XP Reducer

OK. I'm actually tired of grinding for xp, so much that I created a character that doesn't fight (ever) he doesn't even have a weapon nor has he bought any combat related skills as a burgler - currently he is level 17.

The XP gain in this game is a joke and seeming meant for people who want to race as fast as they can to the highest level possible, currently level 60 soon to be level 65.

I have to admit without the interaction of other people in this game (and not just to find a pug) this game is actually pretty boring, I'm either not high enough level for the area I'm in and get killed instantly or I'm too high for the level I'm in and it's not worth it to be there.

Just my opinion here take it or leave it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OranjeLament

You won't be satisfied either way. What happens when you get your /xpoff function and complete everything in SOA (which I did and was lvl 58 before stepping foot in Moria, but I digress...) and then turn on your XP and continue into Moria and follow the questlines? You'll end up less than halfway through the content at lvl 57 and realize you missed a 52-53 zone... you'll be at a loss, feeling frustrated and back here on these forums demanding a level reduction function... which IMO is on the verge of exploitation.

Slippery slope, my friend. Enjoy the game and as Gandalf said, "All we have to do is decide what to do with the time that is given to us."

---

Er, no. The OP would not come back and complain, and anyone who did would be justly flamed.

Again, this is already an option in World of Warcraft, where many players use it; some of us LotRO players would also like to have this option.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ferdinanda

Er, no. The OP would not come back and complain, and anyone who did would be justly flamed.

Again, this is already an option in World of Warcraft, where many players use it; some of us LotRO players would also like to have this option.

---

I want a gun. WoW has guns. I bet lots of players would want guns.

Sounds dumb doesn't it?

Oh wait...it is lore-breaking to have guns right? Is it as lore-breaking as an adventurer who experiences certain situations but for some reason gains no experience from his/her experiences? Merry and Pippin were very different hobbits when they returned to the scoured Shire. How do you roleplay around this? Does your character get a bop on the head erasing their short term memory after completing CD? Are the characters so exceptionally stupid that they do not learn from their mistakes?

I would suggest that the people who argue that they want to eliminate xp gain on demand in order to experience content on-level should very carefully plan the content they choose to participate in. Aragorn wanted to experience the siege of Gondor on-level and chose to take the paths of the dead instead of grinding his Rohan and Gondor locations deed.

LOTRO was designed to provide several paths for xp advancement in SoA. You could probably level very well simply by doing deeds and a few quests in each region. A character can grind his/her way to 60 by killing mobs (mind-numbingly boring but whatever) and never doing most of the quests. They can level to 60 by never specifically trying to do deeds and questing only. This means that EVERY area will be outleveled before you can complete all the deeds and quests. Thats just how it is. It sucks for you if this is a problem for you but that is how it is. Therefore you should identify the content you want to do and plan carefully to do it while on-level. You may have to tell people no sometimes.

I haven't the slightest clue how hard or easy it would be to put this tech in place. If it is easy then by all means put it in so I never have to see another of these threads (although I guarantee that the results will not be satisfactory to some percentage of players). If it will take significant resources away from developing changes a larger % of people want then put it in the same timeline that the month of the kinship is on :).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bumbalin

OK. I'm actually tired of grinding for xp, so much that I created a character that doesn't fight (ever) he doesn't even have a weapon nor has he bought any combat related skills as a burgler - currently he is level 17.

---

There have been discussions on this in the past. That's pretty impressive! What's the hardest thing you've had to do so far?

Is burglar the best class for this because you need stealth to do some of the non-combat quests?

Can you make it to Undying? What are the things you are going to do next, or are you completely stuck now?

Now I'm looking forward to the next time we get another character slot...

EDIT: And I assume you're soloing, right? The trivial solution is to be an expert treasure hunter (or a minstrel I guess) and just tag along in a group soaking up XP.


.

OranjeLament: We’re not asking for more so we can have an unfair advantage in the game, we’re asking for less so it’s harder (amongst other reasons that also do not give an advantage), thus, it’s not an exploit. (The term most would use is nerf—though those usually aren’t requested changes.) Yes, some may say they should be able to be level 1000 if they want to be (exploit), but that’s not what we’re asking for here. One relevant thing I want to mention: due to the xp adjustment, one of my characters was suddenly undying--the title that I was working so hard for now feels like a dirty secret. I almost rerolled the character, but since she's the founder of a kin, that would have been asking a lot of my kinmates just so I could feel I earned a title. To me, all the bonuses they keep adding is just a carrot for those who will follow it to the ends of Middle-Earth in their quest to be the highest level they can be.

Thane9, from your posts, it seems like you only see this game as a conquest. In your mind, as long as there is something to conquer, there is nothing wrong with the game.

Due to the growing number of people who are joining in to say that they see so much more to this game, there are definitely other views out there. I’ve even learned a few more reasons that controllable xp (at earned rank only status) would be even more beneficial to the LOTRO community at large.

If you ever want a nice long discussion about at least one person’s list of reasons why, I will be happy to oblige. I don’t know if it will help you understand or not, but the offer is sincere.

pdtohk You are not the first person who has complained that we’ll be splitting the devs’s time—meaning you won’t get something that you want. You claim that this change will take a significant amount of dev time away from other things you think they should be doing, yet others here have said it’s not a major change. I don’t know the base code for LOTRO, so I can’t say either way.

