XP Reducer

[BellusDuFenna]

So... what you are saying is that only a small percentage of the people who ACTUALLY would like to see this feature actually post on these forums. I'm sure you are correct in that regard.

I've brought up this subject in in-game chat and the majority of respondents were in favor of such an option. So... I think the player base which would like to see this are less prone to visiting and posting in the forums.

So encourage them to visit the forums, post in existing threads on the subject, and to create new ones (especially in the Suggestions forum, as well as spreading the word in server forums). If you want to get a movement started, doing a little grassroots work wouldn't hurt.

[Celt_Ainvar]

For familys encourage your family to post here even if you have to help with Writing.

[Kraggy]

So... what you are saying is that only a small percentage of the people who ACTUALLY would like to see this feature actually post on these forums. I'm sure you are correct in that regard.

I've brought up this subject in in-game chat and the majority of respondents were in favor of such an option. So... I think the player base which would like to see this are less prone to visiting and posting in the forums.

LOL, do you have the first clue about statistics and determining their validity with respect to population size, population selection and so on?

The percentage of posters on the forums who agree with you proves nothing. The percentage of posters in-game who agree with you proves nothing.

By themselves these are meaningless 'facts', totally unrelated one to the other and also totally useless when trying to form an accurate view of the players' attitude to this as a whole.

[Khafar]

- Correction 1: "compared with other features that could be done with the same amount of investment." A feature that requires 100 times as much of an investment to create, test, and implement has to affect the purchase decision of 100 times as many people in order to justify the higher costs.

Correction to your correction: some things will likely never be done if they don't appeal to enough customers. We simply have far too much else to do, and other enhancements with broader appeal and/or deeper impact are almost certain to win the competition for our limited time and resources.

Correction 2: It is not the number of people who want a particular change that matters. It is the number of people who would base a purchase decision on a particular feature.

Yes, well... that only weakens your case. You've already admitted multiple times that this isn't a buying decision sort of feature for very many players. And again, just because it's a buying decision for a few, that doesn't somehow make it a "no-brainer" to do even if its cost is low. Software companies with highly complex products don't spend their limited time, money, and resources chasing after the business of a few (unless those few are going to spend a huge amount of money).

I guess that leaves you arguing that Turbine's evaluation of just what percentage of customers this sort of feature would attract (or retain) is wrong. Because if it really is "orders of magnitude" smaller than the 30% someone in here guessed, there simply isn't likely to be much interest in providing it. There's far too much else to do, and even if it were done, it'll probably never show up as anything more than a bullet point buried in some Patch Notes somewhere.

I suspect that's why floon talks about his preference for a mentoring system despite the fact that it costs a lot more: it addresses far more issues for players, provides opportunities for fun new gameplay, and also it also offers value that's bankable - something they can actually use to help sell the game to prospective customers, and better retain a signficant percentage of the customers they have. Mentoring is a feature worth highlighting in dev chats, putting in promotional advertising, etc.

Khafar

[Ruthelia]

LOL, do you have the first clue about statistics and determining their validity with respect to population size, population selection and so on?

The percentage of posters on the forums who agree with you proves nothing. The percentage of posters in-game who agree with you proves nothing.

By themselves these are meaningless 'facts', totally unrelated one to the other and also totally useless when trying to form an accurate view of the players' attitude to this as a whole.

Ouch. You should ask yourself your own question kraggy. One of the main purposes of statistics is to analyze a sample and make inferences on it with regard to the population from which it was taken. Why? Because it's often impossible to sample the whole population. Firefox uses a sample from which to base his statements on. Now this sample may not be the most ideal sample taken of the population, but it is a sample nonetheless. As a result your attack on him is not only misdirected but actually definitively wrong. If you indeed know about statistics you'll clearly know that terms like 'proves' and 'facts' have no real place when describing them. In addition to call something 'totally unrelated' when it is indeed a sample of the population concerned about is very odd. As a result your last sentence (quoted above) is completely perplexing, so i will ask you this: if these samples already spoken about are ''totally useless when trying to form and accurate view'' as you say, then by default you must know of some samples that Firefox, yourself and others can readily get their hands on that are useful. And furthermore, the very fact that you can so clearly state which samples are 'utterly useless' and which are not with such complete absolution must mean that you know about the population makeup already. For evidently - as you know all about statistics - you wouldn't make such bold statements - i.e. your sample is useless - about what is and what is not relevant without having any data/information of your own to share. So please share.



