[alpha1471]

What is this two level rule that I'm hearing about? It couldn't be more wrong!

I was leveling my warrior in a party where someone reached level 18, four people were 16, and I was still 15. They chose to kick me from the party because I was too low and did not fit their two level standard. They felt it was better to retain the stronger fighter that was level 18.

I am very confused, because that is not how it works. Who is spreading this two level rule (myth/lie)? When I asked where they got it from, they replied "the book" says so. Oh, "the book;" no one can dispute "the book."

Explanation of why the two level rule is wrong:

A very tough to the level 18 would be inc tough to everyone else, thus lowering the killing/tanking ability of the whole group, which results in slower kills. The exp would be bad since it is based off the highest level and no one else can hit the inc tough effectively except the level 18.

On the flip side, a group where a monster checks as very tough to almost everyone will have an easy time doing damage to it. Only the one lower level player will have some trouble since it checks as inc tough.

The correct rule of thumb is to have the majority of the party members be at the highest level in the party.

This two level rule is spreading on Gilgamesh, and it's annoying trying to explain to them that it's flat out wrong. Is this myth spreading on other servers as well?

[Sk0pe]

Kujata seems fine =)

They like to stick to the three level rule.

That's just my experience though. I'm not terribly high level.

[alpha1471]

So it's taken the form of a Three Level rule on other servers? It's still a lie.

Read this post.

I'll quote an important part of it.

==== OPTIMUM PARTY LEVEL RANGES

So what are the optimum level ranges you can fit into a party? I see grouping guides by well known experts that claim emphatically that you should never have a spread greater than 3 levels in a group. I see this same myth propagated on the forums too. Wrong. The real story is laid out in the following table.

In my party's example:
One person at level 18 gets 100% exp
Four people at level 16 get 90% exp
One person at level 15 gets 85% exp
------------------------------------------------
Parties' exp effeciency 90.83% - with a 3 level difference

Kicking me and replacing me with another level 16 would do this:
One person at level 18 gets 100% exp
Five people at level 16 get 90% exp
------------------------------------------------
Parties' exp effeciency 91.67% - with a 2 level difference
Note that everyone gets the same exp as above.

Replacing the level 18 player with a level 17 would do this:
One person at level 17 gets 100% exp
Four people at level 16 get 100% exp
One person at level 15 gets 90% exp
------------------------------------------------
Parties' exp effeciency 98.33% - with a 2 level difference

If the level 18 player was replaced with a level 12 character:
Four people at level 16 get 100% exp
One person at level 15 gets 90% exp
One person at level 12 gets 75% exp
------------------------------------------------
Parties' exp effeciency 94.167% - with a 4 level difference

NOTE: Exp penalty is different from Base exp. Exp penalty is a factor, but look how small the differences are.

[Wanderer]

Hi Alpha. I know how you feel about the EXP penalty. Actually, once a person in party gains 3 levels higher than everyone OR if you're 3 levels below everyone then sure, you'll feel a hit in EXP. However, there still are ways to get EXP with 3 level differences. I play'd my WHM (Lv.25) with a party of Lv.27s and 28s. I was still getting around 120-183 EXP per kill because they were fighting things that were Incredibly Tough to them and were able to handle it pretty well. So yes, there is still hope. But if your party is affraid to take on challenges or build better tactics to make the battle go faster then I yea...you'll be hurting in EXP. I guess it all depends on your party. Pick the right party and you'll be fine. Personally I'd rather not be in a party where most of the group are affraid to fight anything greater than a Very Tough. Don't let the EXP rule upset you too much. If anything, find a party or form a party of your level! When leveling my SAM at 39, I gained 5 levels in less than 4 hrs! and attained level 44! I know 4hrs seems like a lot of time but you gotta understand that things aren't exactly cake at that level. But because we were all the same levels we were able to reap the full EXP benefit. Well, take care!

-Wanderer-
Siren

[alpha1471]

Hi Wanderer,

I just want to make the distinction between the exp penalty and hindered party ability.

The exp penalty is what you feel if you are X levels below the highest person. The lowest level player is a factor for the exp penalty, but it is not noticeable unless you're a huge spread apart.

Only the highest level player has an effect on the base exp of the monster.

The lowest level player IS a factor in hindered party ability. However, that can be compensated for if they use the right food and have good equipment.

Don't let the EXP rule upset you too much.

I am very upset and have every reason to be upset. I'm getting kicked from a party when I don't even have an effect on the bad exp they're getting, which is REALLY due to having one person 2 levels higher than everyone else. All thanks to a rule that is false to begin with.

[Thark601]

dude that was just a noob group...

although i do get rather annoyed when someone asks someone 3 lvls under the top how much it is to lvl cause your hurting our xp...

any pt that has there highest lvl 2 lvls above there 2nd highest is bound to fail and needs to drop the high lvl...


xp based on con of highest lvl...

xp penalty to those 3 lvls or more under highest lvl, but if there able to componsate and do there job theres no reason to worry about it

[alpha1471]

Originally posted by Thark601
dude that was just a noob group...

I don't blame them for being new to the game. They are referring to a book or some sort. I'm guessing they bought the "official strategy guide" (by BradyGames). That is where I place the blame.

The problem is they are fooled by the title of it being the "official" strategy guide. They don't believe it can be wrong.