As far as how does that work for RP? One of the reasons that so many of us dropped the idea of actually being able to roll back XP (so you could be any level you’ve already earned before—and there are a lot more games than just WOW that allow this) is that we saw how that might be a huge code headache because of adjustments that would need to be made. That’s why slow/stop is where we are now, and we’re starting to dig in firm on this position. These quests are designed to be on a set timeline. If your character is “back” at the Old Forest after you’ve already been to Moria, you're in the game's set timeline. The backstory to support your level is based on your reason why you're there. Are you testing a theory? Are you trying to rp it now they way you wish you had then when you didn't have more experience rping or a better handle on the character? Are you reliving a moment with the same folk you experienced it with before? Are you doing something you wanted to do before, but didn't, like helping a lower level party, but not necessarily as the 60 or whatever you are now? Etc., etc. It’s not about forgetting—nobody has amnesia. (Well, someone might, but not for this reason.)

I’m willing to be that Sophronia brought up WOW because many people equate “max level or n00b” mentality to WOW. And if that’s the case, if it works for WOW, it could work here since we also have folks of that mindset, and both games have many other similarities. Your example of guns is pointedly unhelpful, and is a poor attempt to try to strengthen your position. Instead it only serves as a weak diversion. Your example of gaining experience through adventure, and then forgetting it was better, but still flawed. Part of why we need to slow/stop xp is all the bonus xp that keeps cropping up and pushing us past where we would be without it.

If you brought up Lore because you truly think this breaks lore, let’s do a true comparison while staying on the topic at hand. If bonuses were intended by J.R.R., then this is what we would see in the books:
Ettinmoors Freep bonus: When Merry and Pippin take down Isenguard with the Ents, everyone at the Battle of the Hornburg suddenly gains more experience than they should because of the bonus XP they got from the Isenguard victory.

Rest XP: While Frodo is recovering at Rivendell, or any other time when he is asleep, he earns quite a bit of bonus experience that he then is rewarded with for a commensurate amount of time afterwards when he furthers his adventures.

XP adjustment: Because J.R.R. realized that he was being so hard on the first to join in on the Council’s efforts, he decides to make it easier on the members of the Fellowship. One day they wake up to find that just by getting water for a Farmer who gives them food in return, they suddenly find themselves much more experienced for seemingly no reason at all.

Bonus XP weekend: Everyone who adventures/helps during Bilbo’s birthday will gain even more experience from his/her actions simply because it's Bilbo's birthday.

The only way we can freeze our level at this time is by not adventuring or stop playing altogether. (One could see things as a reverse catch-up to get rid of all that bonus we couldn’t opt-out of.) For me personally, there's only so much time I can spend lollygagging about in Taverns and crafting for the AH before I feel like I'm playing a niche version of SIMS, which is not my thing. The only way we currently cannot get whichever bonuses are foisted upon us at any given time is by not adventuring. I think we've made it clear that our preference is to stay with the game, but every time a bonus in particular is added yet again (and one can’t opt out), it just brings this issue back to light.

In all honesty, the mandatory bonuses became my last straw. There are many things I have come to accept as being “just the way things are in game.” (Having to level a character to an extent so they can craft at the highest tier, for example.) This issue has become one thing where where work arounds have thus far been unsatisfying. And folks are trying--there was even a plot hatched not long ago by those who would forgo at the very least bonuses to put together an unstoppable Creep team to prevent the Ettinmoor Freep bonus. Now that would affect other people, and might get some to understand how it feels to not get what they want for real, but if nothing else it would at least make the issue more poignant, though not necessarily more sympathetic. What we’re asking for, however, does not affect others in such a direct fashion.

We all know the laundry list that has been given to the devs, and we also understand how the devs are told to prioritize. Well, some folk are now talking with their wallets. Not the best method, because none of those folk (self included) want to stop playing, but if money is what matters, it may be the last resort for even more folk than it already has been.

As far as your point that "It sucks for you if this is a problem for you but that is how it is.", this is really your worst argument of all. Many things have changed in this game because people have asked for them. Some of those changes were not sought after by the majority if threads similar to this are to be believed. More and more of us are taking the time to come to the forums to argue our point of view because we don't want to be marginalized anymore.

There are other reasons to want the slow/stop other than the bonus, but the bonus is the most reflective of the points you so poorly brought up. The ones you argued well, I have not argued against.

to: NotYetMeasured

I do not want to high jack this thread for a pacfist topic so I started a new one.
http://forums.lotro.com/showthread.php?t=291594

The reason I mentioned this here is to show that there are different play styles and different reason people play LOTRO. The game has improved to much from the Beta days and that's because people make suggestions like XP Reducer.

In the end it will be what the developers can do or feel what is best for the game. My favorite example of this is Horsepants.

I think that people who want the game to not improve are the first people who complain when things get stale.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaonashi76

Considering that Turbine did ask players several months ago about this option and that it's still not in the game, it's possible that their research indicated that not enough people wanted it to warrant them adding it in.

