Would you still do AE if they........

1. Capped the XP to the same or as less as 'normal' missions,
2. Removed auto SK,
3. Limited the spawn sizes and amount of bosses per map?
4. Finally, Made maps only available to zones of that lvl?

Would be interesting to hear you answers on this!

Thanks

1. XP derived from any source should be limited to some reasonable maximum rate. An AE-only fix would not stop future exploits. Just think back to the Winterlord, Rikti Portal farming, etc.

2. It's not reasonable to remove this from AE. A lot of stories have to be forced to a particular (higher) level because there are gaps in the level ranges of certain enemy groups. However, all missions (even non-AE) should auto SK all lower-level characters to the higher of the mission holder's level minus 1, or to the minimum level of the mission. This would eliminate the perma-46 PLing scam as well as the AE abuses.

3. This is not reasonable, as features are being introduced that let players increase spawn sizes. If AE is made to return the same kind of XP rewards as regular missions, it should enjoy the same benefits.

4. I've suggested this as well. It would force all those level 54 boss farms to return to Peregrine Island, where the PLing crowd used to run their Family and Demons farms. However, there are lots of missions that have high levels for technical reasons but are not farms. So this is really a toss-up. If you fix the XP imbalance, you fix the real problem.

1: Define what constitutes a "normal" mission, then we'll talk about XP limits.

2: That would be a pain. It would punish authors for setting their level ranges responsibly (instead of trying to make everything 1-54), and we don't need any more incentive for people to set everything to 1-54 "to get more plays." From the player's perspective, it would limit the number of arcs you can play. A lot of story-focused arcs are limited to a fairly narrow range, simply because the enemies used are limited.

3: No. Limiting storytelling tools is never a good idea.

4: No. I hated all the farmer lag in PI back when they farmed portal missions. Again, this would punish non-farmers by forcing them into laggy zones from level 40 onwards. Lowbies at least have the option of starting in Galaxy instead of Atlas, even though everybody stubbornly refuses to acknowledge this. Teenage villains are, admittedly, out of luck. What we need is to have an Atlas Park 2 and a Cap Au Diable 2 on every server, all the time. Then I can point and laugh at all the people who will inevitably go to 1 all the time and complain about the lag.

Another problem with #4, is that it would be an additional pain for people who don't mind SKing or EXing to play an arc. They'd have to switch zones every time they decided to play an arc that was in a different level range. And how would it handle arcs with uneven level ranges, for the very few that have an actual good reason for it?

Would you still do AE if they...

...capped the XP to the same or as less as 'normal' missions?

As it currently stands, when I'm intent on leveling, I avoid AE. If you're not doing a farm, the rewards are less. So, you'd have to provide more details about this cap in order for me to answer accurately. Right now, you don't get mission bonuses in AE, don't get arc bonuses in AE, and don't get patrol XP in AE. Would these restrictions be removed if this cap were put in place?

...Removed auto SK?

I'd still use AE without auto SK, but it would definitely lessen that usage. When everyone wants to play characters of wildly disparate levels, we go to AE to make it work. That, obviously, would stop.

...Limited the spawn sizes and amount of bosses per map?

It'd depend on the extent of the limitation.

...Made maps only available to zones of that lvl?

This would be an enormous pain for reasons already stated, and would indeed all but kill my usage of AE and, at this point, notably lessen my participation in the game in general. Not only would it be a significant hindrance to play, it'd greatly diminish my options as an architect, which means I'd stop designing content for my SGs, which would result in all involved being less inclined to log in at all.

We'd end up in AE once in a blue moon, if that.

And no, that doesn't mean we'd PUG.

Ok, I am usually the first one to say that we should remove AE or limit the feature... but this morning I tried to do a mission, the one about croatoa and lil rose? Well I found that I did not get any XP for it, I was so happy to just do missions in croatoa and croatoa themes that I didnt care about the XP...why do I have to ge XP for running a simulation again its like earning driving credit towards your drivers license by playing mario kart!

Everyone on the other anti-AE thread says that the devs intended this to be an alternative to leveling...but I thought the purpose of AE/MA was to have users craft stories?


What if the devs allowed us to decide whether we would get XP for not? If the devs coded option to allow XP and to disable XP for those missions?

"LEAVE THIS DEAD HORSE ALONE! LEAVE IT ALONE!"

Not to say anything, but the "Restriction of AE mish level by zone" wouldn't work cuz G-ville does NOT have an AE building.

Go into AP, make a huge ordeal about Mito farming being back, have a mission loaded with yellow mitos, give out the ID, and laugh as people try it and come back out.