XP Reducer

[Tiempko]

The main reason I've seen for people opposing this is that it takes precious developer time away from giving us more content, more raids, etc.

You conveniently left that reason off.

You conveniently took my statement out of context.

I was not writing about "people who opposed this feature." I was writing about "people who make up phony objections such as the 'forget to turn XP off' objection."

This is a different issue, and the response here would be different as well.

Namely, that it is utterly selfish to say that, "Turbine should devote 100% of their effort to the things that I value and 0% to the things that would be valued by players whose play style differs from mine."

Nobody has said that Turbine should eliminate working on content and raids in order to install an XP slider or toggle. It would take just a fraction of one percent of the resources devoted to those ends to put in such a feature. To pretend that we are talking about a trade off between "content" and "raids" versus "an XP toggle" is pure fiction.

But it is not the SAME fiction as the "widespread disaster of people turning XP off and forgetting to turn it on" fiction. It is a DIFFERENT fiction. The fiction that, "If Turbine worked on this feature then there will be no more new content or new raids" fiction.

[Lomeloth]

Nobody has said that Turbine should eliminate working on content and raids in order to install an XP slider or toggle. It would take just a fraction of one percent of the resources devoted to those ends to put in such a feature. To pretend that we are talking about a trade off between "content" and "raids" versus "an XP toggle" is pure fiction.

And we are back to one of the central points: you do not know it 'would take just a fraction of one percent of the resources devoted to those ends to put in such a feature." That's your own convenient piece of fiction - because it's an assumption that is not based on any factual evidence.

Any development time given to one feature by definition takes it away from something else on which it could have been spent. Budgets and manhours are finite, not bottomless wells.

[Freestyle270]

I must say I admire the devotion of the supporters of this. Even after being told 'not going to happen any time soon, if at all" numerous times, they just yell louder...

Actually come to think of it, kinda reminds me of a kid in a toy store just being told that they won't get that shiny new toy.

Sure the feature might come, it might not. I don't think yelling louder each time you're told no is going to help that.

But please, keep on going, this post is amusing, to say the lease.

[henry316]

For those wanting to do the level 50 stuff on level. Good luck finding 5 other level 50's to do the same thing.

I have friends right now in game who never bought Moria and will not until they feel they're done with the SoA content (so the group is level 50). They would have bought MoM by now if an XP-MOD feature existed. As it stands we're doing CD, BG, Annuminus, etc... Of course since I bought MoM I am now OP in any group we run since I am now well out-leveling them. But there clearly are people who want to level at their own pace and in this example it has actually costs Turbine revenue.

I must say I admire the devotion of the supporters of this. Even after being told 'not going to happen any time soon, if at all" numerous times, they just yell louder...

Actually come to think of it, kinda reminds me of a kid in a toy store just being told that they won't get that shiny new toy.

Sure the feature might come, it might not. I don't think yelling louder each time you're told no is going to help that.

But please, keep on going, this post is amusing, to say the lease.

Thanks for the support!

[Drogo1]

We know that each character already has data related to XP associated with it - the rested XP bonus. This might be stored as a simple boolean true/false flag, which is checked before applying any incoming xp. More likely, it's a number (such as 1.1 for 10% extra) which is multiplied by any experienced gained before it's added to the character's total. Somewhere in the code, there's probably a line like:

character.xp += quest.xpReward * character.restedBonusRate;

Probably it's the latter, which would be just as easy as the boolean, but much more powerful. If Turbine wanted to change the rate (from 10% extra to 20% extra), they just need to change that number. If that's correct, then changing that multiplier to 0 would effectively toggle off any xp gain (or at least whatever xp is affected by the bonus; IIRC some is not). The line of code above wouldn't have to change at all - just the value of the rate. That would be a pretty simple change.

Except Rest/Bonus XP does NOT apply to all XP gained - only to xp gained from Mobs... which implies there's multiple channels for xp to flow to your character - which complicates any dev/qa effort to change this mechanic in the way the people pushing for the XP toggle want.

