[Yellow Mage]

The problem with the system you suggest, Karinya, is that it would require omniscience on S-E's part, which they have clearly shown that they lack. Otherwise, your system wouldn't even be necessary in the first place, now would it?

[Takelli]

Karinya, from what you said is basically is that the less a monster is hunted, the more exp it should give right?

While, that will open up new camps, and new stratagies, and actually force players to have to move away from Colibri (Which would be nice to see).

Which will make players start to over-camp areas, and zones, and maybe even the now "un-used" zones, and SE will have to add in a system to prevent over camping if they did increase exp gain from monsters that aren't killed as much. People WILL try to MPK, and compete over the camps for the best exp that they can get if SE did do something like this.

What I think SE should do is... The more that a monster is killed, the longer it takes to repop, but only up to a limit of 20 mins. Like every 20 or so monsters increases the repop time by about 10 seconds up to a max of 20 mins, and the time limit will slowly start to decrease after about 2 mins of no one killing them. While this will make Griefing other players possible, it will actually force people to stop over hunting monsters, and make them move to find a new area or camp.

[Ryoii/Nonomii]

Actually I think Karinya's system has value and promise while not hurting anyone. Chocobos fluctuate in price. Why not let mobs fluctuation in XP reward? I'd prefer something more dynamic though than weekly fluctuations. Perhaps there would be an NPC who told you which mob families needed to be hunted, and it changed every real life day. Think of it as game hunting and population control.

Generally I'm just looking to make XP more interesting. Fighting different mob families will certainly do that. We don't need to make what works today less attractive. An extra reward for more difficult and less hunted mob families would make hunting them more enjoyable and allow for more variety in XP. The only real issue is exploitation.

[Kaziel0]

It would hardly require omniscience. Now, SE may lack the base programs to do it, but it's far from undoable in some form or another. The core component that would be required is a program that tracks the kills of certain mobs or mob types over a set period of time (a week seem like good solid numbers). Already there are systems which have similar effects. IIRC, the older version of besieged used to be based on how many monsters killed (prior to placing a hard time limit on each besieged). This system could be made much wider, so that it tracks all kills server wide, finding mobs and families of mobs which are either undercamped or overcamped based on each week, and alter their value based upon those results.

And, Takelli, if I understand it correctly, you are misunderstanding what Karinya is saying. The idea is a updated system which varies who and what are the best targets. Let's say that the Wyverns are the best target one week, giving a whopping 3 times normal XP. Everyone would "OMG! Wyverns!" And at all the various places Wyverns spawn at level 75+, there would be Wyvern guts all over the place. At the end of the week when the conquest tally was turned in, a new program could track what had been killed a lot that week and what hadn't. Wyverns, a high XP gain target, would now be moved off the list and changed back to normal XP gain. Now some more different monsters now give an XP bonus, and Wyverns are ignored again for a few weeks until they are worth a lot of XP again, at which point, everyone goes back to being like "OMG! Wyverns!" Basically it would create a "Targets of the Week" system, where during that week a couple of types of monsters were very high value and good targets for being XPed, without forcing players to stop doing TP-Burn and Mana-Burn parties.

As for some sort of in-game explination, could go with something like...

Monster and Beastmen populations are growing unchecked! Through careful studies, Jeunoan scientists have divised new methods of tracking the numbers of enemies out there. A new Bounty system is being implemented to encourage brave adventurers to seek out those species and beastmen which are growing out of control, and will soon threaten the peace and stability of Vana'diel.

Final thought: Karinya, I'd say that they should never lower XP beneath normal. Primarily this is so that while new players are leveling up, they don't need to try to find decent XP targets in a system which is already a bit hard. That would just make it that much harder...

[Ryoii/Nonomii]

Originally Posted by Takelli

Which will make players start to over-camp areas, and zones, and maybe even the now "un-used" zones, and SE will have to add in a system to prevent over camping if they did increase exp gain from monsters that aren't killed as much. People WILL try to MPK, and compete over the camps for the best exp that they can get if SE did do something like this.

I'm very doubtful of this. I don't see the system making the mobs with bonuses that much more attractive than the standard camps. Once the bonus gets high enough to compete with the standard camp it will soon drop back down.

What I think SE should do is... The more that a monster is killed, the longer it takes to repop, but only up to a limit of 20 mins. Like every 20 or so monsters increases the repop time by about 10 seconds up to a max of 20 mins, and the time limit will slowly start to decrease after about 2 mins of no one killing them. While this will make Griefing other players possible, it will actually force people to stop over hunting monsters, and make them move to find a new area or camp.

This is an interesting idea, but I think it will simply result in a great amount of frustration since it is too dynamic.

