melee 80
caster 100
hybrid 120

A few observations. exp per mob is quadraic while exp needed to ding is cubic thus gaining levels takes more the higher you get. (obviously)(linear increase btw).
This does however mean a lot can be gained by being a lowbie in a high level since exp is shared according to level, not according to exp needed to level (this was changed also along the way, so peeps didnt freeze out exp sponges (Troll SK for example).

Lots of this is based on how things were in the old days, how much of this is still true is uncertain. Outdated as this information may be, it still gives an understanding of where exp system started and thus a good foundation for speculating on how exp works now.

The information herein is stuff as i remember reading it from the guys behind showEQ 3 years ago, i suggest anyone really interested in this should look up original article if it still exists on the net.