Nothing is ever as simple as it seems when you only look at the surface of it. Given how basic of a mechanic XP gain is to an MMO, I'm not surprised there's a lot of reluctance to muck about with the guts of the "system" for a "trivial" change. But if they're going to design a new major feature (like Mentoring) then the level of effort required to change the XP mechanic becomes more feasible...

[Thrindal]

I was writing about "people who make up phony objections such as the 'forget to turn XP off' objection."

Much like many of us have been writing about "people who refuse to listen to valid reasons from a member of the Turbine development team as to why this isn't going to happen"?

[Sigram]

Except Rest/Bonus XP does NOT apply to all XP gained - only to xp gained from Mobs... which implies there's multiple channels for xp to flow to your character - which complicates any dev/qa effort to change this mechanic in the way the people pushing for the XP toggle want.

Nothing is ever as simple as it seems when you only look at the surface of it. Given how basic of a mechanic XP gain is to an MMO, I'm not surprised there's a lot of reluctance to muck about with the guts of the "system" for a "trivial" change. But if they're going to design a new major feature (like Mentoring) then the level of effort required to change the XP mechanic becomes more feasible...

Surely you jest!

It is easy as changing some numbers and letters around. Then multiplying by 3 and dividing by 0. Really.

Other games have done it. It is easy! t mean, the Department of Defence fired 4 programmers because they found out how easy it was, and got Obama's XP Czar's cat Reginald to code it himself!

[Beleg]

Except Rest/Bonus XP does NOT apply to all XP gained - only to xp gained from Mobs... which implies there's multiple channels for xp to flow to your character - which complicates any dev/qa effort to change this mechanic in the way the people pushing for the XP toggle want.

Nothing is ever as simple as it seems when you only look at the surface of it.

Right, which is exactly what I said in the part of my post that you didn't quote:

Of course it may not be that simple. A line like that might actually be in multiple places in the code - one for quest rewards, one for mob kills, one for deeds, etc. If that's true, then it might be simple to turn off (or throttle) xp gain for some things (e.g., mob kills) but not for others (e.g. quest completion). That's probably what Floon means when he says it's not as simple as we think, and that implementing a quick and dirty solution would not result in a feature that made anyone happy; I understand that.

But if Turbine has done a good design and encapsulated the functionality, there's probably a Character object with a operation to called "addExperience". In that case, the change would only be necessary in single place.

A mentoring system would almost certainly address this issue. But that's much harder to implement, and therefore probably a lot less likely to make the cut.

I agree you don't want to go casually messing around with such an important part of the game mechanics. But clearly Turbine already has various ways to affect XP gain, including the global bonus weekends and the bonus when the Freeps are winning in the 'moors. The rested bonus seems to be the most similar though, since it affects each character individually.

There are many features I'd like to see implemented before this one, but I honestly can't think on any that are likely to be as easy to do. I think that's the main reason why many advocates of this feature are still pushing for it - it should be easy to implement; and done well, it shouldn't result in numerous CS tickets.

Too bad it's not feasible to have micro-transactions "in advance" - if it were, those of us who want it could pay for it. And those who wanted a new PvP zone could pay for that, etc. I'd gladly pay a few bucks for this feature.

[Drogo1]

A mentoring system would almost certainly address this issue. But that's much harder to implement, and therefore probably a lot less likely to make the cut.

I agree you don't want to go casually messing around with such an important part of the game mechanics. But clearly Turbine already has various ways to affect XP gain, including the global bonus weekends and the bonus when the Freeps are winning in the 'moors. The rested bonus seems to be the most similar though, since it affects each character individually.

You've got these two items reversed in the reasoning line:

Feature A: Trivial, likely only used by a small percentage of population. Amount of effort allowed to be spent on this feature: trivial to small (depending on if it's a marketable bullet-point feature or not)

Feature B: Large feature, known up-front to have large effort required, but likely to be a marquee, bullet-point feature (may even become the focal point of an expansion - see Skirmishes). Amount of Effort allowed to be spent on this feature: Large to Very Large.