And yes, i am in support of some way to throttle/halt my experience gain. There is absolutely no reason why this shouldn't be put in, as it's such an idea that will have zero effect on anyone in game that does not want to use it. You can't get any better than that, it's a win-win for everyone both for and against it.

[Khafar]

One of the main purposes of statistics is to analyze a sample and make inferences on it with regard to the population from which it was taken.

Yes, but if it's a small and non-random sample, the margins of error go through the roof. That's the big problem with fan-run polls, threads on forums, etc. The total sample size is tiny, and there are major self-selection issues. As I've said before, I've seen two fan-run polls with 100+ responses each where completely opposite results "won" by greater than 2:1 margins -- on the same forum, and at the same time!

That's why we've heard developers talk about trying to validate forum feedback with company-run surveys, data mining, etc. They're less likely to get a false reading that way (at least in most cases).

Khafar

[Fionnuala]

One of the main purposes of statistics is to analyze a sample and make inferences on it with regard to the population from which it was taken. Why? Because it's often impossible to sample the whole population.

And this is why ALL statistics are only marginally useful at best.

When it comes down to it, none of the opinions here matter. If a Dev says that IT'S JUST NOT WORTH IT then that is that. The Devs know what they are working on for the game and what they want to work on in the future for the game and if they think that implementing this feature will take away too much time or resources from the other projects that they think are more important to the game, then that's really all that matters.

[GregJL]

You've already admitted multiple times that this isn't a buying decision sort of feature for very many players.

In between arguing that it would be.

[Sonzia]

Well, with nearly 25,000 views of this thread (making it one of the most viewed among all currently active threads, included the stickies), the developers are hopefully getting the idea that this is something of great interest to more than a handful of people?

[BellusDuFenna]

Well, with nearly 25,000 views of this thread (making it one of the most viewed among all currently active threads, included the stickies), the developers are hopefully getting the idea that this is something of great interest to more than a handful of people?

Or they just see a bunch of squabbling. We can hope they are swayed one way or the other by the arguments herein, but from reading the thread in its entirety they could easily just read it as useless bickering and move on to the next thread.

[Kraggy]

if these samples already spoken about are ''totally useless when trying to form and accurate view'' as you say, then by default you must know of some samples that Firefox, yourself and others can readily get their hands on that are useful.

I don't have to, I'm not the one making assertions of 'fact' and demanding Turbine take action based on faulty statistics, but my answer to you is I don't think they exist.

The fact you don't see the fatal flaws in your arguments in favor of your flawed statistics makes it pretty futile for me to try to educate you, suffice to say those who are in a position to act on this matter will also see these flaws.

Hint: population size and selection are the critical aspects here, both forum posters and in-game responders to your shouts are self-selecting and therefore of dubious value.

[Beleg]

I suspect that's why floon talks about his preference for a mentoring system despite the fact that it costs a lot more: it addresses far more issues for players, provides opportunities for fun new gameplay, and also it also offers value that's bankable - something they can actually use to help sell the game to prospective customers, and better retain a signficant percentage of the customers they have. Mentoring is a feature worth highlighting in dev chats, putting in promotional advertising, etc.

So where does the new Mail Addressing feature fit in?

It's a nice to have (ease of use) feature, but it adds no functionality. It certainly won't be used to gain customers ("Look! We finally made our mail system almost as easy to use as That Other Game's!") And yet, that feature got implemented. I acknowledge that many people have asked for it, and many will benefit from it. And it probably wasn't too hard to implement (though probably harder than a simple XP toggle). It certainly would require a lot of testing, and will no doubt result in many CS tickets too. Sill, I can see how it would be considered low-hanging fruit - and I'm sure I'll be glad to use it.

But would I rather have had an XP toggle? Definitely.

How about the new solo-able version of the Epic Book quests? ("Are you a loner who can't manage to get anyone to help you? Don't worry, now you too can experience the Epic Quest Line!") I guess you can spin that into a marketing bullet, but I think you'd get better results with an XP-toggle feature.

A customer who wants to play all of the content on-level, and stay together with a group of friends (which describes the advocates of this feature) is going to be a more reliable customer than someone who wants to solo and level fast to the "end game" (and then leaves since he has no friends keeping him interested). Do we really need solo-able versions of these (once epic) instances? Wouldn't those resources have been better spent improving the LFG tool? Is it really that hard to get a group?