[Cali]

Nah, not really related to the guidebook... the guidebook has little mistakes(things like elvann being better mage than hume..), and has nothing about lvl range.. I would rather blame Gamefaqs.. free and unofficial, but idiots will believe 100% like it's from the manager of FFXI dept.

Anyway, yup, the lvl range is BS.... If I'm the leader, I will always keep everyone to my lvl, max I will give is a lvl difference, but beyond that is no-no.... but almost 90% of the NA players follow that rule, hell... I got invites from a lv32-35 group when I was 39, god knows what they have in mind...

[Mantronic]

i have exp that having all the melees equal is ideal max 1 lvl different. how ever i have gone out with a 4 lvl gap pld thf drg 43 blm whm bard where 39-40 since the melees where equal damage over time with fine especially with the bard and blm granted the blm didnt have the lvl 43 spell but that worked out to the best cause he never drew aggro. to get good exp we had to pull of chain 5 and 6's but it was very easy with that type of set up.

now i would never get melees different lvls the melees that are lower are always missing and thus not gaining TP thus not magic bursting. thats my perfered party setup melee's all the same level mages can vary a bit.

[Lady Kelenae]

I've had a level 50 mage join one of my PT's becuase there wasnt no mages on at my level...(level 55) and he still got good Exp...

[Tobold]

Originally posted by alpha1471
What is this two level rule that I'm hearing about? It couldn't be more wrong!

I was leveling my warrior in a party where someone reached level 18, four people were 16, and I was still 15. They chose to kick me from the party because I was too low and did not fit their two level standard. They felt it was better to retain the stronger fighter that was level 18.

That is just plain dumb. The base xp that is divided among the group depends on how the mob checks to the HIGHEST group member. Kicking you out and replacing you by an level 16-18 does change nothing in the xp of the other people. If they had kicked out the level 18 instead and replaced him by a level 15-16, xp would have gone up for everybody on the same kills.

For example if the 18/16/16/16/16/16 group kills a level 16 mob, it checks as decent challenge to the highest level (18). So they get 50 xp base, multiplied by 2.1 for a 6-player group, divided by 6, for 18 xp each. The exactly same level 16 mob would give twice as much xp to a 16/16/16/16/16/15 group, 100 xp base for being even to the highest level, multiplied by 2.1 for a 6-player group, divided by 6, makes 35 xp.

Sure, a level 18 is stronger than a level 15. But those 3 levels difference for just 1 group member doesn't make the group kill twice as fast.

If you want to set up a "rule", it is that you shouldn't have a single group member more than 1 level above the rest.

[Aeynrieus]

Originally posted by alpha1471
What is this two level rule that I'm hearing about? It couldn't be more wrong!

I was leveling my warrior in a party where someone reached level 18, four people were 16, and I was still 15. They chose to kick me from the party because I was too low and did not fit their two level standard. They felt it was better to retain the stronger fighter that was level 18.

I am very confused, because that is not how it works. Who is spreading this two level rule (myth/lie)? When I asked where they got it from, they replied "the book" says so. Oh, "the book;" no one can dispute "the book."

Explanation of why the two level rule is wrong:

A very tough to the level 18 would be inc tough to everyone else, thus lowering the killing/tanking ability of the whole group, which results in slower kills. The exp would be bad since it is based off the highest level and no one else can hit the inc tough effectively except the level 18.

On the flip side, a group where a monster checks as very tough to almost everyone will have an easy time doing damage to it. Only the one lower level player will have some trouble since it checks as inc tough.

The correct rule of thumb is to have the majority of the party members be at the highest level in the party.

This two level rule is spreading on Gilgamesh, and it's annoying trying to explain to them that it's flat out wrong. Is this myth spreading on other servers as well?

Do yourself a favor and /blist them all. No need to PT with people like that ever. :sweat:

[Wanderer]

Hi again Alpha. Yes I know what you mean. But everyone who posted under me are just as right. But, being the lowest member in the party doesn't affect the parties EXP. It's the highest person in the party. Also, the person above me is right too. No need to party with people that think like that. If you ever get into a JP party you'll notice that as soon as the EXP offsets like that they will suggest to move camp to a place where EXP will be fair if not better. So sorry for the horrible experience you've encountered. I hope things get better for you.

-Wanderer-

[Arctyc]

The numbers on the XP line are not the only factors at play here. There's a significant power disparity between two players who are four or five levels apart, enough that if your group is fighting ITs and you have a person 3 levs below lowest, they will struggle to do damage or keep up with heals. This is why it is often preferable to stay within several levels of one another.

What is wrong is when it goes from a preference to a prerequisite. I have seen groups sit around for half an hour doing nothing because they refused to take someone "out of range". Though it's an uncommon occurrance, the ridiculousness should be immediately apparent. So long as they don't die, any XP is better than 0 XP.

[Dux]

I think its a general rule that people (me included) picked up in the early parts of the game when 2 levels makes a HUGE difference (9-11 especially).

I have been in teams with ppl 4 levels higher than me and still got 200 EXP or more from chians.

However when u r new its a combination of bad playing, no SC and no experience that makes this 2 level rule seem to be real. I think ever new person "see's" the 2 level rule at some point and assumes thats how it work. So far every body I knew as we leveled up together realised its not true. It just appears to be true until you get to your late 20's.