To all legit players

playerdmg is the assumption that for each player in the party the damage output grows linearly in a ratio of 1:1 players:dmg.

The assumption may be wrong, however when averaged out for many different party compositions, that the damage output should scale evenly 1:1.

Yeah, you're right on the monster damage boost affecting armour the most. perhaps an attack speed modifier (still only small)? therefore armour will still be as effective.

I'd be interested to know what you think regarding what I'm trying to do (rather than whether my maths actually performs my intention). ie, trying to make the XP each person gets over time from any situation be equal with any other situation where the player levels are constant. eg Solo XP at lvl 50 killing lvl 50 mob would be the same as if yuo did the exact same thing in a party, and take the same amount of time to attain.

Is that what we should be striving for? It seems then there would be no benefit to fillers to "boost" XP rate gains.

"

StillSingle wrote:

playerdmg is the assumption that for each player in the party the damage output grows linearly in a ratio of 1:1 players:dmg.

The assumption may be wrong, however when averaged out for many different party compositions, that the damage output should scale evenly 1:1.

Yeah, you're right on the monster damage boost affecting armour the most. perhaps an attack speed modifier (still only small)? therefore armour will still be as effective.

I'd be interested to know what you think regarding what I'm trying to do (rather than whether my maths actually performs my intention). ie, trying to make the XP each person gets over time from any situation be equal with any other situation where the player levels are constant. eg Solo XP at lvl 50 killing lvl 50 mob would be the same as if yuo did the exact same thing in a party, and take the same amount of time to attain.

Is that what we should be striving for? It seems then there would be no benefit to fillers to "boost" XP rate gains.

I've already posted my ideas on it. I believe increasing the party exp is better, not decreasing it.
Also I agree with allowing people to go off and solo monsters in the area, and not be punished, but not be rewarded. Pretty much like Notthat says, where you just cap them if they are too far, or like I said just split the exp to the group.

My system the exploitable issues are only 1 that I can think of.
AFK exping (meaning someone is giving you free exps and you dont have to do anything for it).
I dont see this as a major problem as I expect this could happen either way, and in many forms, the exp rate with zone shared exp would simply be harder to carry some afk people.

TL:DR
I dont like your system for 2 reasons
1)EXP nerf
2)Forces everyone in the party to do AOE damage.

fair enough.

I see where you're coming from now. The XP would be nerfed for parties only (to bring them inline with Solo xp).

I don't know the skills well enough to know whether AoE is a requirement of the increased hp of monsters. Usually, AoE does a reasonable amount less to each monster in a mob compared to single target DPS (please remember flags are not included, they have been dismissed as BAD).

So IF your statement (that AoE would be a must) is based on damage output, then it should hold true in any case where HP is increased for the number of players.

We're basically coming from very different sides. You would like there still to be XP buff for partying, and I would like there to be no difference between partying and soloing.

It only took us a few pages but we got there!! :) good chatting with you :)

"

StillSingle wrote:

We're basically coming from very different sides. You would like there still to be XP buff for partying, and I would like there to be no difference between partying and soloing.

It only took us a few pages but we got there!! :) good chatting with you :)

I'm not sure if you played in a parties a lot, but parties are not good for exp rate.

Solo (not counting boosting) is much faster for exp. It has less to do with hp/exp rate and more with efficiency.

I've yet to see a party, even a well played one, do better than a good solo player. There is always a lot of wasted time and effort, its just the way it is, a lot of this has to do with how the range is limiting groups.

Removing this range issue, will free up people to exp at a better efficiency than they currently do in a party. But really I would rather see parties just get a buff to exp overall. Right now people are just not encouraged at all to party. I know they don't want us to talk about the IIQ, but really that's the only reason to really party up, which doesn't work for maps. Its really bad for maps.

So I think to counter this a little, help with some exp buff in a party. Single play will still be rewarding, as all the loot is yours, and you have more effect on your exp rate, as long as they don't go overboard on the exp bonus for parties.

heh, maybe we could party up at some stage and you can show me how its done! :)

what a tight rope GGG would be walking if they were going to use XP as the carrot for joining a party!! too little, no effect, too much, ther's no point in playing solo anymore.

