Toggling XP Systems - For a Peaceful Co-Existence!

[Sarex]

 There are more creatures. E.g., if you go to the wilderness area on 'easy' you fight 3 wolves. If you go there on 'normal' you fight 5 wolves and some of them are senior wolves. If you get 650 XP for a wolf and 1000 XP for a senior wolf then Hard mode will quickly become easier than easy mode for most of the game (except for the very end) because the player will level up much faster.

 

Keep the same xp, reduce side quest xp. I would still be a minimal difference in xp, as monsters still give much smaller rewards then quest xp (if we are following the IE formula).

 

 I didn't explain this well. If a quest currently yields, say, 20K XP over two objectives in the current objective-based XP system then the sum of the events in the new event-based XP system has to be pretty close to 20K. If it ends up being 2K then the game will be too hard and if it ends up being 200K the game will be too easy.

 

 So, regarding point 2, if you grant XP for kills and don't count them towards the quest, then there's a lot more XP available right? The, let's call them, 'exploration kills' would mean that you can gain levels faster by killing more, right? If you assign event XP under the assumption that the player will use one of the two entry points for the quest, then they can over level by doing all of the events (kills etc.) for both entry points. If you assume they will do that, they will under level if they don't kill everything. The shared XP problem makes this harder to get right.

 

Ok I understand now, but I don't think that would be very complex to figure out, just work.

 

Bring down quest xp by the amount of kill xp available. This would best be done in the side quest for exploration kills and in the main quest for the unavoidable creature encounters (if you are only doing the main quest).

 

 

 The algorithm I mean is assigning XP to events in a way that doesn't make the game ridiculously hard or ridiculously easy. Doing that requires making an XP table that will approximate the current XP objective amounts without making changes to the creature/trap etc. placement, accounting for differing number of creatures at different difficulty levels etc. If you think carefully about how to implement this, it really does seem like a bolted on hack.

 

 It can be done, with a lot of attention to detail and a lot of play testing, but doing it between now and the end of the year (or even into next year if Obsidian can afford to delay the release and can afford the extra money to add a second set of XP rewards) in addition to making the game work as designed?

 

 I think it would be better left as a mod.

 

 If the game is brilliant except for that nagging feeling that the XP rewards are unsatisfying, someone will make the mod.

 

Ah then I already addressed that in the previous post. I doubt they make an algorithm for such a thing. As I said in the previous post, make the main quest line +  the unavoidable encounters on that line give just enough xp that the game can be beat and then add the rest of the xp to the side quests.

[Immortalis]

 

 The algorithm I mean is assigning XP to events in a way that doesn't make the game ridiculously hard or ridiculously easy. Doing that requires making an XP table that will approximate the current XP objective amounts without making changes to the creature/trap etc. placement, accounting for differing number of creatures at different difficulty levels etc. If you think carefully about how to implement this, it really does seem like a bolted on hack.

 

 It can be done, with a lot of attention to detail and a lot of play testing, but doing it between now and the end of the year (or even into next year if Obsidian can afford to delay the release and can afford the extra money to add a second set of XP rewards) in addition to making the game work as designed?

 

 I think it would be better left as a mod.

 

 If the game is brilliant except for that nagging feeling that the XP rewards are unsatisfying, someone will make the mod.

 

Ah then I already addressed that in the previous post. I doubt they make an algorithm for such a thing. As I said in the previous post, make the main quest line +  the unavoidable encounters on that line give just enough xp that the game can be beat and then add the rest of the xp to the side quests.

 

 

All my likes go to this Sarex.. This means your drive to do side quests is to make you more powerful.. Like maybe you can beat the game doing critical path.. but to beat the mega dungeon you need to do a lot of side quests or be really good at the game to finish the dungeon..

Edited August 23, 2014 by Immortalis

[Namutree]

All this talk about balancing it seems silly to me. As I've already stated; any freedom from the quest-xp monopoly is a good thing. Even if it has to be thrown on with little thought. As long as you keep the kill-xp low it won't cause any major disruption in game the difficulty since there is already a freakin' level cap. 

 

The more complicated you make the plan; the less likely it will get done. Keep it simple. 

 

Here's a simple xp number system for you. What level would guess the monster is? Give said monster 5-xp times that number.

 

Those smaller beetles- Seem fitting enemies for level 4 pcs: 20-xp each.

Those big beetles- Seem about level 5: 25-xp each.

 

Now just double that number for bosses and you're done.

Edited August 23, 2014 by Namutree

[Zombra]

Split design is bad mkay.  Kill XP or quest only XP, pick one system and do it well.