Keeping that in mind, when you discuss changing the XP mechanic in any way (which as a base mechanic REQUIRES a high degree of certainty when making changes), there's a minimum level of effort assumed just in validating the change. From what Floon has said in this thread and elsewhere - the amount of effort required JUST FOR QA for a change to the Xp Mechanic would be a large effort. So a trivial feature with a small target audience and small marketing ROI is excluded from being the basis for making this change.

That's why Floon keeps saying that the Mentoring feature is a more likely candidate for making this change. The other one that people have raised as a possibility is this happening as part of the Skirmish System (per ZC) - but that's a Marquee Feature and more likely to be eligible to spend that much effort.

The people who keep insisting that this is a "trivial change" and "low-hanging fruit" are (either deliberately or through ignorance) ignoring the fact that it has been stated that this feature is NOT a trivial request.

[GregJL]

The people who keep insisting that this is a "trivial change" and "low-hanging fruit" are (either deliberately or through ignorance) ignoring the fact that it has been stated that this feature is NOT a trivial request.

I vote for deliberately...of course, they could all be related to Sarah Palin.

[ararax2]

You know you could make 2 characters of the same class. Have them take different paths. Give them almost the same name.

There 50% XP.

[Beleg]

The people who keep insisting that this is a "trivial change" and "low-hanging fruit" are (either deliberately or through ignorance) ignoring the fact that it has been stated that this feature is NOT a trivial request.

Yes, that's been stated by one developer. But this is also the same developer who said that a Mentoring system would be just a little bit harder. Some of us find that unlikely. So it may be that Floon didn't understand what we were asking for; or simply spoke off the cuff without considering some simple implementations; or it may be that he doesn't really know what the level of effort would be. So yes, we're deliberately ignoring what Floon said - or at least asking Turbine to consider some other implementations. Luckily, Floon isn't the one making all the decisions about the game.

That would be great if ZC decided to do it as part of the Skirmish system (though it seems only loosely related, at best).

Maybe someday they'll have a "Month of the Role-Player" or something, and do it as part of the many changes RPers have requested.

[Beldacar]

You know you could make 2 characters of the same class. Have them take different paths. Give them almost the same name.

There 50% XP.

Doesn't take away the fact that both of them are going to need to grind mobs (and quests) for virtues. Most virtues only have about fourteen different ways to achieve them (half of those in Moria and beyond). So, at most, each character would be able to skip a small number of grinds compared to the other character.

OTOH, if your goal is to have a level 15 character in the Shire, you could very easily just alternate between two slots, deleting each one as you got to level 16. The amount of effort to get to level 15 is almost trivial, right?

Solutions I currently use:

A. I drag around a character from my second account (one I don't really intend to play, usually a mule or a duplicate of a character class I'm already playing a lot) just to soak up excess mob kill XP.

B. I avoid playing any of the characters I'm focusing on when there's an XP bonus in place.

Neither of these is really an ideal solution.

In any case, hopefully someday Turbine will see the wisdom of adding a feature that allows players to tailor their own advancement rate. Of course, I'd also like to see:

-a revamp of the weak housing system;

-the addition of several hundred more storage slots per character;

-a complete rework of the Minstrel, Captain, and Warden voice acting (Dwarf Minstrel is cool, the rest sound like they're in agonizing pain every time they open their mouths);

-a Legendary Item system where the items really are "legendary" (can anyone seriously imagine Gandalf saying "darn, Glamdring just picked up a useless trait, now I need to toss it" or Frodo saying "darn, here I was setting foot in Mordor when Sting levelled and I had to go back to Thorin's Hall to reforge it"?

But, just like an XP throttle, I don't see any of the above changes happening any time soon. I guess the spirit of Azeraphel has indeed returned to Turbine. That's a shame, really....

[Sigram]

Yes, that's been stated by one developer. But this is also the same developer who said that a Mentoring system would be just a little bit harder. Some of us find that unlikely. So it may be that Floon didn't understand what we were asking for; or simply spoke off the cuff without considering some simple implementations; or it may be that he doesn't really know what the level of effort would be. So yes, we're deliberately ignoring what Floon said - or at least asking Turbine to consider some other implementations. Luckily, Floon isn't the one making all the decisions about the game.