[Khafar]

the developers are hopefully getting the idea that this is something of great interest to more than a handful of people?

This thread has 25000 views because people like the OP, myself, and a relative handful of others have kept arguing about it for a month now. It has 700+ responses, most of which have come from maybe 20 people. Therefore, it's almost always at or near the top of the page, it has a number of responses by a developer, and people are interested in how other players could possibly argue so much over an XP toggle . Basically, it has good spectator value compared to other threads on this forum.

If anyone thinks this is unusual, they should have tuned into the arguments about what armor styles were appropriate for a Lord of the Rings game on the forums before the game ever launched. It was astonishing. A handful of people, primarily a guy named Unthor, argued with anyone and everyone over what should and should not be allowed. Unthor's view was that only historically accurate Dark Ages armor was permissible (which seriously curtailed the sorts of looks that were possible). It went on for months. One of those threads hit over 1000 responses. New threads were started each time any concept art or screenshots were posted. And if a developer (usually floon) ever said anything, it would just go round and round again for another few hundred responses.

Yet the armor in LOTRO looks pretty much like it did back then, and once the two primary people arguing for that viewpoint left... the issue died down to nearly nothing. The passion over that issue was deep - but very narrow.

Khafar

[FoxFire]

I don't have to, I'm not the one making assertions of 'fact' and demanding Turbine take action based on faulty statistics, but my answer to you is I don't think they exist.

The fact you don't see the fatal flaws in your arguments in favor of your flawed statistics makes it pretty futile for me to try to educate you, suffice to say those who are in a position to act on this matter will also see these flaws.

Hint: population size and selection are the critical aspects here, both forum posters and in-game responders to your shouts are self-selecting and therefore of dubious value.

You're not! Wonderful. But tell me.... who IS making assertions of 'fact' and demanding Turbine take action based on faulty statistics?

As your post is a response to a response of yours to a post of mine, I can only assume you a referring to my statement that the majority of respondents in an in-game chat on this topic were in favor of it. I made no claims of fact as to how that relates to what total numbers or total percent of players would like this feature. Only that I THOUGHT my observation indicated that such players were less likely to be posting in the forums. So even THAT off hand 'conclusion' was prefaced by a qualifier.

At any rate the simple fact of the matter which was being represented was that only a very small percentage of the people who would actually like this feature are (or have) posted in the forums in regard to it. And though I have no specific data to back that up, I can reasonably conclude that statistically that is the case. And I've not said that had any relation to total numbers or percentages?

[Tiempko]

It is interesting to read a number of posts that say, "Here is how you do statistical analysis. However, I (or Person P) already knows what the truth is and, thus, no recourse to objective measures are necessary."

Everybody is subject to being blinded by their own preferences and prejudices. This includes Floon and myself.

It is inconsistent to argue of those who want this sytem that they are only believing what they want to believe in thinking it would be used, but to argue that those who might have an interest in tearing down the idea of an XP slider (because they wish see it as a competitor to a mentoring system or they wish to pull resources to something that THEY want) are subject to the same forces?

This even applies to developers. There are things they WISH to develop and, in wishing it, are just as prone to skew their perceptions of the data as the rest of us.

I am not saying that the development of an XP slider is worthwhile. I do, however, argue that the the claims made by those who claim it is not worthwhile are unreasonable or unfounded.

[DunasConnor]

So where does the new Mail Addressing feature fit in?

It's a nice to have (ease of use) feature, but it adds no functionality. It certainly won't be used to gain customers ("Look! We finally made our mail system almost as easy to use as That Other Game's!") And yet, that feature got implemented. I acknowledge that many people have asked for it, and many will benefit from it. And it probably wasn't too hard to implement (though probably harder than a simple XP toggle). It certainly would require a lot of testing, and will no doubt result in many CS tickets too. Sill, I can see how it would be considered low-hanging fruit - and I'm sure I'll be glad to use it.

I find this reference to the mail feature interesting actually, considering this feature, in my experience, might cause more problems and DB issues. In the absence of this mail feature currently, I use the Ctl-C, Ctl-V combo when I am sending multiple items to alts or others. The system cannot handle it a lot of the time and I get an 'You must wait a before doing this' error constantly because obviously the DB cannot keep up with the requests. So this nifty new feature, which essentially gives the same functionality as a Ctl-C, Ctl-V will fail just as much, unless they have corrected the DB issue.