---

Turbine asked the question in July - after Book 8 came out.

There have been no updates since they asked the question, so no opportunities to add it to the game. Siege of Mirkwood presents the first opportunity for Turbine to act on the results of that research.

Thus, my question.

Will Siege of Mirkwood give players an option to stop or to slow XP?

My decision to buy the expansion actually hinges on the answer to this question. Yes = buy. No = will not buy.

Hmm. there's that "voting with our wallets" thing again. No, I'm not making this post to say that there shouldn't be an xp modifier system of some sort (after all what difference does it make what I think?). Yet, it should be noted that those who want to get to the cap in the time of their choosing, while doing whatever they desire - is kinda like wanting to be at the weight of their choosing, while eating as much as they want. Not wanting to level from playing the content, or wanting to level slower while playing the content is completely contrary to the premise of the MMO. No, power leveling is not the point of an MMO, but advancing your character is. Those that want to slow or stop their xp gain are asking something akin to wanting to not win money, or win less money when playing a card game. That's the reason why so many people "just don't get it".

The other reason people "don't get it" is due to the challenge argument. 99% of the so-called "challenge" in this game is knowing how to play your class and knowing the strategy of what you're doing. It won't matter much how many times you do an instance - it will never be as "challenging" as the first time you do it. Take that Training Hall instance for example. The first time through you might make the mistake of pulling a pat, which would aggro the mobs in the vicinity. Whether that be the orc that walks up and down the opening area, the 4 orcs that walk back and forth across the next area, or the orc that patrols behind the recruits. After you get the pattern down, and the pulls...everything else is cake - no matter what your level. True. You can't just rush in there at level and kill everything in two pulls, but does it matter? Even below level it's a cakewalk - provided you know the pulls, and know your class. In the end though - the only thing that changes is the amount of time it takes to complete the instance.

Again though - let me reiterate that I'm not going to picket Turbine, or /ragequit the game if this feature is implemented. Yet, I'm not crazy about the idea, nor fully understand the logic behind the reasons.

Actually, this is not what is typically understood as "voting with our wallets".

If I had not purchased Mines of Moria, I would have had the Level 50 cap that would have allowed me to play this content at level.

If I do not purchase Siege of Mirkwood, I will at least be able to experience Moria with a level cap of 60 rather than 65.

Not purchasing Mirkwood actually has more value . . . at least until I have finished the content in and around Moria and am ready to move on. As it turns out, not purchasing Mines of Moria would have had more value as well, but I made a mistake there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Digital_Utopia

Yet, it should be noted that those who want to get to the cap in the time of their choosing, while doing whatever they desire - is kinda like wanting to be at the weight of their choosing, while eating as much as they want.

---

I strongly suspect that if somebody can invent a way to allow people to eat as much of they want of what they like without gaining weight (and having no other adverse side effects), that person has the potential to be extremely wealthy.

However, on a broader subject, I think the argument that MMOs have an 'essence' and that violating this essence will somehow disrupt the natural order of the universe and release tonnes of 'ought-not-to-be-doneness' into the universe is flawed.

It's a game. It is meant for entertainment - to provide somebody with an opportunity to spend a few hours doing something that he or she enjoys.

It is also a business, which means that its point is to generate more income than outflow for those who are responsible for creating and offering LOTRO.

For me, entertainment means roleplaying an adventurer who must meet and overcome great challenges for a noble cause. Adventure requires risk. No adventure story I have ever read or watched has the main character walking through the chapters shooting and killing gray mobs and given powers far and away above what he needs to complete the challenges of the next chapter.

And if roleplaying an adventurer whose challenge is to overcome great odds for the sake of some noble good violates the essence of an MMO, then I really do not understand MMOs.

Yes, this involves advancement and change. But it DOES NOT require advancement that is so fast that the next and all future chapters in the story become a mindless cakewalk for the adventurer.

Though much of the challenge involves learning how to navigate the encounter, it will always be more challenging - more of an adventure - to learn how to navigate an encounter with a 45th level character than to navigate that same encounter with a 57th level character.

I think the simplest/easiest way they could implement this (which I would be open to, though I'm not sure how often I would use it) would be to add a button that you click to level (when you reach the next level).

There could even be an option in the option menu so you can toggle on/off whether you get prompted when you level.

If you do choose to get prompted, when you level you have a message saying you leveled and you must click some spot on the screen to continue leveling (say something starts glowing or something)...if you don't click that button/spot...you won't gain xp until you do...so you are effectively frozen at that level until you choose to move on.

I imagine that wouldn't be too hard to implement...and in a game like this where it is almost 100% cooperative...I don't really say how it would hurt those who wouldn't use it. It's not like WAR where you have to worry about people freezing at the end of a Tier just so they can dominant that Tier PVP.

As I understand it, the OP has a solution: to reduce or stop XP gain. The problem that it solves, if I understand correctly, is that he outlevels some of the content he wants to experience.