[DakAttack]

Originally Posted by Ryoii/Nonomii

Perhaps there would be an NPC who told you which mob families needed to be hunted, and it changed every real life day. Think of it as game hunting and population control.

That's the only thing that would make Karinya's idea a bad idea. Pointing all the players in the same direction wouldn't really help anything.

It would definitely enable players to search for camps that offer better EXP, and allow the lazy players to continue to earn base level EXP, but what if those lazy players never leave their lazy player camps? They're effectively ruining and area or monster family for everybody else.

Make it a gain/loss for underhunted/overhunted that's unique to each player, and they'll be more motivated to search for a new camp. The problem this causes is that they wont want to join a party if it's going somewhere where they've overhunted, and it might cause players to simply add new bullet points to the this-camp-at-this-level list to make up for overhunting.

[Aerodinamik]

Anyone got any info on beta release?

[Rothy]

Originally Posted by Aerodinamik

Anyone got any info on beta release?

Pretty sure this is the wrong thread..

[Takelli]

Originally Posted by Ryoii/Nonomii

This is an interesting idea, but I think it will simply result in a great amount of frustration since it is too dynamic.

Thanks. It wont be hard to implimint(SP?) it though. It will cause players to have to move from one camp to another, more often than they are now. It is a low number, but it was just a random number I thought of from teh top of my head. Maybe liek 50 monsters will increase the timer? W/E I'm tired atm and not thinking straight lol.

Or... They could make it so that monsters that are "over hunted" evolve and change into something stronger, and even possibly move where they spawn, so that its always something different... IDK what I'm saying haha XD

Originally Posted by Kaziel0

And, Takelli, if I understand it correctly, you are misunderstanding what Karinya is saying. The idea is a updated system which varies who and what are the best targets. Let's say that the Wyverns are the best target one week, giving a whopping 3 times normal XP. Everyone would "OMG! Wyverns!" And at all the various places Wyverns spawn at level 75+, there would be Wyvern guts all over the place. At the end of the week when the conquest tally was turned in, a new program could track what had been killed a lot that week and what hadn't. Wyverns, a high XP gain target, would now be moved off the list and changed back to normal XP gain. Now some more different monsters now give an XP bonus, and Wyverns are ignored again for a few weeks until they are worth a lot of XP again, at which point, everyone goes back to being like "OMG! Wyverns!" Basically it would create a "Targets of the Week" system, where during that week a couple of types of monsters were very high value and good targets for being XPed, without forcing players to stop doing TP-Burn and Mana-Burn parties.

That is what I had said... just in a shorter post... Maybe not... Too tired to check atm lol

If not, then that is what I was trying to go for. One camp will be camped over way too much if the monster exp gets increased by 3X, as that all that people will want to camp.

[IfritnoItazura]

Originally Posted by DakAttack

That's the only thing that would make Karinya's idea a bad idea. Pointing all the players in the same direction wouldn't really help anything.

Just because SE points, it doesn't mean all players will go.

Besides, even a weekly switch of everyone's-favorite would be nice. I wouldn't mind rotating off of Imps and Colibri when I get back to leveling again.

Originally Posted by Yellow Mage

The problem with the system you suggest, Karinya, is that it would require omniscience on S-E's part, which they have clearly shown that they lack.

For this purpose, SE is pretty much omniscient--it has the logs.

I'm pretty sure SE is already feeding some of the game's logs into databases (from the description of some of their anti-RMT tools). This is pretty much doing more of the same; filter logs for relevant info, toss data in another databases, data mine. *viola*

The trick here is identifying which readily available 'packs' of monsters are under-utilized by players 7-10 levels below them; once that's identified--which is fairly easy if not computationally cheap--then, slap an exp bonus on them based on actual utilization. Karinya's idea is easy to implement; at least the selection process portion of it can be completely automated after it's designed.

[Karinya]

Originally Posted by DakAttack

That's the only thing that would make Karinya's idea a bad idea. Pointing all the players in the same direction wouldn't really help anything.

Well, I didn't mean to suggest that there should be only one bonus family at a time, like the zeni guys. (Are their targets usually mobbed? I haven't really noticed, but then, I don't collect zeni.)

There would be a ranking of bounty levels for each mob family in the game. (On second thought, I think this should be available in-game from a new menu item, like conquest/besieged/campaign maps, so you don't have to visit a specific NPC, which would be time-consuming. It would just list each mob family that the system applied to and the current bonus for that family, auto-sorted with the highest bonuses at the top. Scroll down to see the whole list.) Underhunted families would increase their bonus each week as long as they remain underhunted and overhunted families would decrease (or sit at x1.00).