[Yonjuro]

All this talk about balancing it seems silly to me. As I've already stated; any freedom from the quest-xp monopoly is a good thing. Even if it has to be thrown on with little thought. As long as you keep the kill-xp low it won't cause any major disruption in game the difficulty since there is already a freakin' level cap. 

 

The more complicated you make the plan; the less likely it will get done. Keep it simple. 

 

Here's a simple xp number system for you. What level would guess the monster is? Give said monster 5-xp times that number.

 

Those smaller beetles- Seem fitting enemies for level 4 pcs: 20-xp each.

Those big beetles- Seem about level 5: 25-xp each.

 

Now just double that number for bosses and you're done.

 

 

 No. You are not done. Really. You're not. When you play test this solution you are going find that the game is much easier on "hard" mode than it is on "easy" mode (except for the fights that assume your party will be at the level cap). Obsidian can't release a game that's as broken as that would be. 

 

 Don't take my for anything. Have look at the wilderness area on the easiest mode and the hardest mode and count the creatures (and note the level of the creatures). Calculate the difference in XP. You will see the problem. (That's only one of the problems.)

 

 It's not the plan that's complicated. It actually is complicated to retrofit the game with kill XP (assuming the goal is to keep the level of challenge similar to what it is now). 

[Yonjuro]

 

 There are more creatures. E.g., if you go to the wilderness area on 'easy' you fight 3 wolves. If you go there on 'normal' you fight 5 wolves and some of them are senior wolves. If you get 650 XP for a wolf and 1000 XP for a senior wolf then Hard mode will quickly become easier than easy mode for most of the game (except for the very end) because the player will level up much faster.

 

Keep the same xp, reduce side quest xp. I would still be a minimal difference in xp, as monsters still give much smaller rewards then quest xp (if we are following the IE formula).

 

 

 On the scoend point, going from "easy" to "path of the damned", the wolf encounter would give you something like a factor of 3 or 4 more kill XP. The kill xp numbers would have to be really small from that not to make a difference (as it is now - can't get smaller than zero). I'll get to the first point later.

 

 

 

 I didn't explain this well. If a quest currently yields, say, 20K XP over two objectives in the current objective-based XP system then the sum of the events in the new event-based XP system has to be pretty close to 20K. If it ends up being 2K then the game will be too hard and if it ends up being 200K the game will be too easy.

 

 ....

 

Ok I understand now, but I don't think that would be very complex to figure out, just work.

 

Bring down quest xp by the amount of kill xp available. This would best be done in the side quest for exploration kills and in the main quest for the unavoidable creature encounters (if you are only doing the main quest).

 

 

 Sure, all of these things can be figured out (with significant play testing). To the point of reducing side quest XP and distributing the XP over the kills -  I agree that it doesn't break the main quest if you do it that way but the main quest isn't the whole game - things can get really out whack (too hard or too easy) because the encounters aren't necessairy designed around the full number of available things to kill.  You still have the issue that hard mode is easier (for most of the game) unless you get less XP per kill on hard mode (meaning that you don't need one XP table, you need four of them).

[Yonjuro]

All my likes go to this Sarex.. This means your drive to do side quests is to make you more powerful.. Like maybe you can beat the game doing critical path.. but to beat the mega dungeon you need to do a lot of side quests or be really good at the game to finish the dungeon..

 

 (Well, isn't that already the case with objective XP system? Side quests give you XP making you more powerful.

 

 But,) let's not turn this into a discussion of kill XP (or event XP) vs. objective XP. We have plenty of threads to argue about that.

 

 The question here is whether it's worthwhile to retrofit the game with a second XP system.

 

 And, the answer is: sure, great idea for a mod - bad idea for Obsidian to add it to the list of things they need to do before the release.

[Fearabbit]

If you want XP on kills so much, why doesn't Obsidian just give each enemy a kill XP value, then the game quietly deducts the amount of kill XP you've received from future quest XP?

 

I would just like to say that this is the most perfectly balanced solution I've seen so far, and it's incredibly easy to implement as well. If someone just wants to go around killing critters, they can do that. But if they progress in the story, they'll find that quests don't give them any XP anymore.

But that's alright because they already got the XP.

 

It also means that we wouldn't actually need to separate XP systems. This system does not incentivize you to kill monsters to gain XP, except if you need that level up you've been waiting for a little earlier.

 

I don't know if it's a system that will be agreeable to the majority of players, so maybe a mod would be the best solution for something like that. But damn, I like the simplicity of it.

[Namutree]

 

If you want XP on kills so much, why doesn't Obsidian just give each enemy a kill XP value, then the game quietly deducts the amount of kill XP you've received from future quest XP?

 

I would just like to say that this is the most perfectly balanced solution I've seen so far, and it's incredibly easy to implement as well. If someone just wants to go around killing critters, they can do that. But if they progress in the story, they'll find that quests don't give them any XP anymore.