I enjoy the content a lot, and like to experience much of it also... less the fellowship quests and PvMP than the solo bits, but still more than one can fit into a single character. That's why I'm running multiple characters. Not everyone has to be "<x> of the Quick Post" or "<y>, Servant of Process", but I like to have *somebody* do those chains. I currently have 4 active characters: 1 at 60 and the others from 35-42, and I feel like I'm milking all I need to out of the content. If it turns out I miss something, then I can take the 7th slot (I have a craft-materials holding mule and an AH mule) and start yet another one. I occasionally start up a character on another server when I want the real newbie experience without being tempted to twink it with gold and crafted goodies, just because I want to revisit the Shire with fresh eyes.

Why isn't this an acceptable solution to the original problem?

I'm a Founder and Lifetime member, but not fanatical -- I've taken 6 months or so off a couple of times. I plan to buy all the expansions, assuming the price is right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tiempko

that I will be able to enjoy the vast number of books and regions set up for Level 50 characters (when Level 50 was the cap) without levelling past them.

---

Look, the game is as difficult as you want to make it. For some of us, that level 50 stuff was trivial back when 50 was the cap, just like the Watcher is trivial for some people now.

Virtually all of that level 50 stuff was created with groups in mind. It's not difficult enough? Don't group. Solo or duo or trio or whatever.

That's not difficult enough? Then only equip level 50 stuff. Toss those legendaries, get rid of the level 48 crafted armour (which is now better than the Rift armour) and wear only level 50 quest armour.

Still too easy? Start pulling more mobs at once -- don't allow yourself down time, start Leroy Jenkins'ing it through a few rooms at once.

Still too easy? Take your virtues out. I get like -10% incoming melee damage with my virtues and I sure didn't have that at 50.

As a level 50, you can't solo all the tons of level 50 stuff. Sure, a LM soloed Fornost, but we're talking level 50 instances here, not a low 40 instance. So you're going to have to find some other people to go in with. Do you really have 6-24 other people who all want to disable xp? Yeah, I didn't think so.

Besides, getting to level 52-53 really won't matter all that much as long as you don't upgrade anything or buy new skills or get better potions. Remember, for some people, that level 50 stuff was trivial before MoM came out. Player skill and how well a group works together really make a difference. So, if you've done everything I suggested above and it's all still too easy, then you're the problem. You (or your group) are just too good.

Because the game is as difficult as you want to make it.

If I equip level 8 weapons, I only do like 20 points of damage -- I get perhaps 2-4 more points on average than a level 8 character. And if there's a level 8 guardian in the group, he usually pulls all the aggro.

I am going to add my 2 silvers worth, targeting those who don't understand or oppose this XP reducer proposal.

Turbine has been giving us xp bonuses. Why? Because people have been asking for more bonuses, many of us gleeful embraced this so we can level our alts faster. That is great of some of us (including myself) who are altoholic, some of the new people who can rush to level 60 so they don't miss out on stuff that is occurring at end game such as raiding (As people rarely do Helegrod), or Live World events such as Amarthiel Attacks in Book 13 (or was that 14?) whereby people missed out on joining in the fun because they were too low level.
Those are very valid arguments and we all welcome the xp bonuses, at no time we ever asked for it to be removed.

It is your choice if you want to use the bonuses (destiny points buy). It is your choice to level fast if you want to. It is your choice to pull several mobs for extra difficulties. It is your choice to do a quest that is orange or even red. It is your choice to skip Moria level 55 and head straight for Lothlorien for easy levelling. It is your choice to go back to Angmar at level 60 to do quests. It is your choice to solo Fornost at 60. It is your choice to attempt to solo Rift boss Barz on a Warden. It is your choice to stay in the Shire and never leave its boundaries. It is your choice not to kill any mobs and try level up using non-combat quests. It is your choice to have alts that are only used for crafting. It is your choice to only have one character. It is your choice to RP only. It is your choice to be a Hard-core Raider. It is your choice to level up only with your boy/girlfriend/siblings/family/friends. It is your choice to be a casual player and not raid at all. It is your choice to only wear crafted gear. it is your choice to do all deeds. It is your choice to run around with no armour only weapons (beserker style). It is your choice to hoard all the gold (Scrooge!). SO IT GOES.

You have so many choices of whatever playstyle you want in this game. Turbine have given us those liberties to choose whatever we want to do with our character. Turbine has adhered to the requests that giving us more experience bonuses so we can catch up with the end-game players and experience the contents.

Why... why can't you simply just understand that it is a choice we want when we say we would like to have an OPTION to reduce our experience gain from 0% to 100% the way we decide as much as we all have a choice to do whatever.

Why why can't you simply understand that we want to do all levels at "WHITE" colour, not red, not yellow, not blue, not green and certainly not at grey! After all it is MY, OUR choice whatever we want to do.

More importantly, You have the choice NOT to use the XP reducer, and we have the CHOICE to USE the xp reducer and everyone is happy.

You may not understand why we want to do quest at appropriate level. That is fine, just simply don't stand in the way trying to block something you don't even understand. Let us be free, you do you own way, I do my way.

Not everyone want to rush to 60. Not everyone want to skip fantastic contents of SoA (and soon MoM). Remember the days when Old Forest was bloody hard and aggressive? Good Old days. Remember the days when we all were running Annuminas at level 50. That was fun. Remember the days of raiding the Rift and Helegrod and sense of accomplishment when Thorog and Balrog fell to bunch of level 50s. Remember the pain and annoyance of grinding hard deeds or doing quests in Imblad Bacheloth and Himbar/Carn Dum. God I hate all those difficult times deeding such as Spirits of the Fallen in HI or level 50 instances. But now looking back I am rather fond of those and glad that I got to experience them at level 50.