I doubt many families would actually reach x3.00 since they would have to *stay* ignored for weeks or even months as they rise through 2.00, 2.20, 2.40, 2.60 and 2.80... I'd probably be jumping on them before that, even uragnites. I just didn't want to make the maximum cap low enough that some families would stay ignored even when capped out.

It would definitely enable players to search for camps that offer better EXP, and allow the lazy players to continue to earn base level EXP, but what if those lazy players never leave their lazy player camps? They're effectively ruining and area or monster family for everybody else.

No, only for themselves - the non-lazy players are somewhere else and don't care if that camp is "ruined". And with a x1.00 floor they can't do any worse than right now, anyway. (Actually better, because *some* players would still go off bounty hunting, leaving the lazy player camps less crowded. Anything that puts more parties in more *different* places is good even if that's the only thing it does.)

Make it a gain/loss for underhunted/overhunted that's unique to each player, and they'll be more motivated to search for a new camp. The problem this causes is that they wont want to join a party if it's going somewhere where they've overhunted, and it might cause players to simply add new bullet points to the this-camp-at-this-level list to make up for overhunting.

Individual counters would not only be harder to implement (SE can already track worldwide kills by player nation and region for conquest, so tracking worldwide kills by mob family shouldn't be much harder if at all, but keeping separate records for each player would be literally thousands of times more data) but also give different members of the same party incentives that pull in different directions. Member 1: "I get x2.50 for malboros, how about those?" Member 2: "Nah, I hunted malboros last week and I'm down to x1.16 on them. How about taurus?" Member 3: "I only get x1.33 for taurus, that's not really worth putting up with Mortal Ray. How about xzomits?" Member 4: "I don't have sea access." You get the idea (and for even more fail, imagine this conversation with a language barrier in the party).

If *everyone* gets x2.50 for malboros this week, then presumably most people won't object to fighting them (except maybe the WHM, but my experience is that WHMs actually like fighting things where they're necessary. People appreciate them more, for one thing.) or at least they will have some idea why the leader wants to fight them. There might be more negotiation when joining a party to distinguish between high-bounty parties going after very nasty mob families, medium-bounty going after mobs of average dangerousness, and no-bounty wimp massacres.

[Elwynn]

I think this would also need to be on a per-zone basis. Crawlers may be a common target in Sarutabaruta and Crawler's Nest, but not so much in the jungle zones.

And of course, this might have to disregard farming. Elementals are easily farmed in the lowbie and midbie areas by 75s (especially by BLMs who can one-shot them), but not so much by those who can exp off of them, in any area. (It doesn't help that in addition to being dangerous at exp level, they're also a couple of levels above everything else in the zone.)

[Ziero]

Originally Posted by Karinya

monsters that were hunted a lot would see less, although possibly with a x1.0 minimum. (I don't personally think there is anything wrong with allowing the multiplier for overhunted families to go even lower, but SE might be reluctant to make a change that would be a partial nerf, even if only for the vast majority of players).

Fixed.

Over time values would fluctuate making some players develop new camps to exploit the highest bounties. Mob families that can only be hunted from difficult-to-reach camps (uragnites and sea mobs come to mind) might maintain high bounties consistently if only static/LS parties could hunt them effectively. Some rare families can be hunted in level capped CoP zones - a much more practical suggestion after gear scaling. A few families like Empty can *only* be hunted in level capped zones.

Urganites only go up to lvl 30 and are a pain in the dick to kill. And Sea Mobs are far from difficult to reach. Also, Exping in capped zones is a horrible idea because you gain less Exp per kill (but full merits) if you are higher then the actual cap.

Not many people go to, say, the old deep Kuftal wyvern camp, but if the bounty on wyverns was up to x1.6 (applied after the base exp cap but before chain bonus and exp rings, ideally), that might change. How much bounty would it take for people to be willing to try exp on tonberries? Malboros? Taurus? Uragnites? The red dragons in Zhayolm? Soulflayers? Peistes? IDK exactly, but I'd sure try it at x3 and probably well before then.

Not many people Exp on Wyverns in Kuftal, but they do kill Skoffins in the Mamool Camp constantly. They're no harder for a PT to TP burn then Mamools or Wivres. Red Dragons, Soulflayers and Peistes are very few and far between, meaning they can't really be exped on specifically. Urganites would be horrible Exp no matter how high of a bonus they give you because at many points during the fight they'll stop, heal themselves and you can't do anything to stop them. Meaning a single Exp level urganite fight could easily go 5-10 minutes, which is ridiculous. And again, they only go up to lvl 30ish, which if you're on Purongogo, it would just be better to kill the Mandies, Birds and Pugs there instead. Tonberries are retarded to Exp on, regardless of how much Exp they give you, because the more you kill, the easier they can kill you. To the point that they'll eventually start one shotting people with Everyone's Grudge. And there was a time when Tauri were exped on, but that time has past because they're annoying as hell and there's a lot better targets out there.