But that's alright because they already got the XP.

 

It also means that we wouldn't actually need to separate XP systems. This system does not incentivize you to kill monsters to gain XP, except if you need that level up you've been waiting for a little earlier.

 

I don't know if it's a system that will be agreeable to the majority of players, so maybe a mod would be the best solution for something like that. But damn, I like the simplicity of it.

 

If the xp given were low enough it wouldn't make up for the added challenge. Perhaps 5 was too high; lets try 4. A player needs a lot of xp to level. 4 xp per level of the enemy will not make hard easier than normal. Keep in mind as well that xp is divided by your team.

[IndiraLightfoot]

I've been away for a day, and guess what I found in my in-box when I got home, a message from a dev (from Sking who did the first post about xp, saying it's quest only. In a reply to my wondering whether we'll get to have a more old-school, combat xp, in the game too (or even if modders like me can help them add one before it ships, Sking says:

"Once the game releases any mod you feel is necessary to heighten your experience, you should definitely do."

                                                                                                                              Sent 22 August 2014 - 08:22 PM

 

What this means, folks, is that OE isn't budging. We will have quest-xp only (their version of "objective xp"), so there's nothing to see here. Scram! Go home!

 

/Thread  

[Namutree]

I've been away for a day, and guess what I found in my in-box when I got home, a message from a dev (from Sking who did the first post about xp, saying it's quest only. In a reply to my wondering whether we'll get to have a more old-school, combat xp, in the game too (or even if modders like me can help them add one before it ships, Sking says:

"Once the game releases any mod you feel is necessary to heighten your experience, you should definitely do."

                                                                                                                              Sent 22 August 2014 - 08:22 PM

 

What this means, folks, is that OE isn't budging. We will have quest-xp only (their version of "objective xp"), so there's nothing to see here. Scram! Go home!

 

/Thread  

:( :( :(

[Volourn]

Of course they weren't going to change it. Why do you think they avoid these xp threads? Just be glad they aren't locking them so at last people can rage. <>

[IndiraLightfoot]

Of course they weren't going to change it. Why do you think they avoid these xp threads? Just be glad they aren't locking them so at last people can rage. <>

I do recall you wrote something about it earlier - I just tried to keep the hopes up; I mean, they did change their minds about crafting, weapon/armour degeneration IIRC, and they allowed for the co-existenece of two UIs - one old-school and NWN2-like. Well, you were certainly right about this, though.

[Fearabbit]

 

 

 

 

If you want XP on kills so much, why doesn't Obsidian just give each enemy a kill XP value, then the game quietly deducts the amount of kill XP you've received from future quest XP?

I would just like to say that this is the most perfectly balanced solution I've seen so far, and it's incredibly easy to implement as well. If someone just wants to go around killing critters, they can do that. But if they progress in the story, they'll find that quests don't give them any XP anymore.

But that's alright because they already got the XP.

 

It also means that we wouldn't actually need to separate XP systems. This system does not incentivize you to kill monsters to gain XP, except if you need that level up you've been waiting for a little earlier.

 

I don't know if it's a system that will be agreeable to the majority of players, so maybe a mod would be the best solution for something like that. But damn, I like the simplicity of it.

If the xp given were low enough it wouldn't make up for the added challenge. Perhaps 5 was too high; lets try 4. A player needs a lot of xp to level. 4 xp per level of the enemy will not make hard easier than normal. Keep in mind as well that xp is divided by your team.

???

 

This has no relation to my post that I can see.

 

The system in my post (which is not mine, but Grand Commander's) is balanced no matter how many monsters there are and (almost) no matter how high the XP gain is.

 

@Indira, I don't think your dev mail confirmed that "Quest XP" will be the way they're doing it. Yes Kill XP seems unlikely but they have probably noticed that people were disappointed about the lack of objectives during and outside of quests.

And this disappointment is actually something we all agree on. My guess is that they'll add more objectives.

Edited August 24, 2014 by Fearabbit

[IndiraLightfoot]

 

@Indira, I don't think your dev mail confirmed that "Quest XP" will be the way they're doing it. Yes Kill XP seems unlikely but they have probably noticed that people were disappointed about the lack of objectives during and outside of quests.

And this disappointment is actually something we all agree on. My guess is that they'll add more objectives.

 

Hopefully that's a correct assumption, Fearabbit, but I'm a bit pessimistic, since it was a clear opportunity for the dev's to "leak" that they are at least in the process of making objective xp more frequent.

[Grand_Commander13]

I do recall you wrote something about it earlier - I just tried to keep the hopes up; I mean, they did change their minds about crafting, weapon/armour degeneration IIRC

What was the original plan with crafting, and how does the current plan differ?