We can never recapture that magic moments when you first came to LOTRO (as your first mmo); killing your first mob, doing the epic story quests on your first character. Downing bosses in Raids and 6-man instances for the first time. However sometimes we can feel some of that magic moments if you return on your alt and do it on appropriate level. That opportunity is getting harder and harder because you soon will outlevel it and lose the magic.

For the record, i have been using the bonus gain to level up my crafting alts fast to 60. I would roll a new character or two to experience lower level contents again at appropriate level with the xp reducer. Because that is what I want to do. I want to go into Weathertop with a fellowship of level 20s. I want to run the Rift, Annuminas and Helegrod with level 50s only and experience the victory and thrill of the "real difficulties". Not easy mode with level 60s escorting us and taking the brunt of the work. It isn't fun if a 50 Guard cannot tank because of a level 60 minstrel or hunter, might as well just go on auto follow and have coffee.

Allowing XP reducer would give the opportunity to new people, casual players, those who rolled an alt for this purpose, to do quests, zones, Epic Story questline from Book 6 to book 15 without outlevelling it or even level up. And therefore give them the only opportunity to share the experiences that us veterans had when we all were level 50 for Volume 1 book 7-15.

Give us the CHOICE AND FREEDOM to halt our experience gains/levelling.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tuco

I currently have 4 active characters: 1 at 60 and the others from 35-42, and I feel like I'm milking all I need to out of the content. If it turns out I miss something, then I can take the 7th slot (I have a craft-materials holding mule and an AH mule) and start yet another one. Why isn't this an acceptable solution to the original problem?

---

First, Books 1 through 15 (Part 1), as I understand it, comprise a single continuous story for 1 character. This story is not meant to be split up among multiple characters. I have 11 books ahead of me. I am quite certain that I can't get 1 character through the remaining 11 books without being significantly above level for the final books.

Second, I roleplay a character. Decisions are made from the point of view of a character interacting with the environment. It is not my goal to experience the bulk of the content. It is my goal to log in and play Bounder Chief Meadowlarke Sweetweed of Buckland.

Third, in addition to doing quests, there are deeds to do. A single slayer deed (e.g., "Kill 90 then 180 of Creature X"), executed when the creatures are above level and the fight is dangerous and interesting, generates tens of thousands of XP - with rest XP and bonus XP increasing that reward to 250% of the "base" XP award. You cannot split up deeds for multiple characters since a character that does not do the deed does not get the virtue. That is to say, whereas completing a deed might have generated 20,000 base XP, it generates 50,000 base, rest, and bonus XP.

Fourth, there is a significant balloon of quests at 50. It takes a lot of work getting characters up to Level 45 to pick up another batch of fresh Level 50 content. It is better to go through that content with a character that has already reached Level 45 and save all of that extra work.

Fifth, I like to be helpful. When kinsmen and even strangers ask for help in a region where I am adventuring, I love to volunteer and go with them. (Since I play a minstrel, other players appreciate this.) However, I have to refuse to help them because the XP I gain will force me past level for the content I wish to experience. It would be nice to turn off XP so I could volunteer more to help others.

Sixth, I play with my wife. Since she lost her job she has more time to play than I do. She would like to adventure without out-leveling me. I would like that as well. An XP reducer would allow that. Before this, I had more of a chance to play than she did. I would have loved to take my minstrel out to help others without outleveling her, but I could not do so without an XP reducer.

Seventh, my kinship, Bounders of the Shire, has members who would like to create an alt that is frozen at Level 10, who never leaves the Shire, but who patrol the shire for the purpose of helping out other low-level characters; new players in particular. An XP reducer would allow them to do this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Banaticus

Virtually all of that level 50 stuff was created with groups in mind. It's not difficult enough? Don't group. Solo or duo or trio or whatever.

That's not difficult enough? Then only equip level 50 stuff. Toss those legendaries, get rid of the level 48 crafted armour (which is now better than the Rift armour) and wear only level 50 quest armour.

Still too easy? Start pulling more mobs at once -- don't allow yourself down time, start Leroy Jenkins'ing it through a few rooms at once.

Still too easy? Take your virtues out. I get like -10% incoming melee damage with my virtues and I sure didn't have that at 50.

---

I like to roleplay a character. In fact, that is what attracts me to these types of games - the opportunity to roleplay a character. To the degree that I can do that, to that degree a game has value to me. LOTRO started off as a great game for roleplaying a character. It has become less so over time - mostly by making encounters easier (e.g., Old Forest), hyper-leveling characters with XP scale changes and granting bonus XP on top of bonus XP.

The type of character that I like to play is NOT the village idiot who strips down to his skivvies and charges into battle with a letter opener screaming at the top of his lungs to attract as many enemy as possible.