So a feature, which had a very functional workaround (although failed often due to the DB issue) and not many requests was implemented, while a function that has no sane workaround will not be implemented.

I think a mentoring system would be great too, though based on how skills work in this game, would be a nightmare to implement, and is not really relevant to this discussion because it's apples/oranges.

[DarkCntry]

It is interesting to read a number of posts that say, "Here is how you do statistical analysis. However, I (or Person P) already knows what the truth is and, thus, no recourse to objective measures are necessary."

Everybody is subject to being blinded by their own preferences and prejudices. This includes Floon and myself.

It is inconsistent to argue of those who want this sytem that they are only believing what they want to believe in thinking it would be used, but to argue that those who might have an interest in tearing down the idea of an XP slider (because they wish see it as a competitor to a mentoring system or they wish to pull resources to something that THEY want) are subject to the same forces?

This even applies to developers. There are things they WISH to develop and, in wishing it, are just as prone to skew their perceptions of the data as the rest of us.

I am not saying that the development of an XP slider is worthwhile. I do, however, argue that the the claims made by those who claim it is not worthwhile are unreasonable or unfounded.

But again, missing one very important aspect of this 'skewing' you so state...

The developers, ALL OF THEM, have access to numbers and information that we do not have privy to. So even if they do have a personal bias towards or against something, they can (and more than likely do) back them up with their own internal findings that they have readily available to them.

As for the mail issue stated in the post above, that's not a DB issue, it's a spam-preventative measure.

[Ruthelia]

Yes, but if it's a small and non-random sample, the margins of error go through the roof. That's the big problem with fan-run polls, threads on forums, etc. The total sample size is tiny, and there are major self-selection issues.

Yep you're exactly right Khafar and it's more than likely that these small samples land far from the mark (I won't talk about random, as in a practical, life-science sense 'random' sampling just cannot be achieved). The problem is that until there is data that signifies the contrary, it's faulty to discard any data. That's the beautiful thing about statistics, it removes the qualitative aspects of observation for quantitative probabilities.

And this is why ALL statistics are only marginally useful at best.

When it comes down to it, none of the opinions here matter. If a Dev says that IT'S JUST NOT WORTH IT then that is that. The Devs know what they are working on for the game and what they want to work on in the future for the game and if they think that implementing this feature will take away too much time or resources from the other projects that they think are more important to the game, then that's really all that matters.

Firstly, you can't be more wrong about Statistics Fionnuala. They are amazingly powerful when used properly and are so useful that they've infiltrated nearly all aspects of human life. And as far as our opinions not mattering here? Sure, one person's opinion alone does not count for much, but if enough like-minded people get together the combined value of their opinion becomes much greater. As Lao-Tzu (founder of Taoism) so eloquently says: A journey of a thousand miles began with a single step.

I don't have to, I'm not the one making assertions of 'fact' and demanding Turbine take action based on faulty statistics, but my answer to you is I don't think they exist.

The fact you don't see the fatal flaws in your arguments in favor of your flawed statistics makes it pretty futile for me to try to educate you, suffice to say those who are in a position to act on this matter will also see these flaws.

Hint: population size and selection are the critical aspects here, both forum posters and in-game responders to your shouts are self-selecting and therefore of dubious value

You're quite right Kraggy, it's mostly likely they don't exist. But that's even more reason to hold onto what little 'data' (I use that term loosely here) is available. Don't discard what's there just because you don't "think" it's right. You should know that the very foundation of statistics lies in the quantitative and not the qualitative. And you really should've taken your own 'hint's. Population size and selection are critical yes, but did you ask Firefox about these two factors with references to his statement? Did you try and determine the parameters of the sample? No, you just thought it was bad, assumed it was off the mark, and THEN went on to berate him/her about statistics, guess you don't think they're so critical after all. Sure, it could be the case that Firefox's sample was very small and the selection might have been biased to one type of player and as a result the data would be likely unrepresentative. But did you didn't try and find out. You just started preaching about statistics to them when you yourself should have practiced the very thing you were telling Firefox to.

Anyway, that's enough from me on this statistical topic. Acutely on the OP's topic; I, like you Kraggy, don't have a problem with turbine putting such a XP reducer system in place.

[Ruthelia]

I said earlier that I think a mentoring system is a great idea. I think an XP halting system is a lousy idea.