"

StillSingle wrote:

Great Post TEBird. brings adifferent perspective on XP sharing in groups when there are multiple objectives in the one instance.

From memory, there aren't any similar scenarious in POE at the moment. It could change, would be cool if it did :)

You are totally right. I'm just hopeful that someday PoE might add something like that as an additional endgame-ish content item.

It would be the shizzle.

I suppose aside from that, the cow level was pretty fun because you could split up into a bunch of 2 man groups and see how fast you could clear the cow level.

No real objectives, so it was less interesting, but still fun.

Other than that, I don't see a reason to allow sharing exp while split up...but I do find those to be compelling reasons, primarily the cs example, but I don't know if they will ever do that...

I also don't think PoE has anything even close to the cow level right now in terms of monster density.

But it would be cool if they did.

"

duolc wrote:

To what end did you make this thread? You haven't really left any open ends to discuss, wrapping everything up in your OP. Including calling this exploiting, when just a sentence earlier acknowledging Chris only said it was unfair.

Multiboxing is clearly not an intended function. Instance boosting is a debatable one. If you are doing this, your enemies still have the extra hp, so they take extra long to kill and give extra xp. It seams hardly fair to come straight out and call that an exploit. Unfair, yes, unintended, maybe.

if it is unintended then it is an exploit by definition, since the term exploit is actually a shortened, coined term from the phrase "exploiting an unintended mechanic".

Since it seems that Chris has already agreed that this is unintended, I think it's safe to say it plainly. It's an exploit.

Guys, I love this thread. So much constructive discussion, so many ideas, maths to back it up and no futile personal insults, which I have grown so accustomed to see in another ARPG game's forum, that I will not mention here by name.

Let me also add some of my thoughts.

I generally agree more with StillSingle than with MrDDT in that I'd rather see the XP gained by individual players from solo and party gameplay equal or very close to one another. Neither XP gain, nor additional IIQ should be THE reason to play in a group. If that's all there is to encourage cooperation then there's something really wrong about this system.

IMHO, players should play in parties for the sole fun of it. To comment with friends what's happening on the screen. To comment on the great loot that has just dropped. To help one another in hard situations by providing backup. To form teams with skills which synergize well, making gameplay more fun. To follow creative tactics in difficult boss fights, where each team member is doing their role: tank / aura provider / summoner / trap & totem support etc.

If all those are not enough to encourage playing together, then maybe we should improve something to make it so? Like team capture the flag mode. Like areas with 2x, 3x as many mobs as now, where more players would be needed simply to hold back the incoming hordes of enemies. Like PVP where one team would be invading a fortification protected by another team. Like small side quests and challenges requiring two or three people teams to be able to start. Wouldn't you say that it would make players participate more actively in group play?

I am personally more of a solo player both here, in D2, D3, T2, even GW2. I play only with good friends from online and real life, while extremely rarely in public open games. Possibilities like the ones I mentioned above would certainly strongly encourage me to give it a try a few times and would do so so much more effectively than the incentive of being able to get a bit more XP than when soloing.

Concluding, I'm fully in favor of XP being the same in solo and group play, monster's life +100% scaling with each additional player and small dmg or attack speed increase for monsters. It would solve the problem of boosting once and for all.

Hm... And what would you say if instead of increased monster dmg, the amount of enemies was slightly (+5~10%) increased?

"

misanthropos wrote:

Concluding, I'm fully in favor of XP being the same in solo and group play, monster's life +100% scaling with each additional player and small dmg or attack speed increase for monsters. It would solve the problem of boosting once and for all.

As someone who solos almost exclusively, I am not in favor of equal XP for solo and group play. Solo play is far more convenient. Group play needs to be encouraged.

GGG has also mentioned that by open beta, boosting and other similar tactics will be "not worth it."