That would be great if ZC decided to do it as part of the Skirmish system (though it seems only loosely related, at best).

Maybe someday they'll have a "Month of the Role-Player" or something, and do it as part of the many changes RPers have requested.

Could you please direct me to where Floon said mentoring would just be "a little bit harder"?

All I've seen close to this is in this post.

He says:
"And we've been bitten before with doing the lame hacky version of something, rather than spending the time to do the Real System. All it does is blow up into more work later. I'd rather get a mentoring system on the schedule than hack a poor substitute in just because it's faster."

No mention of difficulty.

[GregJL]

Could you please direct me to where Floon said mentoring would just be "a little bit harder"?

All I've seen close to this is in this post.

He says:
"And we've been bitten before with doing the lame hacky version of something, rather than spending the time to do the Real System. All it does is blow up into more work later. I'd rather get a mentoring system on the schedule than hack a poor substitute in just because it's faster."

No mention of difficulty.

Are the problems with shutting off XP fixable? Sure, but then it's not nearly as "free" a feature: addressing the issues means expanding it with more code and UIs and design. It becomes a full-fledged feature. That's when it gets into the, "Why are we spending so much time putting lipstick on this pig?" area, when what we really should have done is, for a little more effort, a real mentoring system.

If you really want to address the litany of reasons espoused, a mentoring system does it. It handles all the social reasons for wanting this. The challenge level issue for solo players is not answered by this, and that's where I would say go fight on-level stuff or roll an alt. Alts are fun. Or pull out your butterknife and have at it.

Not "a little bit harder", but "a little more effort". Maybe meaning the same thing, maybe not. Either way, it doesn't change the fact that a developer ON THIS GAME says one thing about the cost/benfit of this feature, and is basically called a liar by those who want the feature, simply because they wish to believe that man used to hunt dinosaurs.

[sactoking]

Add 'XP Reducer' to the list with 'serverwide/open world PvP', 'flying mounts', etc. of things that flat aren't going to happen but people will refuse to listen to the answers given and continually ask for.

[Thane9]

I must say I admire the devotion of the supporters of this. Even after being told 'not going to happen any time soon, if at all" numerous times, they just yell louder...

Actually come to think of it, kinda reminds me of a kid in a toy store just being told that they won't get that shiny new toy.

Sure the feature might come, it might not. I don't think yelling louder each time you're told no is going to help that.

But please, keep on going, this post is amusing, to say the lease.

Check out the PvMP forums sometime...hehe...it makes this argument look like the guy in the limo asking for some grey poupon.

[Unique]

Hmmm.....541 replies and 37 pages for this thread. Turbine are you listening?

Thal

The shear number of replies does not indicate a large number of people support or oppose the topic being discussed.

If you take a look at how many posts come from the same small group it becomes clearer

Tiempko 44
Beldacar 39
henry316 35
FoxFire 33
Khafar 27
Celt_Ainvar 21
Sigram 20
Thane9 20
GregJL 17
Kraggy 16
DrWookie 15
Lomeloth 15
Lohi 12
Ohioastro 10
Cerataindisaster 10
Thrindal 9
Beleg 9
DarkCntry 8
Algorithm2 8
bellack 7
Digital_Utopia 7
Thrandiul110 7
Gaming_Gal 5
BellusDuFenna 5
BINKLEY1 5
floon 5
Gareth420 5
findorin-gilrain 5
auximenes 5
Harperelle 5
Casesuit 5
Dago_Red 4
ferdinanda 4
Rixxus 4
Mafia 4
Jadzi 3
logothesia 3
Banaticus 3
DunasConnor 3
Drogo1 3
MusicalDwarf 3
Roberto 3
Wu-Thunderkiss 3
stubing 3
Kyrra_T 3
Reximus 3

Posted twice = 17
Posted once =50

not flaming, just pointing out that size doesn't matter sometimes

[Beleg]

...basically called a liar by those who want the feature, simply because they wish to believe that man used to hunt dinosaurs.

Though there may be a few posters who have crossed the line, I think the vast majority (on both sides) have been pretty civil. I'm certainly not calling Floon a liar; though I think (and hope) he's mistaken about the level of effort.