.

My god, why aren't we all rallying behind floon here to try and get a mentoring system put in place? Personally a XP reducing system would be nice, but a mentoring system would be far FAR superior and more worthwhile to put in. One simple fact that puts a mentoring system far out in front is that it actively encourages community interaction for it's use. Put a mentoring system in place and place a ceiling on how many levels over a quest/deed you can be before you're unable to advance it (e.g. when they become trivial), and that would skyrocket the amount of community interaction online i believe. Afterall, that's what MMO's are all about at their core; working and playing together with other people to achieve common goals in-game. Anything that fosters this i think can only be a good thing.

How do we go about helping you floon turn the mentoring system idea into a reality?

[Beleg]

If there were a chance for a Mentoring system to get implemented, I would support it.

Although I've played a lot of MMOs (UO, AC1, DAoC, WoW, GW), I don't recall ever using a Mentoring system. I'd like to know more about them. What other games have done Mentoring well?

I guess the general idea is, you can enter an instance and somehow lower the effective level of your character? So, I could take my level 60 into Fornost, and he would revert to level 40-ish?

How would it work? Obviously, my stats would drop, perhaps to 2/3 (40/60) - that's assuming a linear rate of change from 1 to 60, which may not be valid, I don't know.

Would I get to choose my target level - so I could pick 35 if I wanted a hard challenge, or 45 if I wanted it to be easier?

What about my skills? Would I just not have access to any skills that I trained after reaching level 40?

What about my gear? Would the gear stats (DPS, armor, buffs, etc) simply drop to 2/3?

What about consumables such as food, potions, oils, marbles, traps, etc? Would they be unusable (so I'd have to go get lower level ones), or could I use my level 60 ones, but they'd only work at 2/3 effectiveness?

I can see how it might be useful in many situations (certainly to a broader group than the XP Reducer would be); but it sounds kind of complicated.

[Ruthelia]

If there were a chance for a Mentoring system to get implemented, I would support it.

Although I've played a lot of MMOs (UO, AC1, DAoC, WoW, GW), I don't recall ever using a Mentoring system. I'd like to know more about them. What other games have done Mentoring well?

I guess the general idea is, you can enter an instance and somehow lower the effective level of your character? So, I could take my level 60 into Fornost, and he would revert to level 40-ish?

How would it work? Obviously, my stats would drop, perhaps to 2/3 (40/60) - that's assuming a linear rate of change from 1 to 60, which may not be valid, I don't know.

Would I get to choose my target level - so I could pick 35 if I wanted a hard challenge, or 45 if I wanted it to be easier?

What about my skills? Would I just not have access to any skills that I trained after reaching level 40?

What about my gear? Would the gear stats (DPS, armor, buffs, etc) simply drop to 2/3?

What about consumables such as food, potions, oils, marbles, traps, etc? Would they be unusable (so I'd have to go get lower level ones), or could I use my level 60 ones, but they'd only work at 2/3 effectiveness?

I can see how it might be useful in many situations (certainly to a broader group than the XP Reducer would be); but it sounds kind of complicated.

Have a read of the Everquest 2 mentoring system. I think it's pretty commonly accepted that it is the best mentoring system on offer in any MMO at the moment. It's really quite simple; basically you choose to mentor someone, your level and stats both personal and item-wise get reduced to their level comparably.

[DunasConnor]

Have a read of the Everquest 2 mentoring system. I think it's pretty commonly accepted that it is the best mentoring system on offer in any MMO at the moment. It's really quite simple; basically you choose to mentor someone, your level and stats both personal and item-wise get reduced to their level comparably.

You're right, they do have a great mentoring system. I used it a lot when I played. But the rub here is that their skill engine (for lack of a better term) was built differently. The way their skills work is that in the back-end, each skill can be set specifically for the type of play it is being executed in. So that 'Fireball' skill which gives 100 damage at level 60 can be set to give 20 damage during mentoring at level 20. That same 'Fireball' skill can have it's resistance changed during PvP so that it has a better resist chance against a human opponent. Their skill flagging has multiple entries in the database for each and every skill and flag is huge. The devs there are definitely good and they obviously had the funding to set up this skill engine from the very start. I respect the work they did, even though I would never think about supporting their company.

While I respect the devs here, and love most of them, I think this engine just doesn't have the finesse to handle this the same way, at least not without a serious cost issue on the back-end and performance. Adding it here would be pretty major.