Again, think of an adventure story - a story like Lord of the Rings. When is the last time you read a chapter in which the Hero(es), looking at the task ahead, said, "Okay, this is too easy. So, let me throw away my best weapon, strip out of all of my armor, tie my left hand behind my back, and charge into battle making as much noise as I can try to eeek out a little bit of excitement from this battle."

I would hope that LOTRO would make it possible to roleplay a character on an adventure - one who, even though he takes as much advantage as he can of the weapons, armor, and other tools available to him, still has to THINK, "How am I going to survive this?"

TBH I am in clear favour of the option. Or options even...no XP, just quest XP, whatever...we should all play the game as we want. Personally on a new alt it would be good to do all the content of a new area before all the quests and mobs go grey so I think a 50% reduction in XP would work for me - I still progress but I have to work at it and effectively have to do all the area's content at level appropriate.

By way of illustration, I just levelled a new man LM and reached level 27 without setting foot outside Bree-Land. There is a ton of content there that most people level right past and I got to do one of the best on-level instances there is in the Great Barrow without any level 30+ help :). However almost all the Lone Lands quests are grey or green by that time so my LM won't experience that area at all. If I had done all that Bree-Land content (apart from GB maybe) and only made it to level 20ish - how much more of an adventure would that have been! (I could then have gone onto Lone-Lands, got to level 22/23 and gone back for GB quests.)

Finally, for those who don't like or understand wanting the option, why on earth do you even bother to post? How would it hurt you or affect you and tbh why are you even interested? Just ignore it, like you would the option if it was there, and carry on as usual.:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pdtohk

I want a gun. WoW has guns. I bet lots of players would want guns.

Sounds dumb doesn't it?

Oh wait...it is lore-breaking to have guns right? Is it as lore-breaking as an adventurer who experiences certain situations but for some reason gains no experience from his/her experiences? Merry and Pippin were very different hobbits when they returned to the scoured Shire. How do you roleplay around this? Does your character get a bop on the head erasing their short term memory after completing CD? Are the characters so exceptionally stupid that they do not learn from their mistakes?

I would suggest that the people who argue that they want to eliminate xp gain on demand in order to experience content on-level should very carefully plan the content they choose to participate in. Aragorn wanted to experience the siege of Gondor on-level and chose to take the paths of the dead instead of grinding his Rohan and Gondor locations deed.

LOTRO was designed to provide several paths for xp advancement in SoA. You could probably level very well simply by doing deeds and a few quests in each region. A character can grind his/her way to 60 by killing mobs (mind-numbingly boring but whatever) and never doing most of the quests. They can level to 60 by never specifically trying to do deeds and questing only. This means that EVERY area will be outleveled before you can complete all the deeds and quests. Thats just how it is. It sucks for you if this is a problem for you but that is how it is. Therefore you should identify the content you want to do and plan carefully to do it while on-level. You may have to tell people no sometimes.

I haven't the slightest clue how hard or easy it would be to put this tech in place. If it is easy then by all means put it in so I never have to see another of these threads (although I guarantee that the results will not be satisfactory to some percentage of players). If it will take significant resources away from developing changes a larger % of people want then put it in the same timeline that the month of the kinship is on :).

---

This. Exactly.
You can't do anything without learning something (gaining xp) even in real life.
I honestly don't care if they do or don't do this. I'm just tired of hearing the whining about out leveling content. You can't experience everything on one character (at level). Make another character to go do the stuff you missed. Or (better option as far as i'm concerned) go play a game that has a leveling scheme that you like.
EVE Online might be more up your alley as there are no 'levels'.
You don't have to be a specific level to enjoy the story, and being level 60 really didn't make book 7 or book 15 any easier.
But everyone can have their opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tiempko

Actually, this is not what is typically understood as "voting with our wallets".

If I had not purchased Mines of Moria, I would have had the Level 50 cap that would have allowed me to play this content at level.

If I do not purchase Siege of Mirkwood, I will at least be able to experience Moria with a level cap of 60 rather than 65.

Not purchasing Mirkwood actually has more value . . . at least until I have finished the content in and around Moria and am ready to move on. As it turns out, not purchasing Mines of Moria would have had more value as well, but I made a mistake there.

---

Actually buying an expansion is no different than making any other purchase decision - where cost/value is king. Whether that be shoes, groceries, or even internet connection speed. That being said you're right in the extent that not buying the expansion for a reason such as that - isn't voting with your wallet as much as a simple cost/value decision.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tiempko

I strongly suspect that if somebody can invent a way to allow people to eat as much of they want of what they like without gaining weight (and having no other adverse side effects), that person has the potential to be extremely wealthy.

---

They surely will - but certainly only because U.S. culture (and perhaps some others) tends to be rapidly acquiring the mindset: "I should have as much of x as I want, and if I suffer a problem because of it - I'm going to sue!"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tiempko

However, on a broader subject, I think the argument that MMOs have an 'essence' and that violating this essence will somehow disrupt the natural order of the universe and release tonnes of 'ought-not-to-be-doneness' into the universe is flawed.

It's a game. It is meant for entertainment - to provide somebody with an opportunity to spend a few hours doing something that he or she enjoys.

It is also a business, which means that its point is to generate more income than outflow for those who are responsible for creating and offering LOTRO.