Not all mobs can be, or should be Exped on.

In the end however, there are a few massive and glaring flaws in this system. One, it would have to extend and cover almost every single Mob type in game, all at once, all at the same time. Meaning that every week, every mob's kill records would need to be tallied and their exp per kill adjusted accordingly. That's a LOT of information to constantly alter and adjust each week. Two, how would this take into account farming, or low level exping? EP-DC versions of these "dangerous" mobs are constantly killed every day. Hell, Nyzul alone accounts for the vast majority of daily Soulflayer deaths. Now you could just say "things in Nyzul don't count!" but we get Exp from Nyzul mobs so why shouldn't they count? A third problem is that not all mobs are good to exp on at all levels. There are no lvl 75 Malboro camps. There are no high level Tonberrys to exp on. For a lot of mobs, there are no higher level versions to camp. And since this Exp problem is mainly an issue at endgame, that's where the fix should be focused on the most.

To make this work, you would basically need to overhaul and create an entirely new system that affects every single monster in the entire game. All to get people to spread out more at lvl 75. There are better, and easier fixes.

Originally Posted by Takelli

While this will "fix" the issues with Sc+Mb, there will still be people going to the Tp burn parties as that you havea said before. But because it adds more options, it will also add more people to the game, and that might split the game into Tp, Mana burns, and Sc+Mb parties, and that could cause in game issues for the players as well.

I'm not saying go for pure realism. I am just saying that a rabbit shouldn't be harder than a human, unless it was a mutated rabbit like thing or something like that.

A) Having options is never a bad thing. B) The rabbits we're fighting have two legs, long tails and flat, blank faces. If they're not mutated already, I'd hate to see one that was.

Originally Posted by Takelli

What I think SE should do is... The more that a monster is killed, the longer it takes to repop, but only up to a limit of 20 mins. Like every 20 or so monsters increases the repop time by about 10 seconds up to a max of 20 mins, and the time limit will slowly start to decrease after about 2 mins of no one killing them. While this will make Griefing other players possible, it will actually force people to stop over hunting monsters, and make them move to find a new area or camp.

And that would effectively kill farming and low level exp.

[Takelli]

Originally Posted by Ziero

And that would effectively kill farming and low level exp.

Well, if people would actualy get the gil they needed to buy decent gear as they level up, they wouldn't need to farm now would they? It would also prevent RMTing to some extent as they cant sit there all day and kill the same thing over and over. Besides, the monsters are on a 15 minute respawn in a lot of the exp zones already. If people time the kills correctly, they can still Chain on them, and get god exp off of them.

And as for the low level zones... It wont really effect them as there are TONS of monster types to choose from in lower level areas. It would actually force people to "explore" the lands as well. Thats what adventureres do, they explore new places. I don't really see much of that happeneing in FFXI.

Originally Posted by Ziero

A) Having options is never a bad thing. B) The rabbits we're fighting have two legs, long tails and flat, blank faces. If they're not mutated already, I'd hate to see one that was.

I never said it was a bad thing, I am just saying it might split the player base into three groups. A Tp burn party invites some one who likes to SC, and they find out its a pure TP burn, they leave. Some one invites a TP burning player, and they find out its a SC+Mb party, and teh player leaves and so on.

As for the rabbit thing... Its just an example. Why do people have to look way to deep into stuff I say? -.-;

[Ryoii/Nonomii]

How about weighting the ranking (xp bonus) based on how much xp the mob has provided over the past week?
This would lower the effect from EP-DC farming without completely disregarding it.

Additionally I like the idea of treating each zone seperately. I was thinking that you could lump regions, but Kolshushu is one great example where this would fail. All the stuff killed in Buburimu Peninsula would dramatically affect Bibiki Bay.

Lumping whole families also has its flaws. A good example is where Goblin Furriers (RNG) in Yuhtunga Jungle are killed much more often than higher level Goblin Poachers (RNG), Goblin Reapers (DRK), and Goblin Robbers (THF).

This would also have the effect of benefiting small parties. Parties of 2-4 Lv75 could now go kill tough mobs which are rarely hunted and get a bonus. Good examples are Darters (Lv75-78) and Bark Tarantulas (Lv75-78) in The Boyahda Tree, Darters (Lv76-79) and Bark Tarantulas (Lv77-80) in Dragon's Aery, Greater Manticores (Lv76-79) in Cape Teriggan, Ovinnik (Lv77-79) and Greater Cockatrice (Lv78-80) in Kuftal Tunnel, and Tormentors (Lv75-79) and Hurricane Wyverns (Lv75-78) in Ifrit's Cauldron.