Again, I would love something like that for sure, but I can't see that really happening, or happening well, here because of the overhead required to make and sustain a major system like that.

[Ruthelia]

You're right, they do have a great mentoring system. I used it a lot when I played. But the rub here is that their skill engine (for lack of a better term) was built differently. The way their skills work is that in the back-end, each skill can be set specifically for the type of play it is being executed in. So that 'Fireball' skill which gives 100 damage at level 60 can be set to give 20 damage during mentoring at level 20. That same 'Fireball' skill can have it's resistance changed during PvP so that it has a better resist chance against a human opponent. Their skill flagging has multiple entries in the database for each and every skill and flag is huge. The devs there are definitely good and they obviously had the funding to set up this skill engine from the very start. I respect the work they did, even though I would never think about supporting their company.

While I respect the devs here, and love most of them, I think this engine just doesn't have the finesse to handle this the same way, at least not without a serious cost issue on the back-end and performance. Adding it here would be pretty major.

Again, I would love something like that for sure, but I can't see that really happening, or happening well, here because of the overhead required to make and sustain a major system like that.

I think there are a number of important things the mentoring system in EQ2 does that would greatly benefit any mentoring system here in LotRO, but i emulate it completely would likely be a mistake.

Oh and one more thing on why a mentoring system would be more desirable than a XP reducer level: The mentoring system would be useful for all players ALL the time. Even when they hit the level cap - and maybe more so then - the mentoring system would still have a use. The XP reducer system however would only be useful while you're leveling up your characters, once you hit the cap it's a function that you'll no longer use.

[Beldacar]

I think there are a number of important things the mentoring system in EQ2 does that would greatly benefit any mentoring system here in LotRO, but i emulate it completely would likely be a mistake.

Oh and one more thing on why a mentoring system would be more desirable than a XP reducer level: The mentoring system would be useful for all players ALL the time. Even when they hit the level cap - and maybe more so then - the mentoring system would still have a use. The XP reducer system however would only be useful while you're leveling up your characters, once you hit the cap it's a function that you'll no longer use.

As I've stated in a few earlier posts, I have nothing against a mentoring system, but ...

A. Despite floon's assertion that it's only a "little more effort" than an XP throttle, there's no doubt in my mind that he's ... exaggerating a bit. The QA end of things might be exactly the same, but I think it's pretty obvious than a mentoring system is a far more complex undertaking on the design and implementation side. That means it's far less likely to get done at all.

B. A mentoring system doesn't really address my reasons for wanting an XP throttle: 1. levelling is way too fast, especially for the first thirty levels or so and 2. I seem to constantly outlevel areas, quests, quest rewards, and deeds long before I've "completed" them to my satisfaction. If anything, mentoring others will actually lead to me completing these areas / quests even faster, which is exactly the opposite result to what I'm seeking.

C. LotRO really has no mechanism that makes mentoring necessary. Grouping with someone your own level has essentially the same effect on XP as grouping with someone twenty levels above you (I have two accounts and I frequently mix and match higher- and lower-level characters). Similarly, there is no level limit on zones or instances.

I'm not going to go so far as to say a mentoring system is a "lousy idea." But I will say that, if it's not implemented properly, it will end up being a massive waste of developer time and effort. And it still won't address my concerns ;^)

[StavroMuellerBeta]

but I think it's pretty obvious than a mentoring system is a far more complex undertaking on the design and implementation side. That means it's far less likely to get done at all.

We're getting instances where the mobs scale to us, so the scaling mechanism is in place. All that's needed now is to port that from mobs to people.

If I didn't know better, I'd say the skirmishes are a "road test" for a fuller scaling mechanism.

If anything, mentoring others will actually lead to me completing these areas / quests even faster, which is exactly the opposite result to what I'm seeking.

Easy soluton: Solo mentoring-mode. I would hope that XP is turned off in mentoring mode, but if it's nt, then you can simply backtrack when you gain a level.

Grouping with someone your own level has essentially the same effect on XP as grouping with someone twenty levels above you

But it has a terrible effect on the difficulty of the content. A level 45 can solo GB, yet some groups have two or three 60's escorting three 20's through the instance. If the 20's want to get carried through, that's great. But if it's someone who wants to actually experience the content as intended, that's where a scaling system would save the instance.