---

But is it? Using the logic "it's a game created by a business" is also flawed - dually. First of all, the entire concept of the game is to advance your character through combat and quests that, by large involve combat. Adding in a feature that is contrary to the concept of the game would be akin to a Combat Flight Sim adding a switch to stop gaining ranks, or an online FPS that allows you to stop counting kills.

On the business side of things, why doesn't Taco Bell serve burgers? Why doesn't Olive Garden serve Mexican food? Why doesn't Domino's deliver Gyros? I'm sure customers would love it if those places served that type of food as well, but yet they don't. Why? Because they decided to pick one specialty and concentrate on that, instead of having a massive menu where quality might suffer. This game is, at its very core - a traditional MMO where the goal is to reach the highest level of advancement that is possible. If you want to do things in a different way, then that choice is yours - but don't expect it to be any easier to do - or to have it made any easier to do than playing any other game contrary to the intent behind the design.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tiempko

For me, entertainment means roleplaying an adventurer who must meet and overcome great challenges for a noble cause. Adventure requires risk. No adventure story I have ever read or watched has the main character walking through the chapters shooting and killing gray mobs and given powers far and away above what he needs to complete the challenges of the next chapter.

And if roleplaying an adventurer whose challenge is to overcome great odds for the sake of some noble good violates the essence of an MMO, then I really do not understand MMOs.

Yes, this involves advancement and change. But it DOES NOT require advancement that is so fast that the next and all future chapters in the story become a mindless cakewalk for the adventurer.

Though much of the challenge involves learning how to navigate the encounter, it will always be more challenging - more of an adventure - to learn how to navigate an encounter with a 45th level character than to navigate that same encounter with a 57th level character.

---

One last thing - it's curious that some of those who are for this happen to use roleplaying as an example. Mainly because slowing or stopping xp gain would be perhaps the most un-roleplaying feature possible. If I went out and started building decks, repairing computers etc...my experience would gain from doing those tasks - stopping or slowing the experience I would gain from it would require some form of amnesia. The same thing goes in this game - if you're fighting the enemy, you gain experience, if you help out the denizens of Middle-Earth, you gain experience. Slowing or stopping that experience gain wouldn't make sense in any roleplaying perspective (unless you were playing a developmently challenged character).

That being said, the one thing this game should have is scalable instances. Not only would it prevent older instances from being made irrelevant, but it would also provide a challenge at any level.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by findorin-gilrain

TBH I am in clear favour of the option. Or options even...no XP, just quest XP, whatever...we should all play the game as we want. Personally on a new alt it would be good to do all the content of a new area before all the quests and mobs go grey so I think a 50% reduction in XP would work for me - I still progress but I have to work at it and effectively have to do all the area's content at level appropriate.
<snip>
Finally, for those who don't like or understand wanting the option, why on earth do you even bother to post? How would it hurt you or affect you and tbh why are you even interested? Just ignore it, like you would the option if it was there, and carry on as usual.:)

---

I don't understand why they post, either. This is a simple request for the devs to make xp gain optional. It would be a popular feature for some, most would ignore it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Feadel

I honestly don't care if they do or don't do this. I'm just tired of hearing the whining about out leveling content. <snip> But everyone can have their opinion.

---

Good point! We are tired of asking for this, but until a dev posts and says it's never going to happen, we'll keep asking from time to time. I suggest you avoid the threads labeled "XP Reducer" if you are tired of the issue. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tiempko

First, Books 1 through 15 (Part 1), as I understand it, comprise a single continuous story for 1 character. This story is not meant to be split up among multiple characters. I have 11 books ahead of me. I am quite certain that I can't get 1 character through the remaining 11 books without being significantly above level for the final books.

(snipped Second through Seventh)

---

Now I get it. Thanks for the clear explanation.

Now that I understand the reasoning, I think allowing reduced xp gain would be a good addition and probably not a difficult programming fix. I might not use the option, but I agree that it's a valid play-style that isn't addressed by my "start another alt" suggestion. If I were a content developer I'd probably agree because I'd want more people to be able to see what I'd created.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pdtohk

Is it as lore-breaking as an adventurer who experiences certain situations but for some reason gains no experience from his/her experiences?

---

In literary & common usage, "experience" is different from XP. In Tolkien's work, experience tends to enrich (or warp) the character, but diminishes their power. Usually, Tolkien's characters are exhausted (or physically impaired) in their adventures, expending the power they start with. Performance tends to decline over time & battles, so it's a more credible argument to claim that levelling up is Lore Breaking.

Of course, the concept of getting-stronger-by-killing comes from TSR, not Tolkien. In Tolkien's stories, character's abilities don't tend to change very much; usually, they call on innate heroism & the skills that they start their adventures with.

There are exceptions: Merry's journey gives him the confidence to organize other hobbits to frighten off brigands. (In LOTRO terms, 10 billion XP increase his powers to those of a level 20 captain.)

It seems more common that the passage of time & the expenditure of effort reduce the capacity in Tolkien's world. The elves don't get noticeably any better at fighting even after thousands of years of soldiering.

In crafting, Tolkien states this loss-of-ability-by-practise explicitly (and frequently). For example, Olwë constructed the White Ships but says that they "were the works of our heart, whose like we shall not make again". (I.e. his people retain the technical skill, but not the will to repeat their master work, and their output will forever be lesser than those first accomplishments.)