[IndiraLightfoot]

Good question: Hopefully someone can fill me in, or perhaps it's simply just me mixing them up a bit. As per Update #58, Tim Cain had crafting and item durability tied together, but those knots were severed, and then some adaptations was done to the crafting because of it.

[PrimeJunta]

IIRC there was a separate "Crafting" skill, which affected item durability. You could repair your gear with it when camping, and the better you were, the better the repairs would turn out. You would then use the same skill to craft new stuff.

 

The public didn't like item durability so it was dropped, and without it the Crafting skill felt sad and lonely, so they bound crafting to other things instead.

[JFSOCC]

I've been donated a beta by a very generous forumite, but I haven;t as of yet played the beta. But from what I've read so far, the problem seems to be that objective based xp is not staggered properly. You get XP only at the end of a quest, not during significant progression within these tasks. Perhaps if the same XP was broken up and given in smaller increments throughout the quests, players would notice more feedback during the questing.

[Gfted1]

I've been donated a beta by a very generous forumite, but I haven;t as of yet played the beta. But from what I've read so far, the problem seems to be that objective based xp is not staggered properly. You get XP only at the end of a quest, not during significant progression within these tasks. Perhaps if the same XP was broken up and given in smaller increments throughout the quests, players would notice more feedback during the questing.

 

Im not sure that we have a clear picture of how it works yet. I believe PrimeJunta has posted receiving 1500XP upon entering the Ogre cave but in my buggy experience, I never earned a single XP point (that I noticed) and couldn't even turn in the quests. Im hoping beta v2 is more stable so I can get a better picture of what the hell is actually going on.

[anameforobsidian]

I've been donated a beta by a very generous forumite, but I haven;t as of yet played the beta. But from what I've read so far, the problem seems to be that objective based xp is not staggered properly. You get XP only at the end of a quest, not during significant progression within these tasks. Perhaps if the same XP was broken up and given in smaller increments throughout the quests, players would notice more feedback during the questing.

 

That's a very good point.  I personally find encounter XP a better system than combat xp or quest xp.

[Volourn]

XP shouldn't be just about killing or competing quests, or objectives. It should be about rewarding the player for overcoming challenges by using character skills as well as roel-playing and stuff. ie. Dealing with the spider queen or beetles should be worthy of xp in the same way the ogre is whetehr it's through fighting or some other way of dealing with them. But, none of this you only get xp if a villager begs you to do it. That's just plain dumb and no intelligent DM would handle xp that way, NONE.

[Nonek]

Perhaps as a meeting in the middle ground one could recieve a quest upon first fighting an opponent, to fill up the details of that creature in the Lore screen, through successfully fighting against them? Have the quest track the number of these kind of opponents you defeat, (10/250) or whatever, and upon that number being met, and a full lore description being unlocked, XP is rewarded as well as perhaps a small combat bonus against that creature type. Thus we gain something from each combat, have a goal to aim for and a reward at the end of it, that uses mechanics already in the game.

 

Just a thought.

 

Edit: Would a low Lore skill mean you have to kill more to gain information? Seems a reasonable trade-off, but many may see it as degenerate and overpowered however. Similar complaints to those raised about Durability I imagine.

Edited August 31, 2014 by Nonek

[Stun]

^that's already the system in PoE. The Cyclopedia fills in the blanks for each enemy as you fight them. if you have a high lore skill it fills up faster. if you have a low lore skill you have to kill more of the specific type of enemy to get the same amount of information.

 

The only difference is that you don't get any bonuses against that enemy in combat once you have all the information on them. Thus it isn't a trade off. It's also not a tradeoff because feverishly going around killing things just so you can achieve a completely unabridged Cyclopedia will do exactly nothing to advance you from level 1 to level 2.

[Zansatsu]

Perhaps as a meeting in the middle ground one could recieve a quest upon first fighting an opponent, to fill up the details of that creature in the Lore screen, through successfully fighting against them? Have the quest track the number of these kind of opponents you defeat, (10/250) or whatever, and upon that number being met, and a full lore description being unlocked, XP is rewarded as well as perhaps a small combat bonus against that creature type. Thus we gain something from each combat, have a goal to aim for and a reward at the end of it, that uses mechanics already in the game.

 

Just a thought.

 

Edit: Would a low Lore skill mean you have to kill more to gain information? Seems a reasonable trade-off, but many may see it as degenerate and overpowered however. Similar complaints to those raised about Durability I imagine.

I like this idea. I've had the same thought about it.  Even if no XP is granted at the end filling up the Cyclopedia to unlock bonuses is a nice thought. At the moment though it only gives you some information and combat advice. The Cyclopedia will all be online in no time so lore seems pointless atm. You can look up the best way to kill everything.