In any case, I greatly appreciate any of the developers taking the time to read and post in the forum, even if it's just to say 'not likely'. And Floon posts a lot more than most - I hope he continues to do so.

Add 'XP Reducer' to the list with 'serverwide/open world PvP', 'flying mounts', etc. of things that flat aren't going to happen but people will refuse to listen to the answers given and continually ask for.

Hmm... comparing the XP Reducer to Flying Mounts is just trolling. You might want to try the PvP forums if you're just hoping to shake the hive.

[FoxFire]

Feature A: Trivial, likely only used by a small percentage of population. Amount of effort allowed to be spent on this feature: trivial to small (depending on if it's a marketable bullet-point feature or not)

Sorry Drogo1 but you are certainly wrong on this first point. An XP toggle/throttle is ABSOLUTELY a marketable bullet-point feature. In fact I'll write it for Turbine.

• Greater Flexibility to suit a wider variety of play styles! Now regulate the rate of your characters advancement.
  
  • Maintain the level of challenge you enjoy
  • Complete more content on level with individual characters
  • Allow Friends and Family to 'catch up' while you continue to play
  • More easily maintain adventuring groups that level together.
    
  • Increased Role Playing potential!
    
  
  

It's a pretty significant bullet-point at that, and very likely for little investment (in comparison to other things that can be added). Heck it doesn't even matter how many people will actually use it, the bullet-point alone makes the game sound even more enticing to current and prospective customers. That *IS* after all what marketing does.

[henry316]

It's a pretty significant bullet-point at that, and very likely for little investment (in comparison to other things that can be added). Heck it doesn't even matter how many people will actually use it, the bullet-point alone makes the game sound even more enticing to current and prospective customers. That *IS* after all what marketing does.

"New with VOL III! Level at you own pace! Adventuring 'your style' !"

[sactoking]

Hmm... comparing the XP Reducer to Flying Mounts is just trolling. You might want to try the PvP forums if you're just hoping to shake the hive.

No, it's not. You have an unequivocal answer that flying mounts will not happen. Inevitably, a "Hey, let's have flying mounts" thread pops up every few months. You have an unequivocal answer that an "XP reducer" will not happen. Now, people refuse to listen to the unequivocal answer. They are exactly the same, as are the stubbornness of the proponents.

[Beldacar]

No, it's not. You have an unequivocal answer that flying mounts will not happen. Inevitably, a "Hey, let's have flying mounts" thread pops up every few months. You have an unequivocal answer that an "XP reducer" will not happen. Now, people refuse to listen to the unequivocal answer. They are exactly the same, as are the stubbornness of the proponents.

Not exactly. The flying mounts question has been answered by the devs responsible for system design. The XP reducer question has been answered by floon, who has himself admitted that his answer is not the final word and that he is expressing his personal opinion of why it should not be included.

[henry316]

You have an unequivocal answer that an "XP reducer" will not happen.

Cite this please. No one has ever said this will not happen.

[sactoking]

Sorry Drogo1 but you are certainly wrong on this first point. An XP toggle/throttle is ABSOLUTELY a marketable bullet-point feature. In fact I'll write it for Turbine.

• Greater Flexibility to suit a wider variety of play styles! Now regulate the rate of your characters advancement.
  
  • Maintain the level of challenge you enjoy
  • Complete more content on level with individual characters
  • Allow Friends and Family to 'catch up' while you continue to play
  • More easily maintain adventuring groups that level together.
    
  • Increased Role Playing potential!
    
  
  

It's a pretty significant bullet-point at that, and very likely for little investment (in comparison to other things that can be added). Heck it doesn't even matter how many people will actually use it, the bullet-point alone makes the game sound even more enticing to current and prospective customers. That *IS* after all what marketing does.

It's only significant to an extremely small market base. The players' estimate was a few %. Floon says it's "orders of magnitude" less than that.

Floon says it's not a "little investment".

Adding a feature that noone uses is a waste, so yes it does matter how many people use it.

Adding features that customers place no value on does not make it more enticing.