To address pdtohk's (satirical?) argument seriously: I see no evidence in Lore that stabbing 10,000 boars to death will allow me to kill a Stone Troll with a single shout. In fact, it looks the opposite way around: personalities are strengthened by experience in Tolkien but fighting & crafting abilities tend to remain at-initial-level (or weaker).

So, if we take the Lore-adherence seriously, we should scrap levelling (or any life-experience-based increase in fighting/crafting abilities, beyond finding weapons). But naturally, this is not the proposal; in a game we all want to enjoy, some concessions are necessary. Why not grant the simplest concession to those of us who would prefer slower levelling? Is the development effort for an '/xpoff' switch a genuine concern?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Digital_Utopia

One last thing - it's curious that some of those who are for this happen to use roleplaying as an example. Mainly because slowing or stopping xp gain would be perhaps the most un-roleplaying feature possible. If I went out and started building decks, repairing computers etc...my experience would gain from doing those tasks - stopping or slowing the experience I would gain from it would require some form of amnesia. The same thing goes in this game - if you're fighting the enemy, you gain experience, if you help out the denizens of Middle-Earth, you gain experience. Slowing or stopping that experience gain wouldn't make sense in any roleplaying perspective (unless you were playing a developmently challenged character).

---

Trust me, I will be gaining experience.

The type that actually matters.

I will be learning my character's skills and how best to use them. I will be learning how to use the various tools that are available - potions, scrolls, different types of foods.

I will be learning the strengths and weaknesses of the creatures that I encounter and how to use that knowledge to my advantage.

This is exactly the same type of experience that one gets by building decks and repairing computers.

Experience points are akin to some magical force that somehow causes an individual to do a better and better job even though he has not actually LEARNED anything.

There's nothing to be learned in mindless button-mashing. I would wager that most characters do not even know what skills they have, or what tools are available, for the most part, because they have no need to learn such things, and they are not challenged to learn them well.

I will gain experience alright. Real experience that is best obtained by reducing the amount of fake XP that makes it unnecessary to learn anything.

In addition, if I should run a quest more than once because some kinshipmate or stranger asked for help, I should not get XP for that because it is not actually a part of my character's story. My character has only one story to tell of "the time we charged up weathertop and retook it from the orcs". If I should charge up a dozen times more helping others, it is because I am helping other players, not because I am advancing my character's story. These are the times for which I would like to turn off XP entirely.

Finally, I would like to point out that my specific request was for a slider that will reduce the rate at which one gains XP. A setting of 35% is necessary just to negate rest XP, bonus XP, and the faster levelling that resulted from chaing the XP curve.

I fail to see any circumstance that I would turn off my xp gain. Doesn't mean the idea doesn't have merit.

I want to make sure my original question doesn't get lost in the noise.

I am asking whether Siege of Mirkwood will contain a feature for slowing or turning off XP.

If the answer is "yes", then I wish to shelve this game until SoM comes out, then continue my adventure with this feature activated.

If the answer is "no", then I will make no plans to purchase SoM since not purchasing it will allow me to explore the Mines of Moria and surrounding areas with a level cap of 60 rather than 65.

If somebody would like to share the answer, I would appreciate it.

In the mean time, I have stopped exploring in the hope that the answer is "Yes."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Algorithm2

As I mentioned in my survey response not long ago, I am also a member of that small percentage and I'm voting with my wallet.

I'm not getting a lifetime subscription, a second subscription, the next upgrade, or buying the game for my brother until I can de-level, un-experience or *something* that allows on-level challenges for my first time through things.

It should only take the lost revenue from a handful of people like me to justify the cost of the few man-hours required to code something... Call it 'Hard Mode' :)

People seem to forget that not everyone has already done everything once and not every level 20 is an alt trying to get to Cap.

---

This is where a "death penalty" comes in. COH/COV has one and when I used to play there I knew people (muself included) that used to die just to get the xp reduction to try to see content before we out-levelled it.

However, the way COH/COV was designed, and I believe LOTRO follows the same mentality, was that you're not SUPPOSED to be able to do everything, everywhere, with just one character. There are two paths from 15-25, Lonelands and North Downs or some combiation there of and they aren't meant to be linear. I can see where it's a pain to out-level something, but again if the idea is to experience different aspects/paths of the game with different characters then how things are now is the correct way to be.

I can see the mentality of those who want to experience content "at level" but my question to them is 'are you trying to do everything with just one character?' because if so it's a bit unfeasible to imagine one person essentially being everywhere at once (based on how time is structured in the SOA part of the game), but maybe that's just me.

Not knocking anyone who wants this feature, and if it's easy to place in the game why not do it, but really, if you're not subscribing because of a tantrum that you can't hit the content at it's right level when you (assuming here) are trying to do ALL of it with one character is a bit.. excessive. And also, if you're not subscribing then why read the forums at all?

As an alternative.... Turbine could make all quest conclusions instances, in which case you're always attacked by creatures even if they are 'grey con', which would be the challenge to anyone who thinks things are too easy if they outlevel the content.